Saturday, February 5, 2011

"What 4th downs say about taking risk": Not just football risk management

Try asking any Monday morning quarterback about blown fourth-down play calls in the NFL and you are guaranteed passionate opinions. In most fourth-down plays, an NFL team will punt or try for a field goal. But, occasionally, teams decide to do something that is viewed as risky—attempt a fourth-down conversion or "go for it." (Credit: iStockphoto)

VANDERBILT (US) — After studying more than 22,000 fourth-down decisions over five NFL seasons, researchers found that teams trailing by three touchdowns or less are more likely to “go for it.”

Teams trailing by wider margins actually became less and less likely to attempt a seemingly risky fourth-down conversion as the game progressed. Researchers say the findings—scheduled for publication in the journal Organization Science—may tell us something about the role of feedback and deadlines within organizations.

“The idea here is that as the deadline approaches, the time available begins to factor in to the decision to try something different in response to underperformance,” says study co-author Ranga Ramanujam, associate professor of management at Vanderbilt University.


The results suggest that as the game clock runs down, teams within striking distance of their opponent grow more and more eager to try out risky plays that might help them win the game at hand. However, teams outside that striking distance grow increasingly concerned with “saving face” or avoiding a risky move that might backfire and make them look stupid.

“We argue that this same tension between chasing organizational goals and avoiding reputational threats can help us understand risk-taking behaviors in other types of organizations,” says study co-author David Lehman from the National University of Singapore.

Looming deadline
The goal of the study was to understand how risky organizational decisions might be shaped by performance feedback (i.e., the extent to which current performance is above or below the aspired level of performance) and deadline proximity (i.e., time remaining before an important deadline such as an earnings report date.)

“We know that deadlines play an important role in organizational life. Part of what we’re trying to understand is how deadlines affect the well-known relationship between under-performance and risk-taking,” Ramanujam says. “In other words, when are organizations more likely to deviate from routines? This is an important question for understanding a variety of important organizational outcomes such as innovation, change and fraud.”

Risk-taking’s the exception
Ramanujam is quick to acknowledge, “Although many managers have a natural talent for finding a football analogy for every business situation, football games are very different from the operations of business organizations. However, they are sufficiently similar in some key respects to make these findings potentially relevant to business organizations.”

For instance, fourth-down decisions typically are organizational decisions in that they are based on the inputs of various people on and off the field and are based on performance relative to a target and in reference to a deadline.

Ramanujam also notes that unlike prior studies that analyzed whether fourth-down conversions are as risky as they are made out to be, this study was about understanding when teams were more likely to go for it.

“What is especially relevant to our study is that teams treat this as a non-routine choice. In more than 80 percent of fourth-down plays, the teams punted the ball,” says Ramanujam.

More news from Vanderbilt: http://news.vanderbilt.edu/research/

Is this the thinking in your firm - when you most need the push you take the least risk and focus more on the downside risk at the expense of the upside risk?

Friday, February 4, 2011

Snap the Fingers on Risk. Part 1 of 3

by Rick Nason, PhD, CFA

Partner, RSD Solutions Inc

www.rsdsolutions.com

info@rsdsolutions.com

 

Teaching in an MBA program I have lots of students asking for advice on how to get a job.  With them I always start with the “snap the fingers test”.  The “snap the fingers test” works like this:  Assume that I had magical powers and that upon a snap of my fingers that you would be able to switch places with anyone in the world.  Who would that be? 

Students generally give a knee-jerk reaction such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Mick Jagger, etc.  Upon a little bit more self reflection (as I look at them with a “get real” look on my face), they actually come up with a reasonable answer or more likely they cannot think of anyone (it has to be a specific person – a role such as fireman will not work with me). 

Now how does this relate to risk management?  Simple.  Assume that I had magical powers and upon a snap of my fingers, your risk function could switch places with any other company’s risk department.  Who would you choose?  Are you capable of giving a non-frivolous answer?  Can you name a specific company or risk department that you would like to be like?

Thursday, February 3, 2011

Bernanke’s risk management is Mubarak’s nightmare

by Michael Arbow MBA

Partner, RSD Solutions Inc.

www.rsdsolutions.com

info@rsdsolutions.com

 

Back in 2007 Wall Street was looking a little shaky and the financial meltdown that would give birth to the Great Recession was just getting kick started. It was then the Ben Bernanke – US Federal Reserve Chairman – reached into his academic knowledge of the Great Depression and believed that the to reduce the downside risk and pain of the United States economy, quantitative easing (increasing the money supply) was required. The theory was sound (to some economist) and so quantitative easing began. This had the desired effect of lowering US interest rates to near zero and weakened the US dollar; all good for encouraging businesses to grow and expand exports.  Unfortunately, as Nouriel Roubini is quoted as saying, this begat the “mother of all carry trades” and money flowed out of the US and to the emerging markets. 

These markets over the last three years started to grow, their economies expanded and with that came new wealth for their citizens.  This is great news; except the citizens of these countries now craved lifestyles and diets similar to the West. Now there is a problem. This new desire has created new demand for energy, metals and minerals and more importantly food. This is when things start to get tough for Mr. Mubarak whose country has bread as its main food sustenance (wheat is up 76% in the past year alone) and like Tunisia before it, food has been the tipping point for bringing public dissent into the streets. 

So to summarize: what was Bernanke’s risk management strategy to stop America from unraveling lead to the unintentional unraveling of Egypt. On a smaller scale this can happen to companies when the risk management of one division works against the risk management or ideas of another either knowingly or not.  For the firm this can be remedied by developing a more integrative risk management strategy (the holistic approach) where all key stakeholders in the firm’s success are part of the risk strategy formulation. For Mr. Bernanke it is a little more complicated.

Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Governmental Competence - Part 1

 by Stephen McPhie, CA

Partner, RSD Solutions Inc.

www.rsdsolutions.com

info@rsdsolutions.com

 

I call this Part 1, not because I have in mind a continuation of this blog – it stands on its own - but because I know that there is scope for many more parts to this topic.  Actually, probably an infinite number of further parts! 

Across the United Kingdom, many public sector projects, especially schools and hospitals, have been financed under PFI (Public Finance Initiative).  The idea is to transfer risk of building and managing such projects to the private sector.  (Taking billions of pounds of public sector debt off balance sheet for a government that appeared addicted to spending, taxing and borrowing may also have been an attractive factor.) 

We are gradually finding out that PFI commitments are a potential time bomb for governments and local authorities that are locked into high charges and maintenance costs.  It appears that risk transfer in many cases has not occurred to the extent it was thought, and many assumptions underlying future costs and funding that are embedded in contracts were poorly formulated.  These contracts are typically for long periods; up to 50 years in some cases.

Public bodies are locked into these contracts just as they are to paying interest on public sector debt.  PFI contract costs include not only financing costs (debt interest equivalent) but also management and other costs. 

An article in Public Finance Journal[1] reports that maintenance requirements over the lives of many contracts are far in excess of what should be required and at far higher cost than they should be and NPV of cash flows to investors in some contracts studied are as much as 6 times the NPV of their equity investments. 

At a time of swingeing cost cutting by governments these fixed cost commitments will make higher cuts elsewhere necessary.  Many local councils have, or intend to, raise taxes by significant amounts to fund these commitments. 

Also in the journal Public Finance, a report[2] cites a study by economists of PFI in Scotland (the conclusions of which may well be valid for the UK as a whole) that came to similar conclusions about the costs of PFI contracts and inadequacy of embedded assumptions. 

Public bodies appear to have been taken to the cleaners by private enterprises in negotiating many PFI contracts.  This has resulted in a waste of taxpayers’ money on a vast scale and also a political climate against private sector involvement in public expenditure projects.  You might also say that the private sector is shooting itself in the foot by having done this.  This may well be true for the sector as a whole but individual companies negotiating contracts do not take a macro view of the sector as a whole.  This should be government’s job but politicians’ approaches often appear to be swayed by the easiest way to get votes at the next election.  Private sector greed, expensive consultants, public money feeding private profits, etc. are easy rants for politicians.  The fact that the public sector only exists because resources have been taken from the private sector does not always figure prominently in the arguments. 

In my career in the financial sector in the City of London as well as the United States and Canada, I have seen, and negotiated billions of dollars / euros of contracts and seen all types of mistakes made.  The lessons for businesses and anyone else in negotiating contracts is to understand the risks, decide who takes the risk and at what price, and know that unforeseen events will occur and to allow appropriately for that.  (I would say also that lawyers are a valuable part of a team and have their role but should not be given roles beyond their own areas of competence.  This is not intended as sleight on lawyers; rather just common sense.)

 Fro the public sector, more competence and greater vision and imagination are needed in negotiating with private companies. 

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

127 Hours. Risk management is up for an Oscar.

by Michael Arbow MBA

Partner, RSD Solutions Inc.

www.rsdsolutions.com

info@rsdsolutions.com

 

Recently my daughter and I (both avid movie goers) went and saw the Oscar nominated movie 127 Hours. This true story, retold by director Danny Boyle and with a stunning performance by James Franco, is about s mountain climber becoming trapped under a boulder while canyoneering alone in Utah.  Of course the trapped situation becomes a metaphor and the foundation for which the movie and the thoughts and reflections of the climber are based. So you are wondering – where does risk management fit into this? 

Franco plays a young engineer in peak physical shape, equipped with all the best equipment and hiking in an area he has been exploring since childhood. Does this sound familiar: brilliant minds with lots of financial resources using the most sophisticated technology and algorithms working in a sector they have “played” in for decades? But the engineer made one vital mistake; his over confidence in his abilities – he was always the person doing the rescuing – and this blinded him to the possibility of being the rescued. Is this the case in your organization, where being surrounded by resources and years of profitability you live in a comfort zone, never realizing or believing that a simple pivotal event will occur and lead to disaster? 

There are a few other risk management lessons in this excellent film but I don’t want to give the entire plot away.     

Monday, January 31, 2011

Risk, Risk Everywhere

Rick Nason, PhD, CFA

Partner, RSD Solutions Inc

www.rsdsolutions.com

info@rsdsolutions.com

 

I teach an Executive MBA course in Enterprise Risk Management.  It is a lot of fun to teach as the students are experienced bankers and thus are very keen and very capable of pushing me as a professor.  Their professional experiences and their willingness to bring them up in class so they can directly apply the learning to their job makes it an exciting, challenging and intriguing class to teach.

Last week I had the students start a discussion on what objectives they had for the class.  One of the students brought up that she would like to learn how to define risk in a corporate context.  The reason for her comment was that the risk department at her institution was quickly becoming the department of everything (I am paraphrasing).

Those of you who have followed my blogs over the last two years know that this is a topic that I have written about a couple of times before.  What is risk, and what is the function of the risk department.  It is very easy for everything to become a task for the risk department to deal with.  Perhaps that is a good thing, and perhaps it is not.  In most institutions it means that the CRO quickly gets swamped due to a lack of resources.

Ultimately it comes back down to focus.  What is it that you want the risk department to do?  In many firms the risk department is a risk-washing department (the risk equivalent of green-washing).  In other organizations the risk department would not exist if the board and / or regulators insisted on it.  In other companies, the risk department plays a vital and valuable role in the day-to-day operations of the firm.

Defining what risk is, and the role and objectives of the CRO and the risk department is the key for achieving a successful, vital, effective and efficient risk department.    Has your organization taken the time to do so?