MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413752655 · doi:10.32628/ijsrssh242554

Building Resilient Enterprise Risk Programs through Integrated Digital Governance Models

2024· article· en· W4413752655 on OpenAlex
Joshua Oluwagbenga Ajayi, Emmanuel Cadet, Iboro Akpan Essien, Eseoghene Daniel Erigh, Ehimah Obuse, Noah Ayanbode, Lawal Babatunde

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Scientific Research in Humanities and Social Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk Management
Canadian institutionsJDA Software (Canada)Alberta Energy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessProcess managementComputer scienceKnowledge managementFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an increasingly volatile business environment, organizations face complex, interdependent risks spanning operational, financial, technological, and regulatory domains. Traditional risk management approaches often operate in silos, limiting their ability to anticipate, adapt to, and mitigate rapidly evolving threats. This paper presents a strategic framework for building resilient enterprise risk programs through integrated digital governance models. By embedding governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) functions into a unified digital architecture, enterprises can improve risk visibility, accelerate decision-making, and strengthen organizational agility. The proposed model leverages advanced analytics, artificial intelligence, blockchain-enabled audit trails, and cloud-based collaboration platforms to enable real-time risk assessment and proactive mitigation. It emphasizes the integration of governance mechanisms across corporate policies, operational controls, and regulatory compliance, ensuring that risk intelligence flows seamlessly between stakeholders and decision-makers. The framework addresses critical challenges such as data silos, inconsistent reporting standards, and fragmented accountability structures. It proposes a layered approach in which governance policies are digitally codified, risk indicators are continuously monitored through automated systems, and compliance status is dynamically updated in alignment with evolving regulations. Cybersecurity, supply chain resilience, and ESG (environmental, social, and governance) considerations are embedded as core pillars, reflecting the increasing interconnectivity between operational performance and reputational risk. Case examples illustrate how enterprises adopting integrated digital governance models have achieved measurable improvements in risk response times, incident recovery rates, and compliance audit readiness. Furthermore, the model aligns with international risk management standards such as ISO 31000 and NIST frameworks, promoting interoperability and cross-border governance consistency. It also underscores the importance of fostering a risk-aware culture through digital training tools, predictive scenario planning, and transparent reporting dashboards. By uniting technology, governance structures, and cultural transformation, the integrated model enables enterprises not only to withstand disruptions but to adapt and thrive in high-uncertainty environments. This research contributes to both academic and practical discourse by offering a replicable, technology-enabled governance blueprint that can be tailored to diverse industries and regulatory contexts. It positions integrated digital governance as a catalyst for transforming enterprise risk management from a reactive compliance exercise into a proactive, strategic value driver.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.512
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.124
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.246 · 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