Publication: When Do Companies Need a Board-Level Risk Management Committee?
Loading...
Published
2013
ISSN
Date
2014-02-12
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
Risk management is nothing new. But the global financial crisis and corporate failures in recent years have put risk management in the spotlight. Who is ultimately responsible for it? Responsibility for risk management should start in the boardroom, as the board is ultimately responsible for the organization's decision making, business performance, and value creation, all of which are associated with risk. The chief executive officer, who is accountable to the board, has the responsibility to ensure proper execution of the risk-management strategy and policies laid down by the board. The board governs while management manages. The board's risk management role should therefore be the governance of risk overseeing, directing, and setting policies and monitoring performance.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Choi, Ivan. 2013. When Do Companies Need a Board-Level Risk Management Committee?. Private Sector Opinion;no. 31. © http://hdl.handle.net/10986/17018 License: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO.”
Digital Object Identifier
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Uses and Limits of Conventional Corporate Governance Instruments : Analysis and Guidance for Reform - Part One(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2009-06)This private sector opinion seeks to demonstrate that while conventional governance mechanisms can be highly effective in many situations, they are not appropriate remedies in all contexts. In some cases, the prescribed medicine actually exacerbated the governance ailment that it was designed to cure. To illustrate, the rapid growth of executive compensation persisted and in some markets, accelerated after the introduction of individual executive pay disclosure. In the financial sector, the shift toward a board dominated by independent directors perceived by many to be key for effective monitoring of management ultimately proved to be its Achilles' heel as weak industry knowledge meant that non-executive directors were unable to pick up on warning signs of imprudent risk taking by management. This section will examine how the core set of corporate governance instruments comprising transparency, independent monitoring, economic incentives, shareholder rights, and financial liability has been applied to different issues and contexts. It will discuss the extent to which these mechanisms have been effective and analyze the limits of their application by surveying cases where they have failed to work as intended. In addition, it will set forth proposals to improve the use of specific tools and suggest how certain governance issues should be addressed.Publication The Effectiveness of Boards of Directors of State Owned Enterprises in Developing Countries(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2008-03)This paper aims to shed some new light on the conditions needed to ensure the effectiveness of Boards of Directors of state owned enterprises with a focus on infrastructure sectors. In the case of developing countries, empirical studies have found evidence of positive links between the composition of the Board of Directors and financial performance. Yet the lack of solid theoretical foundations, and in some cases poor data availability, makes the conclusions of most studies weak. Several policy recommendations emerge from the review of the economic literature and evidence from case studies. First, the introduction of a sufficient number of independent directors emerges as an important corporate governance milestone. Empowering them to exercise effective monitoring of management, however, may prove to be a formidable challenge for of state owned enterprises. More attention to board procedures, particularly related to the Board selection and evaluation process, is essential, to produce the necessary insulation of Boards from government interference. Ensuring sufficient continuity of services to directors is particularly crucial to improve corporate governance. In addition, other factors that may reduce directors' ability to monitor corporate activities, such as the age profile and the number of Boards on which they sit, need to be handled more carefully.Publication The Russia Corporate Governance Manual : Part II. Good Board Practices(Washington, DC, 2004-09-17)The Russia corporate governance manual has been divided into and is published in six parts: (i) corporate governance introduced; (ii) good board practices; (iii) shareholder rights; (iv) information disclosure and transparency; (v) special focus section; and (vi) annexes model corporate governance documents. The first four parts contain chapters that focus on core corporate governance issues, such as a company's board structure, information disclosure practices, and shareholder rights. Part five focuses on corporate governance issues of particular importance in the Russian context, namely corporate governance concerns during a company's reorganization, within holding structures, and relating to enforcement. Part six, finally, offers practical tools in the form of model documents, for example company codes, by-laws, and contracts. All issues are closely examined through Russian law and regulations; the Federal Commission for the Securities Market's Code of Corporate Conduct (FCSM Code) Code and, when applicable, internationally recognized best practices. This manual also provides government officials, lawyers, judges, investors, and others with a framework for assessing the level of corporate governance practices in Russian companies. Finally, it serves as a reference tool for the educational institutions that will train the next generation of Russian managers, investors, and policy makers on good corporate governance practices.Publication From Companies to Markets--Global Developments in Corporate Governance(Washington, DC, 2016-04)In May 2015, the IFC Corporate Governance Group called together 40 experts in the field and members of the IFC Corporate Governance Private Sector Advisory Group. These participants explored key changes in international corporate governance standards and codes of best practice in the wake of the recent global financial crisis and how these changes have helped draw corporate attention to sustainability issues. The group found that many issues that became evident regarding banks in the financial crisis, and led to changes in the governance of banks, also have flowed through into broader corporate governance developments. This publication arises from the issues and information from these discussions. Specifically, part A discusses developments from global or regional groups involved in corporate governance. Part B addresses developments in corporate governance practice, and part C looks at developments in corporate governance codes and standards.Publication Culture and Corporate Governance Principles in India : Reconcilable Clashes?(Washington, DC, 2011-01)The structures, institutions, and legal framework of corporate governance are developed and administered by individuals whose behaviors are shaped by cultural and personal concepts of hope, ambition, greed, fear, uncertainty, and hubris, as well as by the social ethos. A problem arises when these influences do not conform to the regulatory prescriptions of corporate governance. This private sector opinion explores the dynamics of culture and corporate governance in India by calling attention to three areas where the clashes are strongest: related-party transactions, the promoter's or large shareholder's actions, and the board's nominations, deliberations, and effectiveness.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Global Economic Prospects, June 2025(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2025-06-10)The global economy is facing another substantial headwind, emanating largely from an increase in trade tensions and heightened global policy uncertainty. For emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs), the ability to boost job creation and reduce extreme poverty has declined. Key downside risks include a further escalation of trade barriers and continued policy uncertainty. These challenges are exacerbated by subdued foreign direct investment into EMDEs. Global cooperation is needed to restore a more stable international trade environment and scale up support for vulnerable countries grappling with conflict, debt burdens, and climate change. Domestic policy action is also critical to contain inflation risks and strengthen fiscal resilience. To accelerate job creation and long-term growth, structural reforms must focus on raising institutional quality, attracting private investment, and strengthening human capital and labor markets. Countries in fragile and conflict situations face daunting development challenges that will require tailored domestic policy reforms and well-coordinated multilateral support.Publication Digital Progress and Trends Report 2023(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2024-03-05)Digitalization is the transformational opportunity of our time. The digital sector has become a powerhouse of innovation, economic growth, and job creation. Value added in the IT services sector grew at 8 percent annually during 2000–22, nearly twice as fast as the global economy. Employment growth in IT services reached 7 percent annually, six times higher than total employment growth. The diffusion and adoption of digital technologies are just as critical as their invention. Digital uptake has accelerated since the COVID-19 pandemic, with 1.5 billion new internet users added from 2018 to 2022. The share of firms investing in digital solutions around the world has more than doubled from 2020 to 2022. Low-income countries, vulnerable populations, and small firms, however, have been falling behind, while transformative digital innovations such as artificial intelligence (AI) have been accelerating in higher-income countries. Although more than 90 percent of the population in high-income countries was online in 2022, only one in four people in low-income countries used the internet, and the speed of their connection was typically only a small fraction of that in wealthier countries. As businesses in technologically advanced countries integrate generative AI into their products and services, less than half of the businesses in many low- and middle-income countries have an internet connection. The growing digital divide is exacerbating the poverty and productivity gaps between richer and poorer economies. The Digital Progress and Trends Report series will track global digitalization progress and highlight policy trends, debates, and implications for low- and middle-income countries. The series adds to the global efforts to study the progress and trends of digitalization in two main ways: · By compiling, curating, and analyzing data from diverse sources to present a comprehensive picture of digitalization in low- and middle-income countries, including in-depth analyses on understudied topics. · By developing insights on policy opportunities, challenges, and debates and reflecting the perspectives of various stakeholders and the World Bank’s operational experiences. This report, the first in the series, aims to inform evidence-based policy making and motivate action among internal and external audiences and stakeholders. The report will bring global attention to high-performing countries that have valuable experience to share as well as to areas where efforts will need to be redoubled.Publication Global Economic Prospects, January 2025(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2025-01-16)Global growth is expected to hold steady at 2.7 percent in 2025-26. However, the global economy appears to be settling at a low growth rate that will be insufficient to foster sustained economic development—with the possibility of further headwinds from heightened policy uncertainty and adverse trade policy shifts, geopolitical tensions, persistent inflation, and climate-related natural disasters. Against this backdrop, emerging market and developing economies are set to enter the second quarter of the twenty-first century with per capita incomes on a trajectory that implies substantially slower catch-up toward advanced-economy living standards than they previously experienced. Without course corrections, most low-income countries are unlikely to graduate to middle-income status by the middle of the century. Policy action at both global and national levels is needed to foster a more favorable external environment, enhance macroeconomic stability, reduce structural constraints, address the effects of climate change, and thus accelerate long-term growth and development.Publication The Container Port Performance Index 2023(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2024-07-18)The Container Port Performance Index (CPPI) measures the time container ships spend in port, making it an important point of reference for stakeholders in the global economy. These stakeholders include port authorities and operators, national governments, supranational organizations, development agencies, and other public and private players in trade and logistics. The index highlights where vessel time in container ports could be improved. Streamlining these processes would benefit all parties involved, including shipping lines, national governments, and consumers. This fourth edition of the CPPI relies on data from 405 container ports with at least 24 container ship port calls in the calendar year 2023. As in earlier editions of the CPPI, the ranking employs two different methodological approaches: an administrative (technical) approach and a statistical approach (using matrix factorization). Combining these two approaches ensures that the overall ranking of container ports reflects actual port performance as closely as possible while also being statistically robust. The CPPI methodology assesses the sequential steps of a container ship port call. ‘Total port hours’ refers to the total time elapsed from the moment a ship arrives at the port until the vessel leaves the berth after completing its cargo operations. The CPPI uses time as an indicator because time is very important to shipping lines, ports, and the entire logistics chain. However, time, as captured by the CPPI, is not the only way to measure port efficiency, so it does not tell the entire story of a port’s performance. Factors that can influence the time vessels spend in ports can be location-specific and under the port’s control (endogenous) or external and beyond the control of the port (exogenous). The CPPI measures time spent in container ports, strictly based on quantitative data only, which do not reveal the underlying factors or root causes of extended port times. A detailed port-specific diagnostic would be required to assess the contribution of underlying factors to the time a vessel spends in port. A very low ranking or a significant change in ranking may warrant special attention, for which the World Bank generally recommends a detailed diagnostic.Publication The Container Port Performance Index 2020 to 2024: Trends and Lessons Learned(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2025-09-22)The Container Port Performance Index (CPPI) provides a global benchmark of how container ports perform in handling vessel calls. Developed jointly by the World Bank and S&P Global Market Intelligence, it measures the time ships spend in port and relates this to the number of containers moved during that time. This approach makes the CPPI a unique diagnostic tool that can highlight patterns in port operations and shed light on global and regional supply chain dynamics. Now in its fifth edition, the CPPI report covers the period from 2020 to 2024. It builds on a well-established methodology to generate scores for more than 400 container ports worldwide. Over time, the CPPI has become a trusted reference point for policymakers, industry stakeholders, and researchers who seek to understand how ports adapt to shocks, recover from disruptions, and identify opportunities for investments, reform and modernization. A major innovation in this edition is the introduction of multi-year trend analysis. Rather than presenting annual snapshots, the report now tracks how CPPI scores have changed across five years. This longitudinal perspective reveals shifts in port performance, showing where scores have risen, fallen, or remained stable. By linking these movements to external factors, the CPPI offers insights into how global and regional supply chains evolve under pressure. The results clearly mirror the crises that have shaken global trade. During the COVID-19 pandemic, CPPI scores in different regions declined sharply as congestion, equipment shortages, and delays overwhelmed many ports. By 2023, global averages rebounded in parallel with easing freight markets and reduced congestion. Yet 2024 brought new challenges: the Red Sea crisis disrupted major trade lanes, while climate-related constraints at the Panama Canal added further stress. These shocks were reflected in lower global and several regional average scores, underscoring the vulnerability of maritime transport to geopolitical and environmental events. The CPPI is not about comparing one port against another, but about understanding changes in performance over time. Ports that improved their scores often did so by reducing time at anchor, optimizing berth operations, investing in digital tools, and strengthening coordination across logistics partners. The evidence confirms that improvements are possible across ports of all sizes, and that rising scores are linked to deliberate actions to minimize time in port relative to containers moved. By consolidating five years of results, this edition transforms the CPPI into a long-term reference point. It shows how global crises have affected shipping, how different regions have adapted, and what lessons can be drawn for future resilience. The World Bank and S&P Global Market Intelligence remain committed to maintaining the CPPI as a global public good, providing transparency, comparability, and practical insights to support more reliable and sustainable maritime supply chains.