保險公司風險管理外文翻譯文獻_第1頁
保險公司風險管理外文翻譯文獻_第2頁
保險公司風險管理外文翻譯文獻_第3頁
保險公司風險管理外文翻譯文獻_第4頁
保險公司風險管理外文翻譯文獻_第5頁
已閱讀5頁,還剩15頁未讀, 繼續(xù)免費閱讀

下載本文檔

版權說明:本文檔由用戶提供并上傳,收益歸屬內(nèi)容提供方,若內(nèi)容存在侵權,請進行舉報或認領

文檔簡介

保險公司風險管理外文翻譯文獻保險公司風險管理外文翻譯文獻(文檔含英文原文和中文翻譯)原文:EnterpriseRiskManagementinInsuranceEnterpriseRiskManagement(hereinafterreferredas“ERM”)interestsawiderangeofprofessions(e.g.,actuaries,corporatefinancialmanagers,underwriters,accountants,andinternalauditors),however,currentERMsolutionsoftendonotcoverallrisksbecausetheyaremotivatedbythecoreprofessionalethicsandprinciplesoftheseprofessionswhodesignandadministerthem.Inatypicalinsurancecompanyallsuchprofessionsworkasagrouptoachievetheoverridingcorporateobjectives.Riskcanbedefinedasfactorswhichpreventanorganizationinachievingitsobjectivesandrisksaffectorganizationsholistically.Themanagementofriskinisolationoftenmissesitsbigpicture.Itisarguedherethataholisticmanagementofriskislogicalandistheultimatedestinationofallgeneralmanagementactivities.Moreover,riskmanagementshouldnotbeaseparatefunctionofthebusinessprocess;rather,managingdownsideriskandtakingtheopportunitiesfromupsideriskshouldbethekeymanagementgoals.Consequently,ERMisbelievedasanapproachtoriskmanagement,whichprovidesacommonunderstandingacrossthemultidisciplinarygroupsofpeopleoftheorganization.ERMshouldbeproactiveanditsfocusshouldbeontheorganizationsfuture.Organizationsoftenstruggletoseeandunderstandthefullriskspectrumtowhichtheyareexposedandasaresulttheymayfailtoidentifythemostvulnerableareasofthebusiness.Theeffectivemanagementofriskistrulyaninterdisciplinaryexercisegroundedonaholisticframework.Whatevernamethisnewtypeofriskmanagementisgiven(theliteraturereferstoitbydiversenames,suchasEnterpriseRiskManagement,StrategicRiskManagement,andHolisticRiskManagement)theultimatefocusismanagementofallsignificantrisksfacedbytheorganization.Riskisanintegralpartofeachandeveryactionoftheorganizationinthesensethatanorganizationisabasketofcontractsassociatedwithrisk(intermsoflossesandopportunities).TheideaofERMissimpleandlogical,butimplementationisdifficult.Thisisbecauseitsinvolvementwithawidestakeholdercommunity,whichinturninvolvesgroupsfromdifferentdisciplineswithdifferentbeliefsandunderstandings.Indeed,ERMneedstheories(whicharetheinterestofacademics)butagrandtheoryofERM(whichinvariablyinvolvesaninterdisciplinaryconcept)isfarfromhavingbeenachieved.Consequently,forpracticalproposes,whatisneededisthedevelopmentofaframework(asetofcompetenttheories)andoneofthekeychallengesofthisthesisistoestablishthekeyfeaturesofsuchaframeworktopromotethepracticeofERM.MultidisciplinaryViewsofRiskTheobjectiveoftheresearchistostudytheERMofinsurancecompanies.InlinewiththisitisdesignedtoinvestigatewhatishappeningpracticallyintheinsuranceindustryatthecurrenttimeinthenameofERM.Theintentionistominimizethegapbetweenthetwocommunities(i.e.,academicsandpractitioners)inordertocontributetotheliteratureofriskmanagement.InrecentyearsERMhasemergedasatopicfordiscussioninthefinancialcommunity,inparticular,thebanksandinsurancesectors.ProfessionalorganizationshavepublishedresearchreportsonERM.Consultingfirmsconductedextensivestudiesandsurveysonthetopictosupporttheirclients.RatingagenciesincludedtheERMconceptintheirratingcriteria.Regulatorsfocusedmoreontheriskmanagementcapabilityofthefinancialorganizations.Academicsareslowlyrespondingonthemanagementofriskinaholisticframeworkfollowingtheinitiativesofpractitioners.Thecentralideaistobringtheorganizationclosetothemarketeconomy.Nevertheless,everybodyispushingERMwithinthescopeoftheircoreprofessionalunderstanding.ThefocusofERMistomanageallrisksinaholisticframeworkwhateverthesourceandnature.Thereremainsastronggroundofknowledgeinmanagingriskonanisolatedbasisinseveralacademicdisciplines(e.g.,economics,finance,psychology,sociology,etc.).Butlittlehasbeendonetotakeaholisticapproachofriskbeyonddisciplinarysilos.Moreover,thetheoreticalunderstandingoftheholistic(i.e.,multidisciplinary)propertiesofriskisstillunknown.Consequently,thereremainsalackofunderstandingintermsofacommonandinterdisciplinarylanguageforERM.RiskinFinanceInfinance,riskyoptionsinvolvemonetaryoutcomeswithexplicitprobabilitiesandtheyareevaluatedintermsoftheirexpectedvalueandtheirriskiness.Thetraditionalapproachtoriskinfinanceliteratureisbasedonamean-varianceframeworkofportfoliotheory,i.e.,selectionanddiversification.Theideaofriskinfinanceisunderstoodwithinthescopeofsystematic(non-diversifiable)riskandunsystematic(diversifiable)risk.Itisrecognizedinfinancethatsystematicriskispositivelycorrelatedwiththerateofreturn.Inaddition,systematicriskisanon-increasingfunctionofafirm’sgrowthintermsofearnings.Anotherestablishedconcerninfinanceisdefaultriskanditisarguedthattheperformanceofthefirmislinkedtothefirm’sdefaultrisk.Alargepartoffinanceliteraturedealswithseveraltechniquesofmeasuringrisksoffirms’investmentportfolios(e.g.,standarddeviation,beta,VaR,etc.).Inadditiontotheportfoliotheory,CapitalAssetPricingModel(CAPM)wasdiscoveredinfinancetopriceriskyassetsontheperfectcapitalmarkets.Finally,derivativemarketsgrewtremendouslywiththerecognitionofoptionpricingtheory.RiskinEconomicsRiskineconomicsisunderstoodwithintwoseparate(independent)categories,i.e.,endogenous(controllable)riskandbackground(uncontrollable)risk.Itisrecognizedthateconomicdecisionsaremadeunderuncertaintyinthepresenceofmultiplerisks.ExpectedUtilityTheoryarguesthatpeoples’riskattitudeonthesizeofrisk(small,medium,large)isderivedfromtheutility-of-wealthfunction,wheretheutilitiesofoutcomesareweightedbytheirprobabilities.Economistsarguethatpeopleareriskaverse(neutral)whenthesizeoftherisksislarge(small).Prospecttheoryprovidesadescriptiveanalysisofchoiceunderrisk.Ineconomics,theconceptofrisk-bearingpreferencesofagentsforindependentriskswasdescribedunderthenotionof“standardriskaversion.”Mostoftheeconomicresearchonriskisoriginatedonthestudyofdecisionmakingbehavioronlotteriesandothergambles.RiskinPsychologyWhileeconomicsassumesanindividual’sriskpreferenceisafunctionofprobabilisticbeliefs,psychologyexploreshowhumanjudgmentandbehaviorsystematicallyformssuchbeliefs.Psychologytalksabouttherisktakingbehavior(riskpreferences).Itlooksforthepatternsofhumanreactionstothecontext,referencepoint,mentalcategoriesandassociationsthatinfluencehowpeoplemakedecisions.Thepsychologicalapproachtoriskdrawsuponthenotionoflossaversionthatmanifestsitselfintherelatednotionof“regret.”AccordingtoWillett;“riskaffectseconomicactivitythroughthepsychologicalinfluenceofuncertainty.”Managers’attitudeofrisktakingisoftendescribedfromthepsychologicalpointofviewintermsoffeelings.Psychologistsarguethatrisk,asamultidisciplinaryconcept,cannotbereducedmeaningfullybyasinglequantitativetreatment.Consequently,managerstendtoutilizeanarrayofriskmeasurerstoassisttheminthedecisionmakingprocessunderuncertainty.Riskperceptionplaysacentralroleinthepsychologicalresearchonrisk,wherethekeyconcernishowpeopleperceiveriskandhowitdifferstotheactualoutcome.Nevertheless,thepsychologicalresearchonriskprovidesfundamentalknowledgeofhowemotionsarelinkedtodecisionmaking.RiskinSociologyInsociologyriskisasociallyconstructedphenomenon(i.e.,asocialproblem)anddefinedasastrategyreferringtoinstrumentalrationality.Thesociologicalliteratureonriskwasoriginatedfromanthropologyandpsychologyisdominatedbytwocentralconcepts.First,riskandcultureandsecond,risksociety.Thenegativeconsequencesofunwantedevents(i.e.,natural/chemicaldisasters,foodsafety)arethekeyfocusofsociologicalresearchesonrisk.Fromasociologicalperspectiveentrepreneursremainliablefortheriskofthesocietyandresponsibletoshareitinproportiontotheirrespectivecontributions.Practically,theresponsibilitiesareimposedandactionsaremonitoredbystateregulatorsandsupervisors.Nevertheless,identificationofasociallyacceptablethresholdofriskisakeychallengeofmanysociologicalresearchesonrisk.ConvergenceofMultidisciplinaryViewsofRiskDifferentdisciplinaryviewsofriskareobvious.Whereas,economicsandfinancestudyriskbyexaminingthedistributionofcorporatereturns,psychologyandsociologyinterpretriskintermsofitsbehavioralcomponents.Moreover,economistsfocusontheeconomic(i.e.,commercial)valueofinvestmentsinariskysituation.Incontrast,sociologistsargueonthemoralvalue(i.e.,sacrifice)ontheriskrelatedactivitiesofthefirm.Inaddition,sociologists’criticismofeconomists’concernofriskisthatalthoughtheyrelyonrisk,time,andpreferenceswhiledescribingtheissuesrelatedtorisktaking,theyoftenmissouttheirinterrelationships(i.e.,narrowperspective).Interestingly,thereappearssomeconvergenceofeconomicsandpsychologyintheliteratureofeconomicpsychology.Theintentionistoincludethetraditionaleconomicmodelofindividuals’formalrationalactionintheunderstandingofthewaytheyactuallythinkandbehave(i.e.,irrationality).Inaddition,behavioralfinanceisseenasagrowingdisciplinewiththeoriginofeconomicsandpsychology.Incontrasttoefficientmarkethypothesisbehaviourfinanceprovidesdescriptivemodelsinmakingjudgmentunderuncertainty.TheoriginofthisconvergencewasduetothediscoveryoftheprospecttheoryinthefulfillmentoftheshortcomingsofvonNeumann-Morgenstern’sutilitytheoryforprovidingreasonsofhuman(irrational)behaviorunderuncertainty(e.g.,arbitrage).Although,theoverridingenquiryofdisciplinesistheestimationofrisk,theycomparingandreducingintoacommonmetricofmanytypesofrisksarethereultimatedifficulty.Thekeyconclusionoftheaboveanalysissuggeststhatthereexistoverlapsonthedisciplinaryviewsofriskandtheirinterrelationsareemergingwiththeprogressofriskresearch.Inparticular,thecentralideaofERMistoobscurethehiddendependenciesofriskbeyonddisciplinarysilos.InsuranceIndustryPracticeThepracticeofERMintheinsuranceindustryhasbeendrawnfromtheauthor’sPhDresearchcompletedin2006.TheinitiativesoffourmajorglobalEuropeaninsurers(hereinafterreferredas“CASES”)werestudiedforthispurpose.Outofthesefourinsurersoneisareinsurerandtheremainingthreeareprimaryinsurers.TheywereatvariousstagesofdesigningandimplementingERM.Atotaloffifty-oneface-to-faceandtelephoneinterviewswereconductedwithkeypersonneloftheCASESinbetweentheendof2004andthebeginningof2006.Thecomparativeanalysis(compare-and-contrast)techniquewasusedtoanalyzethedataandtheywerediscussedwithseveralindustryandacademicexpertsforthepurposeofvalidation.Thereafter,aconceptualmodelofERMwasdevelopedfromthefindingsofthedata.Findingsbasedonthedataarearrangedunderfivedimensions.Theyareunderstanding;evaluation;structure;challenges,andperformanceofERM.UnderstandingofERMItwasfoundthatthekeydistinctioninvariousperceptionsofERMremainsbetweenriskmeasurementandriskmanagement.Interestingly,toolsandprocessesarefoundcomplimentary.Inessence,meaningthatatoolcannotrunwithoutaprocessandviceversa.Itisfoundthatthepeoplewhoworkwithnumbers(e.g.,actuaries,financepeople,etc.)areinvolvedintheriskmodelingandmanagement(mostlyconcernedwiththefinancialandcoreinsurancerisks)andtendtobelieveERMisatool.Ontheotherhandinternalauditors,companysecretaries,andoperationalmanagers;whosejobisrelatedtothehuman,systemandcompliancerelatedissuesofriskaremorelikelytoseeERMasaprocess.ERM:AProcessWithintheunderstandingofERMasaprocess,fourkeyconceptswerefound.Theyareharmonization,standardization,integrationandcentralization.Infact,theyarelinkedtotheconceptoftop-downandbottom-upapproachesofERM.TheanalysisfoundfourkeyconceptsofERM.Theyareharmonization,standardization,integrationandcentralization(indecreasingorderofimportance).ItwasalsofoundthatauniqueunderstandingofERMdoesnotexistwithintheCASES,ratherERMisseenasacombinationofthefourconceptsandtheyoftenoverlap.ItisrevealedthatanunderstandingofthesefourconceptsincludingtheirlinkagesisessentialfordesigninganoptimalERMsystem.LinkagesAmongsttheFourConceptsAlthoughharmonizationandstandardizationareseenapparentlysimilarrespondentsviewthemdifferently.Whereas,harmonizationallowschoicesbetweenalternatives,standardizationprovidesnoflexibility.Effectively,harmonizationoffersarangeofidenticalalternatives,outofwhichoneormorecanbeadopteddependingonthegivencircumstances.Althoughstandardizationdoesnotoffersuchflexibility,itwasfoundasanessentialtechniqueofERM.Whilstharmonizationacceptsexistingdivergencetobringastateofcomparability,standardizationdoesnotnecessarilyconsiderexistingconventionsanddefinitions.Itfocusesonacommonstandard,(a“top-down”approach).Indeed,integrationofcompetentpoliciesandprocesses,models,anddata(eitherformanagementuse,complianceandreporting)arenotpossibleforglobalinsurerswithoutharmonizingandstandardizingthem.Hence,theresearchestablishesthatasequence(i.e.,harmonization,standardization,integration,andthencentralization)istobemaintainedwhenERMisbeingdevelopedinpractice(fromanoperationalperspective).Aboveall,theprocessisfoundimportanttoachieveadiversifiedriskcultureacrosstheorganizationtoallocateriskmanagementresponsibilitiestoriskownersandrisktakers.ERM:AToolViewedasatool,ERMencompassesproceduresandtechniquestomodelandmeasuretheportfolioof(quantifiable)enterpriseriskfrominsurers’coredisciplinaryperspective.Theobjectiveistomeasurealevelof(riskadjusted)capital(i.e.,economiccapital)andthereafterallocationofcapital.InthisperspectiveERMisthoughtasasophisticatedversionofinsurers’asset-liabilitymanagement.Mostoften,extremeandemergingrisks,whichmaybringtheorganizationdown,aretakenintoconsideration.Ideally,theprocedureofcalculatingeconomiccapitaliscloselylinkedtothemarketvolatility.Moreover,theobjectiveisclear,i.e.,meetingtheexpectationofshareholders.Consequently,thereremainslessscopetocapturethesubjectivityassociatedwithenterpriserisks.ERM:AnApproachIncontrasttoprocessandtool,ERMisalsofoundasanapproachofmanagingtheentirebusinessfromastrategicpointofview.Since,riskissodeeplyrootedintheinsurancebusiness,itisdifficulttoseparateriskfromthefunctionsofinsurancecompanies.ItisarguedthataproperlydesignedERMinfrastructureshouldalignrisktoachievestrategicgoals.Alternatively,applicationofanERMapproachofmanagingbusinessisfoundcentraltothevaluecreationofinsurancecompanies.Inthestudy,ERMisbelievedasanapproachofchangingthecultureoftheorganizationinbothmarketingandstrategicmanagementissuesintermsofinnovatingandpricingproducts,selectingprofitablemarkets,distributingproducts,targetingcustomersandratings,andthusformulatingappropriatecorporatestrategies.Inthisholisticapproachvariousstrategic,financialandoperationalconcernsareseenintegratedtoconsiderallrisksacrosstheorganization.Itisseenthatasaprocess,ERMtakesaninductiveapproachtoexplorethepitfalls(challenges)ofachievingcorporateobjectivesforbroaderaudience(i.e.,stakeholders)emphasizingmoreonmoralandethicalissues.Incontrast,asatool,ittakesadeductiveapproachtomeetspecificcorporateobjectivesforselectedaudience(i.e.,shareholders)byconcentratingmoreonmonitory(financial)outcomes.Clearly,theapproachesarecomplimentaryandhaveoverlappingelements.外文題目:AnEmpiricalStudyonEnterpriseRiskManagementinInsurance出處:NewFrontiersinEnterpriseRiskManagement作者:MAcharyya譯文:保險業(yè)對企業(yè)風險管理的實證研究企業(yè)風險管理涉及各種行業(yè)(如保險精算師、公司財政經(jīng)理、保險商、會計和內(nèi)部審計員),當前企業(yè)風險管理解決方案往往不能涵蓋所有的風險,因為這些方案取決于決策者和執(zhí)行則的專業(yè)道德和原則。在一家典型的保險公司中,專業(yè)工作將以小組的形式完成,風險也可以稱為因素,其阻礙組織目標的實現(xiàn)進而影響整體。而孤立的風險管理往往忽略了全局。本文所研究的全面的風險管理是合理的,也是一般管理活動的最終目標。風險管理不是一個獨立的業(yè)務流程的,管理目標的關鍵應該是處理好風險的負面效應,以及從風險的正面效應中獲取機會。企業(yè)風險管理是風險管理的一種途徑,它是各個學科的專家達成的共識。企業(yè)風險管理要具有前攝性,應立足于企業(yè)的未來發(fā)展。企業(yè)應了解風險涉及的范圍以及可能引起的損失。有效的風險管理是以全面的框架為基礎的一項跨學科的實踐活動。無論以何種名義定義這種新型的風險管理(本文指的是不同的名稱,如企業(yè)風險管理,戰(zhàn)略風險管理,整體風險管理),最終都統(tǒng)一于對該企業(yè)所有重大風險的管理。風險存在于任何事項中,企業(yè)的任何一項決策,無論是虧損還是獲利都與風險密切相關。企業(yè)風險管理理論上是簡單合理的,但由于它的主體是社會,有廣泛的利益相關者,而且涉及到不同信仰,不同世界觀的社會群體,在現(xiàn)實中很難實行。企業(yè)風險管理需要理論作為依據(jù),但卻始終缺少強有力的理論(它涉及跨學科的概念)。本文認為,現(xiàn)在需要的是一個整體框架的發(fā)展,本文的主要任務就是建立一個完整的理論體系,以促進企業(yè)風險管理的實際運用。多學科的風險觀:此次討論的目的是研究保險公司的風險管理。為此我們設計了一份調查,調查內(nèi)容是保險業(yè)實際面臨的狀況,調查目的是盡量減少學者和從業(yè)人員之間的差距,以促進風險管理的實證研究。近年來,風險管理已成為金融界一個重點討論的話題,尤其是銀行業(yè)和保險業(yè)。專業(yè)組織發(fā)表關于企業(yè)風險管理的研究報告,咨詢公司為支持他們的客戶進行廣泛的研究課題和調查,評級機構在評級標準中包含了企業(yè)風險管理。監(jiān)管機構更注重金融機構的風險管理能力。學者們也逐漸響應從業(yè)人員的號召,提倡對風險管理構建一個全面的框架結構,其中心思想是使該組織貼近市場經(jīng)濟。然而大家推崇各自核心專業(yè)的企業(yè)風險管理思想。風險管理的重點是整個管理活動中任何性質的一切風險。在一些學科中,仍有大量風險管理知識是孤立存在的(例如,經(jīng)濟學,金融學,心理學,社會學等),完整的跨學科風險體系還未建立。此外,整體(即多學科的)風險性質的理論認識仍是盲點,因此,人們對跨學科的企業(yè)風險管理的認識仍然難以達成共識。金融學中的風險:在金融學中,風險主要通過期望值和風險程度來表現(xiàn)。傳統(tǒng)規(guī)避風險的方法是投資組合理論;金融風險包括系統(tǒng)性風險和非系統(tǒng)性風險;系統(tǒng)性風險與投資回報率密切相關,但與企業(yè)自身盈利能力無關;金融風險還包括違約風險,這與公司的業(yè)績密切相關;相當一部分金融風險與投資組合風險的衡量標準有關(如標準差,β,風險等);除了投資組合理論,資本資產(chǎn)定價模型在完美的資本市場也適用于風險資產(chǎn)的定價;衍生市場隨著期權定價理論的推廣而迅速擴張。經(jīng)濟學中的風險:經(jīng)濟學中的風險可以分為兩類即內(nèi)部風險和外部風險。經(jīng)濟決策往往是在存在多個風險的不確定性下做出的。預期效用理論認為,人們根據(jù)自己的風險態(tài)度判斷風險大?。ㄐ⌒?,中型,大型),而根據(jù)財富效用理論,風險態(tài)度取決于財富,它通過風險的概率來衡量。經(jīng)濟學家認為當風險很大時,人們是風險厭惡型的。風險預期理論論述了風險狀態(tài)下的選擇分析。標準風險厭惡是指在獨立的風險中偏好于承擔風險的個體。經(jīng)濟中對風險的研究來自于為彩票和其他賭博行為制定規(guī)則。心理學中的風險:雖然經(jīng)濟學假定個人的風險偏好是信念的表現(xiàn),心理學家仍在研究系統(tǒng)的判斷和行為

溫馨提示

  • 1. 本站所有資源如無特殊說明,都需要本地電腦安裝OFFICE2007和PDF閱讀器。圖紙軟件為CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.壓縮文件請下載最新的WinRAR軟件解壓。
  • 2. 本站的文檔不包含任何第三方提供的附件圖紙等,如果需要附件,請聯(lián)系上傳者。文件的所有權益歸上傳用戶所有。
  • 3. 本站RAR壓縮包中若帶圖紙,網(wǎng)頁內(nèi)容里面會有圖紙預覽,若沒有圖紙預覽就沒有圖紙。
  • 4. 未經(jīng)權益所有人同意不得將文件中的內(nèi)容挪作商業(yè)或盈利用途。
  • 5. 人人文庫網(wǎng)僅提供信息存儲空間,僅對用戶上傳內(nèi)容的表現(xiàn)方式做保護處理,對用戶上傳分享的文檔內(nèi)容本身不做任何修改或編輯,并不能對任何下載內(nèi)容負責。
  • 6. 下載文件中如有侵權或不適當內(nèi)容,請與我們聯(lián)系,我們立即糾正。
  • 7. 本站不保證下載資源的準確性、安全性和完整性, 同時也不承擔用戶因使用這些下載資源對自己和他人造成任何形式的傷害或損失。

最新文檔

評論

0/150

提交評論