Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Das Risiko-Rendite Paradoxon. Stand der Forschung und Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung

  • Risiko-Rendite Paradoxon
  • Published:
Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Bowman (1980) found an unexpected and paradoxical negative relationship between risk and return in many firms across industries. This article summarizes major findings concerning this so called risk/return paradoxon. Following an assessment of previous research the authors develop a framework based on prospect theory and contingency approach for a further investigation of the phenomenon. Based on a sample of 155 firms (groups), it is shown that the risk/return paradoxon is valid for German groups. This is a surprising result given that groups are established among other things with the intention to reduce risk. In addition, the results show that diversification and size are variables that effect the risk of a group. These results support the basic propositions of prospect theory and are robust within and across industries. Some implications for further research are discussed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literatur

  • Aaker, David/ Ajjacobsen, Robert (1987), The Role of Risk in explaining differences in Profitability, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 30, S. 277–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albach, Horst (1987), Investitionspolitik erfolgreicher Unternehmen, in: Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 57. Jg., S. 636–661.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baird, Inga S./ Thomas, Howard (1985), Toward a Contingency Model of Strategie Risk Taking, in: Academy of Management Review, Vol. 10, S. 230–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battalio, Raymond C/ Kagel, John H/ Jiranyakul, Komain (1990), Testing Between Alternative Models of Choice Under Uncertainty: Some Initial Results, in: Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol. 3, S. 25–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, Max/ Gulliano, Toni/ Appelman, Alan (1984), Escalation of Commitment in Individual and Group Decision Making, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 33, S. 141–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettis, Richard A./ Mahajan, Vijay (1985), Risk/Return Performance of Diversified Firms, in: Management Science, Vol. 31, S. 785–799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettis, Richard A./ Thomas, Howard (Hrsg.) (1990), Risk, Strategy, and Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, Edward H. (1980), A Risk/Return Paradox for Strategic Management, in: Sloan Management Review, Vol. 21, S. 17–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, Edward H (1982), Risk Seeking by Troubled Firms, in: Sloan Management Review, Vol. 23, S. 33–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brealey, Richard A./ Myers Stewart C. (1991), Principles of Corporate Finance, 4. Aufl.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromiley, Philip (1991), Testing a causal model of corporate risk taking and performance, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34, S. 37–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronner, Rolf (1993), Entscheidungsverhalten, in: Hauschildt, Jürgen/ Grün, Oskar (Hrsg.) (1993), Ergebnisse empirischer betriebswirtschaftlicher Forschung, S. 713–745.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronner, Rolf/ Mellewigt, Thomas (1996), Eine Realtypologie betriebswirtschaftlicher Konzern-Organisationsformen; in: ZfB Ergänzungs-Heft Nr. 3, S. 145–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budescu, David V./ Weiss, Wendy (1987), Reflection of Transitive and Intransitive Preferences: A Test of Prospect Theory, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 39, S. 184–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bühl, Achim/ Zöfel, Peter (1994), SPSS für Windows Version 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhner, Rolf (1993), Strategie und Organisation, 2. Aufl.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, Colin F. (1992), Recent Tests of Generalizations of Expected Utility Theory, in: Edwards, Ward (Hrsg.) (1992), Utility Theories: Measurements and Applications, S. 207–251.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, Alan/ Musser, Wesley N./ Mason, Robert (1991), Prospect Theory and Risk Preferences of Oregon Seed Producers, in: American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 73, S. 429–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Jacob/ Cohen, Patricia (1983), Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2. Aufl..

    Google Scholar 

  • Currim, Imran S./ Sarin, Rakeshi K. (1989), Prospect versus Utility, in: Management Science, Vol. 35, S. 22–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, Ward (Hrsg.) (1992), Utility Theories: Measurements and Applications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiegenbaum, Avi/ Thomas, Howard (1988), Attitudes towards Risk and the Risk-Return Paradox: Prospect Theory Explanations, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 31, S. 85–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiegenbaum, Avi/ Thomas, Howard (1990), Stakeholder Risks and Bowman’s Risk/Return Paradox: What Risk Measure is relevant to Strategists?, in: Bettis, R. A./ Thomas, H. (Hrsg.) (1990), Risk, Strategy and Management, S. 111–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiegenbaum, Avi (1990), Prospect Theory and the Risk-Return association, in: Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol. 14, S. 187–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frecka, Thoams J./ Lee, Cheng F. (1983), Generalized financial ratio adjustment processes and their implications, in: Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 21, S. 308–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frese, Erich (1987), Grundlagen der Organisation, 3. Aufl.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hauschildt, Jürgen/ Grün, Oskar (Hrsg.) (1993), Ergebnisse empirischer betriebswirtschaftlicher Forschung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hershey, John C/ Schoemaker, Paul J. H. (1980), Prospect Theory’s Reflection Hypothesis: A Critical Examination, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 25, S. 395–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, Friedrich (1993), Der Konzern als Gegenstand betriebswirtschaftlicher Forschung, in: Hoffmann, Friedrich (Hrsg.), Konzernhandbuch, S. 1–79.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jahera, John S. (1992), Additional evidence on the validity of ROI as a Measure of Performance, in: Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business, Vol. 28, S. 105–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jegers, Marc (1988), Prospect Theory and the Risk-Return Paradox: some Belgian Evidence, in: Working Paper Vol. 88, No. 22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jemison, David B. (1987), Risk and the Relationship among Strategy, Organizational Processes, and Performance, in: Management Science, Vol. 33, S. 1087–1101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, Hazel J. (1992), The Relationship between Variability, Distance from Target, and Firm Size: A Test of Prospect Theory in the Commercial Banking Industry, in: The Journal Socio-Economics, Vol.21, S. 153–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, Daniel/ Slovic, Paul/ Tversky, Amos (1982), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, Daniel/ Tversky, Amos (1979), Prospect Theory: An analysis of decisions under risk, in: Eco-nometrica, Vol. 47, S. 262–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieser, Alfred (Hrsg.) (1993), Organisationstheorien.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieser, Alfred (1993) Der situative Ansatz, in: Kieser, Alfred (Hrsg.) (1993), Organisationstheorien, S. 161–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laughhunn, Dan J./ Payne, John W./ Crum, Roy (1980), Managerial Risk Preferences for Below-Target Returns, in: Management Science, Vol. 26, S. 1238–1249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lev, Baruch (1969), Industry averages as Targets for financial ratios, in: Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 7, S. 290–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linville, Patricia W./ Fischer, Gregory W. (1991), Preferences for Separating or Combining Events, in: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 60, S. 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCrimmon, Kenneth R/ Wehrung, Donald A. (1985), A Portfolio of Risk Measures, in: Theory and Decision, Vol. 19, S. 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, James G. (1988), Variable Risk Preferences and adaptive Aspirations, in: Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol. 9, S. 5–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mellewigt, Thomas (1995), Konzernorganisation und Konzernführung — eine empirische Untersuchung börsennotierter Konzerne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlitz, Manfred/ Löbler, Helge (1985), Brauchen Unternehmen zum Innovieren Krisen?, in: Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 55. Jg., S. 424–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlitz, Manfred/ Löbler, Helge (1989), Das Innovationsverhalten in der mittelständischen Industrie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt, Richard P. (1974), Strategy, Structure, and Economic Performance, Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutledge, Robert (1995), Escalation of Commitment in groups and the moderating effects of information framing, in: Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol. 11, S. 17–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, Axel G. (1995), Der Einfluß der Unternehmensgröße auf die Rentabilität von Industrieunternehmen.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schule, Fritz M. (1992), Diversifikation und Unternehmenserfolg.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schwalbach, Joachim (1987), Diversifizierung, Risiko und Erfolg industrieller Unternehmen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, Tapen (1994), Prospect Theory and the risk return association: Another look, in: Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol. 24, S. 225–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, Paul/ Fischoff, Baruch/ Lichtenstein, Sarah (1982), Facts versus Fears: Understanding Perceived Risk, in: Kahneman, Daniel/ Slovic, Paul/ Tversky, Amos (Hrsg.) (1982), Judgment under Uncertanity: Henrishies and Biazes, S. 463–489.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, Richard H./ Johnson, Eric J. (1990), Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice, in: Management Science, Vol. 36, S. 643–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toland, Anne/ O’Neill, Patrick (1983), A Test of Prospect Theory, in: Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol. 4, S. 53–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treacy, Michael E. F. (1980), Profitability patterns and firm size, Working Paper (Alfred P. Sloan School of Management) Massachusetts Institute of Technology, WP 1109–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Martin (1993), Besitztumseffekte — Eine theoretische und experimentelle Analyse, in: Die Betriebswirtschaft, 53. Jg., S. 479–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiemann, Volker (1996), Determinanten der Risiko-Rendite-Relation, Arbeitspapiere zur Organisationsforschung, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Nr. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, Glen (1993), Escalating Commitment in Individual and Group Decision Making: A Prospect Theory Approach, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 54, S. 430–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wriley, Leonard (1970), Divisional Autonomy and Diversification.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mitarbeiter im Bereich Finanzierung & Contolling der Flores Holding GmbH, Weserstr. 7, 32602, Vlotho, Deutschland

    Volker Wiemann

  2. Leiter Regulierungsökonomie der o.tel.o Communications GmbH, Heerdter Lohweg 35, 40549, Düsseldorf, Deutschland

    Thomas Mellewigt

Authors
  1. Volker Wiemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Mellewigt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

gleichzeitig Habilitand am Lehrstuhl für ABWL und Organisation (Prof. Dr. R. Bronner), Johannes Gutenberg-Universität, 55099 Mainz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wiemann, V., Mellewigt, T. Das Risiko-Rendite Paradoxon. Stand der Forschung und Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung. Schmalenbachs Z betriebswirtsch Forsch 50, 551–572 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03371521

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03371521

Search

Navigation