How Can Enterprise Risk Management Help in Evaluating the Operational Risks for a Telecommunications Company?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Operational risk is defined as the potential losses resulting from events caused by inadequate or failed processes, people, equipment, and systems or from external events. One of the most important challenges for the management of the company is to improve its results through its operational risk identification and evaluation. Most of Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) scholarship has roots in the finance/risk management and insurance (RMI) discipline, mainly in the banking sector. This study proposes an innovative operational risk assessment methodology (OpRAM), to evaluate operational risks focused on telecommunications companies (TELCOs), on the basis of an operational risk self-assessment (OpRSA) process and method. The OpRSA process evaluates operational risks through a quantitative analysis of estimates which inputs are the economic impact and the probability of occurrence of events. The OpRSA method is the “engine” for calculating the economic risk impact, applying actuarial techniques, which allow estimation of unexpected losses and expected losses distributions in a TELCO. The results of the analyzed business unit in the field work were compared with standardized ratings (acceptable, manageable, critical, or catastrophic), and contrasted against the company’s managers, proving that the OpRSA framework is a reliable and useful management tool for the business, and leading to more research in other sectors where operational risk management is key for the company success.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".