Skip to main content

Improving Organizational Risk Management

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 2130 Accesses

Part of the book series: International Series in Operations Research & Management Science ((ISOR,volume 185))

Abstract

Chapters 1 and 2 emphasized technical methods−causal analysis and robust decision-making, respectively – that are especially useful for individual decision-makers. Chapter 3 explored challenges and opportunities for improving decision-making by treating communities, rather than individuals, as the natural units for decision-making. This chapter, by contrast, considers an intermediate level of decision-making entity: the organization, including business enterprises. Although it is a fascinating challenge to understand how businesses (and other organizations) interact with each other and the public within societies, communities, and institutional frameworks, adapting to each other and to their uncertain environments over time (Harford 2011), this chapter has a narrower, applied focus: understanding and improving how organizations describe and respond to the risks and threats that they perceive. It has become common practice for many organizations to explicitly identify, list, and make management priority decisions about different risks that they are aware of facing. These can be as diverse as risks of supply chain disruption, loss of reputation, failure of business continuity, legal liabilities, strikes, plant closures, and market and financial risks. This chapter critically examines how well such explicitly identified risks can be managed by the scoring, rating, and ranking systems now widely used in practice; and whether it is possible to make simple changes to improve the performance of these risk management systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Atkinson W (2003) Enterprise risk management at Walmart. Risk Manag. http://www.rmmag.com/Magazine/PrintTemplate.cfm?AID=2209

  • Bernstein PL (1998) Against the Gods: the remarkable story of risk. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox LA Jr (2008a) What’s wrong with risk matrices? Risk Anal 28(2):497–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox LA Jr (2008b) Some limitations of “Risk  =  Threat  ×  Vulnerability  ×  Consequence” for risk analysis of terrorist attacks. Risk Anal 28(6):1749–1762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies JC (1996) Comparing environmental risks: tools for setting government priorities. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Denardo EV, Rothblum UG, van der Heyden L (2004) Index policies for stochastic search in a forest with an application to R&D project management. Math Oper Res 29(1):162–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doctor JN, Bleichrodt H, Miyamoto J, Temkin NR, Dikmen S (2004) A new and more robust test of QALYs. J Health Econ 23(2):353–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer JS, Jia J (1998) Preference conditions for utility models: a risk-value perspective. Ann Oper Res 80(1):167–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer JS, Sarin RK (1979) Measurable multiattribute value functions. Oper Res 27(4):810–822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EPA SAB (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Science Advisory Board) (1990) Reducing risk: setting priorities and strategies for environmental protection. SAB-EC-90-021. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Science Advisory Board, Washington, DC [online]. Available http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/28704D9C420FCBC1852573360053C692/$File/REDUCING+RISK++++++++++EC-90-021_90021_5-11-1995_204.pdf. Accessed 14 Sept 12

  • Gintis H, Bowles S, Boyd R, Fehr E (2003) Explaining altruistic behavior in humans. Evol Hum Behav 24:153–172 Gintis H (2000) Game Theory Evolving: A problem-centered introduction to modeling strategic interaction. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glazebrook KD, Minty R (2009) A generalized gittins index for a class of multiarmed Bandits with general resource requirements. Math Oper Res 34(1):26–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harford T (2011) Adapt: why success always starts with failure. Farra, Straus and Giroux, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazen G, Sounderpandian J (1999) Lottery acquisition versus information acquisition: price and preference reversals. J Risk Uncertainty 18(2):125–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubbard DW (2009) The failure of risk management: why it’s broken and how to fix it. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Infanger G (2006) Dynamic asset allocation strategies using a stochastic dynamic programming approach. Chapter 5. In: Zenios SA, Ziemba WT (eds) Handbook of assets and liability management, volume 1. North Holland, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO31000 http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=43170. Accessed 8 July 2011

  • Jones P, Edmonds Y (2008) Risk-based strategies for allocating resources in a constrained environment. J Homeland Security. www.homelandsecurity.org/newjournal/Articles/displayArticle2.asp?article=171

  • Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value trade-offs. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre CR, Seccull A, Lane JM (2006) Plant A. Development of a risk-priority score for category A bioterrorism agents as an aid for public health policy. Mil Med 171(7):589–594

    Google Scholar 

  • Martello S, Toth P (1990) Knapsack problems: algorithms and computer interpretations. ­Wiley-Interscience, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell C, Decker C (2004) Applying risk-based decision-making methods and tools to U.S. Navy Antiterrorism Capabilities. J Homeland Security http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ndia/mitchell_rbdm_terr_hls_conf_may04.pdf. Accessed 14 Sept 12

  • Pfanzagl J (1959) A general theory of measurement. Applications to utility. Naval Research Logistic Quarterly 6:283–294 Rosenthal EC (2011) The Complete idiot’s guide to game theory. The Penguin Group. Alpha Books, New York, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Senju S, Toyoda Y (1968) An approach to linear programming with 0–1 variables. Manag Sci 15(5):B-196–B-207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sethuraman J, Tsitsiklis J (2007) Stochastic search in a forest revisited. Math Oper Res 589–593. http://www.columbia.edu/∼js1353/pubs/search.pdf

  • Wilson R (1968) The theory of syndicates. Econometrica 336(1):119–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Louis Anthony Cox, Jr

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cox, L.A. (2012). Improving Organizational Risk Management. In: Improving Risk Analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 185. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6058-9_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics