IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/snbeco/v3y2023i10d10.1007_s43546-023-00561-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating governance, risk and compliance? A multi-method analysis of the new Three Lines Model

Author

Listed:
  • Kai-Uwe Seidenfuss

    (University of South Australia)

  • Angus Young

    (The University of Hong Kong)

  • Mohan Datwani

    (The Hong Kong Chartered Governance Institute)

Abstract

As research and practice in corporate governance and risk management evolve, related tools and procedures are also developing in tandem—as is the case with the recent review of the widely adopted and time-tested three lines of defence (TLOD). This new Three Lines Model (TLM) attempts to reflect model criticism and widen the model scope towards integrated governance, naturally setting expectations high. This paper presents the first synopsis of the academic criticisms of TLOD, providing a foundation for analyzing the models. In a multi-method approach, the authors triangulate quantitative approaches from the corpus research with qualitative approaches to inquire about their research questions, in what is the first full review of the two original documents. Several converging results from triangulation support this thesis. The findings reveal a revised model that increases complexity yet gives up important parts of the previous model. While addressing key criticisms and adding important clarifications, the logic and simplicity of the old model seem lost—a conclusion that potentially contributes to the current slow adoption of TLM, not least among regulators. In contrast to the positive initial reactions, this paper concludes that a nuanced and critical view of the revamped TLM is necessary. It points out directions for further improvement—as well as those new elements worth preserving, such as the use of newly introduced principles, so that the model can keep its precision and appeal. This paper also inquires what practitioners should do at this stage, especially considering regulations in specific industries, and how the model authors may further develop the three lines. Finally, research limitations are highlighted as well as four research avenues regarding governance and risk identified.

Suggested Citation

  • Kai-Uwe Seidenfuss & Angus Young & Mohan Datwani, 2023. "Integrating governance, risk and compliance? A multi-method analysis of the new Three Lines Model," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(10), pages 1-28, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:snbeco:v:3:y:2023:i:10:d:10.1007_s43546-023-00561-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s43546-023-00561-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43546-023-00561-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s43546-023-00561-x?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Howard Davies & Maria Zhivitskaya, 2018. "Three Lines of Defence: A Robust Organising Framework, or Just Lines in the Sand?," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 9(S1), pages 34-42, June.
    2. Norman, Carolyn Strand & Rose, Anna M. & Rose, Jacob M., 2010. "Internal audit reporting lines, fraud risk decomposition, and assessments of fraud risk," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 546-557, July.
    3. Slapničar, Sergeja & Vuko, Tina & Čular, Marko & Drašček, Matej, 2022. "Effectiveness of cybersecurity audit," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    4. Christian Fisch & Joern Block, 2018. "Six tips for your (systematic) literature review in business and management research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 103-106, April.
    5. Turner, Donna, 2022. "Three lines of defence — is it the right model?," Journal of Financial Compliance, Henry Stewart Publications, vol. 5(3), pages 237-247, March.
    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. Swen Nadkarni & Reinhard Prügl, 2021. "Digital transformation: a review, synthesis and opportunities for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 233-341, April.
    2. Jan Wiers & Didier Chabaud, 2022. "Bibliometric analysis of immigrant entrepreneurship research 2009–2019," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 12(1), pages 441-464, December.
    3. Anna Görlitz & Michael Dobler, 2023. "Financial accounting for deferred taxes: a systematic review of empirical evidence," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 113-165, February.
    4. Nurul Nazlia Jamil, 2020. "The Power of Political Connections: Review on the Impacts of Audit Committee and Corporate Governance," Journal of Public Administration and Governance, Macrothink Institute, vol. 10(1), pages 333347-3333, December.
    5. Agbodoh-Falschau, Kouassi Raymond & Ravaonorohanta, Bako Harinivo, 2023. "Investigating the influence of governance determinants on reporting cybersecurity incidents to police: Evidence from Canadian organizations’ perspectives," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    6. Slapničar, Sergeja & Axelsen, Micheal & Bongiovanni, Ivano & Stockdale, David, 2023. "A pathway model to five lines of accountability in cybersecurity governance," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    7. Chris Wagner, 2020. "Deducing a state-of-the-art presentation of the Eclectic Paradigm from four decades of development: a systematic literature review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(1), pages 51-96, February.
    8. Christin Höge-Junge & Stefan Eckert, 2024. "Multinationality and systematic risk: a literature review and meta-analysis," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 377-414, February.
    9. Isabel Z. Wang & Neil Fargher, 2017. "The effects of tone at the top and coordination with external auditors on internal auditors’ fraud risk assessments," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 57(4), pages 1177-1202, December.
    10. Steven DeSimone & Giuseppe D’Onza & Gerrit Sarens, 2019. "Correlates of Internal Audit Function Maturity," Working Papers 1905, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    11. Zhang, Lipai & Li, Biao, 2022. "Mutual supervision or conspiracy? The incentive effect of multiple large shareholders on audit quality requirements," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    12. Andreas Kuckertz & Leif Brändle, 2022. "Creative reconstruction: a structured literature review of the early empirical research on the COVID-19 crisis and entrepreneurship," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(2), pages 281-307, June.
    13. Verena Komander & Andreas König, 2024. "Organizations on stage: organizational research and the performing arts," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 303-352, February.
    14. Russell Tatenda Munodawafa & Satirenjit Kaur Johl, 2019. "A Systematic Review of Eco-Innovation and Performance from the Resource-Based and Stakeholder Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-23, November.
    15. Elizabeth Sheedy & Dominic S. B. Canestrari‐Soh, 2023. "Does executive accountability enhance risk management and risk culture?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4093-4124, December.
    16. Monica Ramos Montesdeoca & Agustín J. Sánchez Medina & Felix Blázquez Santana, 2019. "Research Topics in Accounting Fraud in the 21st Century: A State of the Art," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-31, March.
    17. W. Randy Clark & Leigh Anne Clark & Deana M. Raffo & Ralph I Williams, 2021. "Extending Fisch and Block’s (2018) tips for a systematic review in management and business literature," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(1), pages 215-231, February.
    18. Mark E. Lokanan & Prerna Sharma, 2023. "Two Decades of Accounting Fraud Research: The Missing Meso-Level Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    19. Julia Neuhaus & Andrew Isaak & Denefa Bostandzic, 2022. "Million dollar personality: a systematic literature review on personality in crowdfunding," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(2), pages 309-345, June.
    20. Fazilah Hatta Antah & Muhamad Azry Khoiry & Khairul Nizam Abdul Maulud & Azlina Abdullah, 2021. "Perceived Usefulness of Airborne LiDAR Technology in Road Design and Management: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-22, October.

    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:spr:snbeco:v:3:y:2023:i:10:d:10.1007_s43546-023-00561-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.