MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1551488888 · doi:10.1002/9781118704233.ch9

Building Enterprise Risk Management into Agency Processes and Culture

2014· other· en· W1551488888 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John M. Fraser

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRisk Management in Financial Firms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessAccountabilityEnterprise risk managementRisk managementOrganizational culturePublic relationsAgency (philosophy)FacilitatorTransparency (behavior)Work (physics)Knowledge managementPolitical scienceFinanceEngineeringComputer scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawn from the experience of Ontario's government-owned electric utility Hydro One, this chapter provides advice for embedding Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) into processes and culture of an agency, using a small central corporate risk office, reinforcing line accountability for risk management, and encouraging constructive conversations about strategy and risk among decision makers and stakeholders. ERM will work well in organizations where the leadership values openness and transparency and encourages employees to function as a team and to be engaged and resilient, but may not work in all organizational cultures. ERM requires only a small office to be a facilitator, and does not remove accountability from line managers to manage risk or tell them how to manage their operations. Techniques for engaging the governing body, management, and staff are described. ERM's simple, focused approach gives every organization, large and small, and even countries, a method to return to basics of good management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk Management in Financial FirmsFrench-language works237,207