{"title":"文化对部分亚洲国家银行业操作风险管理指引的影响","authors":"M. Mocanu","doi":"10.21314/JOP.2020.248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For banks, operational risk losses are likely to have a significant impact not only on their financial condition, but also on their reputation. This makes operational risk management (ORM) particularly important. In relation to ORM, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision promotes a banking supervision policy based on the idea of “enforced self-regulation”. Thus, the central banks of different countries regulate ORM according to the specificities of their national banking industry. This paper tests the hypothesis that such regulatory openness results in legal texts that are highly influenced by the culture of the country in which each central bank issuing guidelines on ORM is located. The author analyzes a corpus of approximately 50 000 words that feature in ORM guidelines published in English by the central banks of China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Singapore and South Korea. By applying the Kendall coefficient, the following significant correlations have been found: (a) the higher the masculinity dimension, the less clear the text; and (b) the higher the masculinity dimension, the less prescriptive the text. Moreover, our content analysis reveals that each operational risk-related item has a different weight in the guidelines of different countries. The research results should be useful to regulators looking to fine-tune their decisions in different cultural environments.","PeriodicalId":54030,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Operational Risk","volume":"87 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Culture Upon Operational Risk Management Guidelines in the Banking Sector of Selected Asian Countries\",\"authors\":\"M. Mocanu\",\"doi\":\"10.21314/JOP.2020.248\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"For banks, operational risk losses are likely to have a significant impact not only on their financial condition, but also on their reputation. This makes operational risk management (ORM) particularly important. In relation to ORM, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision promotes a banking supervision policy based on the idea of “enforced self-regulation”. Thus, the central banks of different countries regulate ORM according to the specificities of their national banking industry. This paper tests the hypothesis that such regulatory openness results in legal texts that are highly influenced by the culture of the country in which each central bank issuing guidelines on ORM is located. The author analyzes a corpus of approximately 50 000 words that feature in ORM guidelines published in English by the central banks of China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Singapore and South Korea. By applying the Kendall coefficient, the following significant correlations have been found: (a) the higher the masculinity dimension, the less clear the text; and (b) the higher the masculinity dimension, the less prescriptive the text. Moreover, our content analysis reveals that each operational risk-related item has a different weight in the guidelines of different countries. The research results should be useful to regulators looking to fine-tune their decisions in different cultural environments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54030,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Operational Risk\",\"volume\":\"87 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Operational Risk\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21314/JOP.2020.248\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Operational Risk","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21314/JOP.2020.248","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
对于银行来说,操作风险损失不仅可能对其财务状况产生重大影响,还可能对其声誉产生重大影响。这使得操作风险管理(ORM)尤为重要。在ORM方面,巴塞尔银行监管委员会(Basel Committee on Banking Supervision)推动了一项基于“强制自我监管”理念的银行监管政策。因此,各国央行根据本国银行业的具体情况对ORM进行监管。本文检验了这样一个假设,即这种监管开放导致的法律文本受到每个发布ORM指导方针的央行所在国家文化的高度影响。作者分析了中国、香港、印度、印度尼西亚、日本、新加坡和韩国央行以英语出版的ORM指南中大约5万字的语料库。运用肯德尔系数,发现以下显著相关性:(a)男性化维度越高,文本越不清晰;(b)男性化维度越高,文本的规定性越少。此外,我们的内容分析显示,每个操作风险相关项目在不同国家的指导方针中具有不同的权重。研究结果应该有助于监管机构在不同的文化环境中微调决策。
The Impact of Culture Upon Operational Risk Management Guidelines in the Banking Sector of Selected Asian Countries
For banks, operational risk losses are likely to have a significant impact not only on their financial condition, but also on their reputation. This makes operational risk management (ORM) particularly important. In relation to ORM, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision promotes a banking supervision policy based on the idea of “enforced self-regulation”. Thus, the central banks of different countries regulate ORM according to the specificities of their national banking industry. This paper tests the hypothesis that such regulatory openness results in legal texts that are highly influenced by the culture of the country in which each central bank issuing guidelines on ORM is located. The author analyzes a corpus of approximately 50 000 words that feature in ORM guidelines published in English by the central banks of China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Singapore and South Korea. By applying the Kendall coefficient, the following significant correlations have been found: (a) the higher the masculinity dimension, the less clear the text; and (b) the higher the masculinity dimension, the less prescriptive the text. Moreover, our content analysis reveals that each operational risk-related item has a different weight in the guidelines of different countries. The research results should be useful to regulators looking to fine-tune their decisions in different cultural environments.
期刊介绍:
In December 2017, the Basel Committee published the final version of its standardized measurement approach (SMA) methodology, which will replace the approaches set out in Basel II (ie, the simpler standardized approaches and advanced measurement approach (AMA) that allowed use of internal models) from January 1, 2022. Independently of the Basel III rules, in order to manage and mitigate risks, they still need to be measurable by anyone. The operational risk industry needs to keep that in mind. While the purpose of the now defunct AMA was to find out the level of regulatory capital to protect a firm against operational risks, we still can – and should – use models to estimate operational risk economic capital. Without these, the task of managing and mitigating capital would be incredibly difficult. These internal models are now unshackled from regulatory requirements and can be optimized for managing the daily risks to which financial institutions are exposed. In addition, operational risk models can and should be used for stress tests and Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR). The Journal of Operational Risk also welcomes papers on nonfinancial risks as well as topics including, but not limited to, the following. The modeling and management of operational risk. Recent advances in techniques used to model operational risk, eg, copulas, correlation, aggregate loss distributions, Bayesian methods and extreme value theory. The pricing and hedging of operational risk and/or any risk transfer techniques. Data modeling external loss data, business control factors and scenario analysis. Models used to aggregate different types of data. Causal models that link key risk indicators and macroeconomic factors to operational losses. Regulatory issues, such as Basel II or any other local regulatory issue. Enterprise risk management. Cyber risk. Big data.