Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) and Firm’s Performance: A Study of Listed Manufacturing Firms in Nigeria
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increased volatility in the business world has exposed the inadequacy of traditional approaches to risk management. This has led to an integrated approach to measuring and managing risks known as enterprise risk management (ERM). At the same time, past studies on ERM disclosures have examined it within the context of book-based approach, which has not given the right and accurate information. However, this paper examined the significance of enterprise risk management and listed manufacturing firms' financial performance in Nigeria using both the book-based approach and the market-based approach. Relevant ERM theories in relation to financial performance such as Agency Theory, Stakeholders Theory, and Enterprise Risk Management Theory were examined. A panel data analysis was employed on time series and cross-sectional data of thirty listed manufacturing firms in Nigeria from 2010 to 2018. The random effect of the Hausman test was found to be more appropriate and hence adopted in interpreting the results of the analysis. The results confirm the a priori expectations that profitability ratio, liquidity ratio, market-based ration to risk board committee, the board size, firm size, and directors’ ownership all have varied impact on the firm’s profitability with varied statistical significance levels.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it