IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v42y2025i6p1836-1848.html

Evolving Risk Management Frameworks for Complex Systems—An Empirically Grounded Systems Thinking Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Luther
  • Indra Gunawan
  • Nam Nguyen

Abstract

The increasing complexity of systems is demanding a paradigm shift in risk management frameworks (RMFs). This study adopts a systems thinking approach to conduct an empirically grounded analysis (EGA) of the risk management practices of Flight Test crews operating in a dynamic environment with catastrophic consequences. Extending upon qualitative research that elicited the unique RMF of Flight Test crews, the EGA examines the academic theory underlying why the Flight Test crew approach to applying multiple mitigations to system hazards is effective. Grounded in risk and utility theory, this research then presents a novel RMF that aligns effective risk management tools with the intricacy level (dynamism, determinism and latency) of the underlying system, categorized using a Cynefin ontological framework. This novel RMF accommodates the attributes of complexity exhibited by socio‐technical systems, enabling effective (and therefore efficient) resource allocation when mitigating risk in complex systems. Using the systems thinking approach of the Flight Test crews, this EGA contributes a validated, generalized RMF to support decision‐making in organizations operating complex systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Luther & Indra Gunawan & Nam Nguyen, 2025. "Evolving Risk Management Frameworks for Complex Systems—An Empirically Grounded Systems Thinking Approach," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(6), pages 1836-1848, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:42:y:2025:i:6:p:1836-1848
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.3118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.3118
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.3118?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:42:y:2025:i:6:p:1836-1848. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.