IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/col/000520/021472.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Theoretical convergences in the classification of business risks and the characterization of the consequence

Author

Listed:
  • Julio César González Rodríguez

    (Universidad Militar Nueva Granada)

  • Ramiro Díaz Carreño

    (Universidad Militar Nueva Granada)

Abstract

Introduction: Risk management in the business environment has evolved significantly, but it still faces the challenge of having a unified and coherent risk classification. This lack of homogeneity hinders the effective implementation of mitigation strategies and communication between different stakeholders. Objective: This research proposes a new way of classifying business risks, providing a novel theoretical framework for Enterprise Risk Management (ERM). Methodology: An epistemological and praxeological contrast was carried out through an exhaustive review of the academic literature and current business practices in risk management. This analysis made it possible to identify factors of conceptual convergence and to unravel inconsistencies in the existing risk taxonomies. Results: It was determined that internal risks can be grouped into three key areas: strategic, financial and operational. The consequence should not be considered a classification variable, but a construct of several variables. Conclusions: The distinction between the scope of risk and its consequences allows for a more precise identification, evaluation and management. This proposal contributes to standardizing enterprise risk management, by distinguishing between the scope of risk and its consequences. This model improves risk identification and management, reduces conceptual ambiguity, and strengthens organizational capacity to deal with uncertainty. Introducción: La gestión del riesgo en el ámbito empresarial ha evolucionado significativamente, pero aún enfrenta el desafío de contar con una clasificación de riesgos unificada y coherente. Esta falta de homogeneidad obstaculiza la aplicación efectiva de estrategias de mitigación y la comunicación entre diferentes stakeholders. Objetivo: Esta investigación propone una nueva forma de clasificar los riesgos empresariales, aportando un marco teórico novedoso para el Enterprise Risk Management (ERM). Metodología: Se realizó un contraste epistemológico y praxeológico mediante una revisión exhaustiva de la literatura académica y las prácticas empresariales actuales en gestión de riesgos. Este análisis permitió identificar factores de convergencia conceptual y desentrañar inconsistencias en las taxonomías de riesgo existentes. Resultados: Se determinó que los riesgos internos pueden agruparse en tres ámbitos clave: estratégico, financiero y operativo. La consecuencia no debe considerarse una variable de clasificación, sino un constructo de diversas variables. Conclusiones: La distinción entre el ámbito del riesgo y sus consecuencias, permite una identificación, evaluación y gestión más precisa. Esta propuesta contribuye a estandarizar la gestión de riesgos empresariales, al distinguir entre el ámbito del riesgo y sus consecuencias. Este modelo mejora la identificación y gestión del riesgo, reduce la ambigüedad conceptual y fortalece la capacidad organizacional para enfrentar la incertidumbre. Introdução: A gestão de riscos no ambiente empresarial tem evoluído significativamente, mas ainda enfrenta o desafio de ter uma classificação de risco unificada e coerente. Essa falta de homogeneidade dificulta a implementação efetiva de estratégias de mitigação e a comunicação entre as diferentes partes interessadas. Objetivo: Esta pesquisa propõe uma nova forma de classificar os riscos de negócios, fornecendo uma nova estrutura teórica para o Enterprise Risk Management (ERM). Metodologia: Realizou-se um contraste epistemológico e praxeológico por meio de uma revisão exaustiva da literatura acadêmica e das práticas empresariais atuais em gestão de riscos. Essa análise possibilitou identificar fatores de convergência conceitual e desvendar inconsistências nas taxonomias de risco existentes. Resultados: Determinou-se que os riscos internos podem ser agrupados em três áreas principais: estratégica, financeira e operacional. A consequência não deve ser considerada uma variável de classificação, mas um construto de

Suggested Citation

  • Julio César González Rodríguez & Ramiro Díaz Carreño, 2025. "Theoretical convergences in the classification of business risks and the characterization of the consequence," Revista Tendencias, Universidad de Narino, vol. 26(02), pages 55-83, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:col:000520:021472
    DOI: 10.22267/rtend.2526
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://revistas.udenar.edu.co/index.php/rtend/article/view/9619
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22267/rtend.2526?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David L. Olson & Desheng Wu, 2010. "Enterprise Risk Management Models," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-642-11474-8, March.
    2. Stanley Kaplan & B. John Garrick, 1981. "On The Quantitative Definition of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 11-27, March.
    3. Marco Moscadelli, 2004. "The modelling of operational risk: experience with the analysis of the data collected by the Basel Committee," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 517, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    4. Imad A. Moosa, 2007. "Operational Risk: A Survey," Financial Markets, Institutions & Instruments, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 167-200, November.
    5. Drew, Stephen A. & Kelley, Patricia C. & Kendrick, Terry, 2006. "CLASS: Five elements of corporate governance to manage strategic risk," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 127-138.
    6. Stephen C. Gabriel & C. B. Baker, 1980. "Concepts of Business and Financial Risk," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 62(3), pages 560-564.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Claudia Nicoleta Guni, 2021. "Financial Risk - Integrating Determinant Of The Accounting Model," Management Strategies Journal, Constantin Brancoveanu University, vol. 51(1), pages 77-85.
    2. Gundula Glowka & Andreas Kallmünzer & Anita Zehrer, 2021. "Enterprise risk management in small and medium family enterprises: the role of family involvement and CEO tenure," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 1213-1231, September.
    3. Benischke, Mirko H. & Guldiken, Orhun & Doh, Jonathan P. & Martin, Geoffrey & Zhang, Yanze, 2022. "Towards a behavioral theory of MNC response to political risk and uncertainty: The role of CEO wealth at risk," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 57(1).
    4. Stefan Mittnik & Sandra Paterlini & Tina Yener, 2011. "Operational–risk Dependencies and the Determination of Risk Capital," Center for Economic Research (RECent) 070, University of Modena and Reggio E., Dept. of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    5. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    6. Marco Rocco, 2011. "Extreme value theory for finance: a survey," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 99, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    7. Deane, Paul & Malcolm, Bill, 2006. "Do Australian woolgrowers manage price risk rationally?," AFBM Journal, Australasian Farm Business Management Network, vol. 3(02), pages 1-7.
    8. K. Karthikeyan & S. Bharath & K. Ranjith Kumar, 2012. "An Empirical Study on Investors’ Perception towards Mutual Fund Products through Banks with Reference to Tiruchirapalli City, Tamil Nadu," Vision, , vol. 16(2), pages 101-108, June.
    9. Nicola Paltrinieri & Nicolas Dechy & Ernesto Salzano & Mike Wardman & Valerio Cozzani, 2012. "Lessons Learned from Toulouse and Buncefield Disasters: From Risk Analysis Failures to the Identification of Atypical Scenarios Through a Better Knowledge Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1404-1419, August.
    10. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, Jr., 2012. "Community Resilience and Decision Theory Challenges for Catastrophic Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(11), pages 1919-1934, November.
    11. Ozgur Satici & Esra Satici, 2024. "Theoretical semi-quantitative risk assessment methodology for tunnel design and construction processes," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 15(7), pages 3385-3405, July.
    12. Chen, Fuzhong & Hsu, Chien-Lung & Lin, Arthur J. & Li, Haifeng, 2020. "Holding risky financial assets and subjective wellbeing: Empirical evidence from China," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    13. Niël Almero Krüger & Natanya Meyer, 2021. "The Development of a Small and Medium-Sized Business Risk Management Intervention Tool," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-14, July.
    14. James H. Lambert & Rachel K. Jennings & Nilesh N. Joshi, 2006. "Integration of risk identification with business process models," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 187-198, September.
    15. Johnson, Caroline A. & Flage, Roger & Guikema, Seth D., 2021. "Feasibility study of PRA for critical infrastructure risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    16. Kasai, Naoya & Matsuhashi, Shigemi & Sekine, Kazuyoshi, 2013. "Accident occurrence model for the risk analysis of industrialfacilities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 71-74.
    17. Lien, Gudbrand, 2002. "Non-parametric estimation of decision makers' risk aversion," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 75-83, May.
    18. Featherstone, Allen M., 1990. "Optimal Capital Structure as Business Risk Changes," 1990 Quantifying Long Run Agricultural Risks and Evaluating Farmer Responses to Risk Meeting, January 28-31, 1990, Sanibel Island, Florida 271544, Regional Research Projects > S-232: Quantifying Long Run Agricultural Risks and Evaluating Farmer Responses to Risk.
    19. Ojo, Marianne, 2007. "The role of the external auditor in bank regulation and supervision: A comparative analysis between the UK, Germany, Italy and the US," MPRA Paper 32614, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jan 2008.
    20. J. C. Helton & F. J. Davis, 2002. "Illustration of Sampling‐Based Methods for Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 591-622, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • L29 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Other
    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • O20 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - General
    • P27 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist and Transition Economies - - - Performance and Prospects
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    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:col:000520:021472. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Universidad de Narino (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fenarco.html .

    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.