Talking about the likelihood of risks: an agent-based simulation of discussion processes in risk workshops

IF 2.4 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change Pub Date : 2021-11-05 DOI:10.1108/jaoc-11-2020-0197
Clemens Harten, M. Meyer, Lucia Bellora-Bienengräber
{"title":"Talking about the likelihood of risks: an agent-based simulation of discussion processes in risk workshops","authors":"Clemens Harten, M. Meyer, Lucia Bellora-Bienengräber","doi":"10.1108/jaoc-11-2020-0197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to explore drivers of the effectiveness of risk assessments in risk workshops.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis study uses an agent-based model to simulate risk assessments in risk workshops. Combining the notions of transactive memory and the ideal speech situation, this study establishes a risk assessment benchmark and then investigates real-world deviations from this benchmark. Specifically, this study models limits to information transfer, incomplete discussions and potentially detrimental group characteristics, as well as interaction patterns.\n\n\nFindings\nFirst, limits to information transfer among workshop participants can prevent a correct consensus. Second, increasing the required number of stable discussion rounds before an assessment improves the correct assessment of high but not low likelihood risks. Third, while theoretically advantageous group characteristics are associated with the highest assessment correctness for all risks, theoretically detrimental group characteristics are associated with the highest assessment correctness for high likelihood risks. Fourth, prioritizing participants who are particularly concerned about the risk leads to the highest level of correctness.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis study shows that by increasing the duration of simulated risk workshops, the assessments change – as a rule – from underestimating to overestimating risks, unraveling a trade-off for risk workshop facilitators. Methodologically, this approach overcomes limitations of prior research, specifically the lack of an assessment and process benchmark, the inability to disentangle multiple effects and the difficulty of capturing individual cognitive processes.\n","PeriodicalId":46141,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jaoc-11-2020-0197","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore drivers of the effectiveness of risk assessments in risk workshops. Design/methodology/approach This study uses an agent-based model to simulate risk assessments in risk workshops. Combining the notions of transactive memory and the ideal speech situation, this study establishes a risk assessment benchmark and then investigates real-world deviations from this benchmark. Specifically, this study models limits to information transfer, incomplete discussions and potentially detrimental group characteristics, as well as interaction patterns. Findings First, limits to information transfer among workshop participants can prevent a correct consensus. Second, increasing the required number of stable discussion rounds before an assessment improves the correct assessment of high but not low likelihood risks. Third, while theoretically advantageous group characteristics are associated with the highest assessment correctness for all risks, theoretically detrimental group characteristics are associated with the highest assessment correctness for high likelihood risks. Fourth, prioritizing participants who are particularly concerned about the risk leads to the highest level of correctness. Originality/value This study shows that by increasing the duration of simulated risk workshops, the assessments change – as a rule – from underestimating to overestimating risks, unraveling a trade-off for risk workshop facilitators. Methodologically, this approach overcomes limitations of prior research, specifically the lack of an assessment and process benchmark, the inability to disentangle multiple effects and the difficulty of capturing individual cognitive processes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
谈论风险的可能性:风险研讨会中讨论过程的基于代理的模拟
目的探讨风险研讨会中风险评估有效性的驱动因素。设计/方法/方法本研究使用基于主体的模型模拟风险研讨会中的风险评估。本研究结合交互记忆与理想言语情境的概念,建立风险评估基准,并探讨现实世界中与此基准的偏差。具体来说,本研究的模型局限于信息传递、不完整的讨论和潜在的有害群体特征,以及互动模式。首先,研讨会参与者之间信息传递的限制可能会阻碍正确的共识。其次,在评估之前增加所需的稳定讨论轮数,可以提高对高可能性风险的正确评估,而不是对低可能性风险的正确评估。第三,虽然理论上有利的群体特征与所有风险的最高评估正确性相关,但理论上有害的群体特征与高可能性风险的最高评估正确性相关。第四,对那些特别关心风险的参与者进行优先级排序,可以获得最高级别的正确性。原创性/价值本研究表明,通过增加模拟风险研讨会的持续时间,评估变化-作为一种规则-从低估到高估风险,揭示了风险研讨会促进者的权衡。在方法上,该方法克服了先前研究的局限性,特别是缺乏评估和过程基准,无法理清多种影响以及难以捕获个体认知过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
15.80%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The main objective of the journal is to provide a platform for researchers and practitioners from multiple disciplines to disseminate information on organizational and accounting systems change. To achieve this, the journal will be directed at mapping out contemporary changes in the new global business environment. It will seek to explain the new techniques, processes, and philosophies associated with the rise of strategy-oriented accounting and information systems.
期刊最新文献
Show me? Inspire me? Make me? An institutional theory exploration of social and environmental reporting practices Toward an epistemology for anarchist accounting and stakeholder relationship capability: evidence from Iran Does the Directive of the European Union on disclosure of non-financial and diversity information improve reporting? Corporate reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals: a structured literature review and research agenda Value for money (VFM) in private finance initiative (PFI) implementation in Malaysia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1