Systemic factors relevant to strategic risk analisys
A case study of Colombian private Universities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24215/23143738e128Keywords:
business strategy, strategic risk management, systemic perspectiveAbstract
This research aims to analyze the presence of systemic factors in the process of identification and analysis of strategic risk in the Colombian private university sector, with high-quality certification., Its goal is to identify and analyze the influence of systemic interventions and perspectives on this process. For that reason, the state-of-the-art was reviewed, the factors that could characterize interventions and systemic perspectives were identified and presented. They provide a theoretical framework from which the strategic risk management process was analyzed., Qualitative field work was developed, based on case studies implemented through in-depth interviews and the collection, of public information and documents provided by the institutions. Conclusions show that the Universities that are part of the group under study, have advanced in the last years in the management of strategic risks including some factors characteristic of systemic interventions. However, from a systemic perspective, it has been possible to identify some opportunities for improvement that can integrate an agenda for the studied institutions.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Almuiñas Rivero, J. L. y Galarza López, J. (2016). Dirección estratégica y gestión de riesgos en las universidades. Revista Cubana de Educación Superior, 35(2), 83-92. https://revistas.uh.cu/rces/article/view/3599
Ariño, M. Á. (2015). ¿Corren las empresas riesgos innecesarios? IEEM Revista de Negocios, 18(5), 36-40.
Baro, M. (2011). Jerarquización de stakeholders para la construcción del capital social de las organizaciones. Mediaciones Sociales, 9, 135-162. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_MESO.2011.n9.38013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_MESO.2011.n9.38013
Barros Castro, R. y Pinzón Salcedo, L. (2009). Intervención sistémica en una red virtual de aprendizaje sobre resolución de problemas matemáticos. Sexto Simposium Iberoamericano en Educación, Cibernética e Informática, SIECI.
Bree, P. (2017). Business innovation concept: 'pensamiento sistémico'. El mundo.
Bromiley, P. y Rau, D. (2016). Ante grandes riesgos, grandes remedios. IESE Insight (Spanish Edition), 28, 15-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15581/002.ART-2817
Castellanos Narciso, J. y Cruz Pulido, M. (2014). Una mirada a la evolución histórica de la estrategia. REAL: Revista de Estudios Avanzados de Liderazgo, 1(3), 28-52.
Choi, B. C. y Pak, A. W. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical and Investigative Medicine, 29(6), 351-364.
Churchman, C. W. (1971). The Design of Inquiring Systems, Basic Concepts of Systems and Organizations. Basic Books.
Comité de Supervisión Bancaria de Basilea. (2003). Buenas prácticas para la gestión y supervisión del riesgo operativo. Banco de pagos internacionales.
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. (2004). Enterprise Risk Management - Integrated framework. COSO.
Correa Henao, G. J., Ríos González, E. M. y Acevedo Moreno, J. C. (2017). Evolución de la cultura de la gestión de riesgos en el entorno empresarial colombiano. Journal of Engineering & Technology, 6(1), 22-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22507/jet.v6n1a2
Corso, K., Raimundini, S., Granado, F. y Janissek, R. (2014). Artigo – Estrategia Empresarial: Aplicação de inteligência estratégica antecipativa e coletiva: inovando a tomada de decisão estratégica a partir da aprendizagem e criação de sentido. REGE: Revista de Gestão, 21(2), 199–217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5700/rege526
D´Alessio Ipinza, F. (2008). El proceso estratégico: Un enfoque de gerencia. Pearson Educación de México.
De Bono, E. (1988). Seis sombreros para pensar. Ediciones Juan Granica.
Flood, R. L. y Jackson, M. C. (Eds.). (1991). Critical systems thinking: directed readings. Wiley.
Freeman, R. E., Wicks, A. C. y Parmar, B. (2004). Stakeholder theory and the corporate objective revisited, Organizational Science, 15(3), 364-369. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/ORSC.1040.0066. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0066
International Organization for Standardization. (2009). Risk Management. Principles and Guidelines (ISO, 31000:2009).
Ison, R. L. (2016). What is systemic about innovation systems? The implications for policies, governance and institutionalization. En J. Francis, L. Mytelka, A. van Huis y N. Röling (Eds.), Innovation Systems: Towards Effective Strategies in Support of Smallholder Farmers (pp. 37-52). Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation and Wageningen University and Research Centre.
Jaraba, I., Nuñez, M. A. y Villanueva, E. (2018). Riesgos estratégicos. Un estudio de las medidas de tratamiento implementadas por las grandes empresas privadas de Antioquia, Colombia. Cuadernos de Contabilidad, 19(47), 171–181. https://doi.org/10.11144/javeriana.cc19-47.reem DOI: https://doi.org/10.11144/javeriana.cc19-47.reem
Jean, S., Medema, W., Adamowski, J., Chew, C., Delaney, P. y Wals, A. (2018). Serious games as a catalyst for boundary crossing, collaboration and knowledge co-creation in a watershed governance context. Journal of Environmental Management, 223, 1010-1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.05.021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.05.021
Kaplan, R. S. y Mikes, A. (2016). Risk Management—the Revealing Hand (Documento de Trabajo Nº 16-102). Harvard Business School. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2744133
Martínez Torre-Enciso, I. y Casares San José Martí, I. (2011). El proceso de gestión de riesgos como componente integral de la gestión empresarial. Boletín de Estudios Económicos, 66(202), 73-93.
McAllister, K. (1999). Understanding Participation: Monitoring and Evaluating Process, Outputs and Outcomes (Documento de Trabajo Nº2). IDRC. http://hdl.handle.net/10625/24628
Mejía, R. y Villanueva, E. (2014). Metodología para monitorear riesgos estratégicos. Revista de Investigaciones Universidad del Quindío, 26(1), 124-134. https://doi.org/10.33975/riuq.vol26n1.138 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33975/riuq.vol26n1.138
Midgley, G. (2000). Systemic intervention: philosophy, methodology, and practice. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Midgley, G., Cavana, R. Y., Brocklesby, J., Foote, J. L., Wood, D. R. R. y Ahuriri-Driscoll, A. (2013). Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 229(1), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.01.047 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.01.047
Midgley, G. y Lindhult, E. (2017). What is systemic innovation? (Memorando de Investigación Nº 99). Centre for Systems Studies. Hull University Business School.
Moreno, L. (2017). Abordar lo complejo desde el diseño: una mirada hacia la transdisciplinariedad. Revista Educación y Humanismo, 19(33), 369-385. http://revistas.unisimon.edu.co/index.php/educacion/article/view/2650/2680 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17081/eduhum.19.33.2650
Nicolescu, B. (2005). Towards transdisciplinary education. The Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa, 1(1), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v1i1.300 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v1i1.300
Palacio Giraldo, A. L. y Nuñez, M. A. (2020). Administración del riesgo estratégico en algunas grandes empresas privadas de Colombia. AD-minister, 36, 67-96. https://doi.org/10.17230/Ad-minister.36.4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17230/Ad-minister.36.4
Shen, C. y Midgley, G. (2014). Action research in a problem avoiding culture using a Buddhist systems methodology. Action Research, 13(2), 170–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750314558428 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750314558428
Strauss, A. y Corbin, J. (2002). Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Técnicas y procedimientos para desarrollar la teoría fundamentada. Editorial Universidad de Antioquia.
Toca Torres, C. E. (2014). Inteligencia colectiva: Enfoque para el análisis de redes. Estudios Gerenciales, 30(132), 259–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.estger.2014.01.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.estger.2014.01.014
Torres Cuello, M. A. (2018). Developing a systemic program evaluation methodology: a critical systems perspective [Tesis de Doctorado, Universidad de los Andes, Colombia]. http://hdl.handle.net/1992/38710
Torres Cuello, M. A., Pinzón, L. y Midgley, G. (2018). Developing a systemic program evaluation methodology: a critical systems perspective. Systems Research And Behavioral Science, 35(5), 538–547. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2561 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2561
Ufua, D. E., Papadopoulos, T. y Midgley, G. (2018). Systemic lean intervention: enhancing lean with community operational research. European Journal of Operational Research, 268(3), 1134-1148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.08.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.08.004
Ulrich, W. (1994). Critical Heuristics of Social Planning: A New Approach to Practical Philosophy. J. Wiley & Sons.
Vasilachis de Gialdino, I. (Coord.). (2006). Estrategias de Investigación Cualitativa (1ª ed.). Gedisa.
Vélez-Castiblanco, J., Brocklesby, J. y Midgley, G. (2016). Boundary games: How teams of OR practitioners explore the boundaries of intervention. European Journal of Operational Research, 249(3), 968–982. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.006
Wharton University of Pensylvania y AON. (2018). Índice de madurez de riesgos [Presentación para la Universidad del Rosario. Bogotá-Colombia].
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Eliana Carolina Borda García; Alberto Néstor Terlato
![Creative Commons License](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-sa/4.0/88x31.png)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Those authors who have publications with this journal, agree with the following terms:
a. Authors will retain its copyright and will ensure the rights of first publication of its work to the journal, which will be at the same time subject to the Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) allowing third parties to share the work as long as the author and the first publication on this journal is indicated.
b. Authors may elect other non-exclusive license agreements of the distribution of the published work (for example: locate it on an institutional telematics file or publish it on an monographic volume) as long as the first publication on this journal is indicated,
c. Authors are allowed and suggested to disseminate its work through the internet (for example: in institutional telematics files or in their website) before and during the submission process, which could produce interesting exchanges and increase the references of the published work. (see The effect of open Access)