IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i3p1080-d1327164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organizational Risk Prioritization Using DEMATEL and AHP towards Sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Eliana Judith Yazo-Cabuya

    (Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Ingeniería, Universidad de Bogotá Jorge Tadeo Lozano, Carrera 4 #22-61, Bogotá 110311, Colombia)

  • Jorge A. Herrera-Cuartas

    (Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Ingeniería, Universidad de Bogotá Jorge Tadeo Lozano, Carrera 4 #22-61, Bogotá 110311, Colombia)

  • Asier Ibeas

    (Departamento de Telecomunicaciones e Ingeniería de Sistemas, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain)

Abstract

Risk management represents a challenge for organizations, as it includes environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues that can negatively impact organizations’ investments. This article shows a general approach for prioritizing organizational risks focused on sustainability, which is applied in a particular case. Based on the analysis of global reports such as the “Global Sustainable Development Report”, “Enterprise Risk Management-Integrating with Strategy and Performance”, and the “Global Risk Report”, five typologies of organizational risks with a focus on sustainability (geopolitical, economic, social, technological, and environmental) that support the concern for sustainability in organizations are characterized, taking into account viability and equitability. Additionally, some sub-risks are proposed for each characterized typology of risk. Subsequently, the application of paired surveys assigned to a group of experts formed by executives from the service sector, auditing and consulting firms, the oil and gas sector, the manufacturing sector, and the financial sector is carried out; the responses obtained are consolidated and used in this study as input for the application of DEMATEL and AHP methods to prioritize risks and sub-risks, respectively. The result obtained via the DEMATEL method is the following risk prioritization: (1) economic, (2) geopolitical, (3) social, (4) technological, and (5) environmental. Using the AHP method, the sustainability sub-risks with the highest level of prioritization for each typology of risk are (1) massive data fraud or theft incident (technological risk), (2) deficit in economic growth (economic risk), (3) water depletion (environmental risk), (4) lack of ethics in the conduct of business (geopolitical risk), and (5) chemical safety (social risk). The sensitivity analysis presents positive and negative values, indicating that the positive results do not generate substantial changes between the characterized sub-risks. On the other hand, the negative results indicate a notable decrease in the relative importance of the sub-risks. It is crucial to highlight that the observed variations remain within realistic limits and reflect the uncertainty inherent in decision-making in a dynamic environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Eliana Judith Yazo-Cabuya & Jorge A. Herrera-Cuartas & Asier Ibeas, 2024. "Organizational Risk Prioritization Using DEMATEL and AHP towards Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-33, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:3:p:1080-:d:1327164
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/3/1080/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/3/1080/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mario Fargnoli & Mara Lombardi & Nicolas Haber, 2018. "A fuzzy-QFD approach for the enhancement of work equipment safety: a case study in the agriculture sector," International Journal of Reliability and Safety, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(3), pages 306-326.
    2. Yu-Jing Chiu & Hsiao-Chi Chen & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Joseph Z. Shyu, 2006. "Marketing strategy based on customer behaviour for the LCD-TV," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(2/3), pages 143-165.
    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. Hsu, C.-H. & Wang, Fu-Kwun & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2012. "The best vendor selection for conducting the recycled material based on a hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 95-111.
    2. Som Sekhar Bhattacharyya & Arvind Sahay & Arunaditya Sahay, 2022. "The Quest for Competitive Advantage: The Role of Technology Depth and Breadth at the Customer Interface," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 47(4), pages 274-287, December.
    3. Chen, Shih-Hsin & Lin, Wei-Ting, 2018. "Analyzing determinants for promoting emerging technology through intermediaries by using a DANP-based MCDA framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 94-110.
    4. Dominic Owusu & Kwamena M. Nyarku, 2014. "Influence of Print Advertising on the Decisions of Tertiary Students to Purchase Telecom Products in the Cape Coast Metropolis: The Moderating Role of Price and Service Quality Delivery," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 4(10), pages 314-332, October.
    5. Srđan Dimić & Dragan Pamučar & Srđan Ljubojević & Boban Đorović, 2016. "Strategic Transport Management Models—The Case Study of an Oil Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-27, September.
    6. W-H Tsai & W-C Chou & W Hsu, 2009. "The sustainability balanced scorecard as a framework for selecting socially responsible investment: an effective MCDM model," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(10), pages 1396-1410, October.
    7. Vivek Agrawal & Nitin Seth & Jitendra Kumar Dixit, 2022. "A combined AHP–TOPSIS–DEMATEL approach for evaluating success factors of e-service quality: an experience from Indian banking industry," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 715-747, September.
    8. Hung, Chih-Young & Lee, Wen-Yi, 2016. "A proactive technology selection model for new technology: The case of 3D IC TSV," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 191-202.
    9. Chia-Wei Hsu & Tsai-Chi Kuo & Guey-Shin Shyu & Pi-Shen Chen, 2014. "Low Carbon Supplier Selection in the Hotel Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(5), pages 1-27, May.
    10. Dong-Shang Chang & Sheng-Hung Chen & Chia-Wei Hsu & Allen H. Hu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2015. "Evaluation Framework for Alternative Fuel Vehicles: Sustainable Development Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-25, August.
    11. Noppamash Suvachart, 2019. "An exploratory study into consumers? perspective for establishing price strategies that maintaining consumers' good will," Proceedings of Economics and Finance Conferences 9511633, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    12. Man-Ching Peng & Ru-Yu Wang, 2017. "Evaluating Wedding Banquet Halls Using a Novel Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Model," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 7(5), pages 1-2.
    13. Shane N. Hall & Mark A. Gallagher & Daniel S. Fenn, 2020. "Risk Framework for an Organizational System With Major Components," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(12), pages 2509-2523, December.
    14. Daniel Adrian, GÂRDAN & Iuliana Petronela, GÂRDAN (GEANGU), 2015. "The Social And Economic Factors Influence Upon The Healthcare Services Consumers Behavior," Annals of Spiru Haret University, Economic Series, Universitatea Spiru Haret, vol. 6(2), pages 45-54.
    15. Tsai, Wen-Hsien & Chou, Wen-Chin & Lai, Chien-Wen, 2010. "An effective evaluation model and improvement analysis for national park websites: A case study of Taiwan," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 936-952.
    16. Dong-Shang Chang & Sheng-Hung Chen & Chia-Wei Hsu & Allen H. Hu, 2015. "Identifying Strategic Factors of the Implantation CSR in the Airline Industry: The Case of Asia-Pacific Airlines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-22, June.
    17. Wei-Chih Lu & I-Ching Tsai & Kuan-Chung Wang & Te-Ai Tang & Kuan-Chen Li & Ya-Ci Ke & Peng-Ting Chen, 2021. "Innovation Resistance and Resource Allocation Strategy of Medical Information Digitalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    18. Xiaoning Zhao & Zhongcheng Wei & Yukun Gao & Penggang Yin, 2023. "Laboratory Risk Assessment Based on SHELL-HACCP-Cloud Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-18, December.
    19. Mara Lombardi & Mario Fargnoli & Giuseppe Parise, 2019. "Risk Profiling from the European Statistics on Accidents at Work (ESAW) Accidents′ Databases: A Case Study in Construction Sites," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-22, November.
    20. Mario Fargnoli & Mara Lombardi, 2020. "NOSACQ-50 for Safety Climate Assessment in Agricultural Activities: A Case Study in Central Italy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-20, December.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:3:p:1080-:d:1327164. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.