Risks taken by some organizations may have considerable impact on society. In this contribution the assessment and management of risk are perceived to take place in a multi-actor setting. Within an organization operators, risk managers, and top managers interact about risk assessments and risk mitigation strategies. Public regulators and inspectorates increasingly focus on risk management systems instead of the operational activities or organizational outputs. Are organizations systematically assessing their risks? This contribution identifies two contrasting perspectives on risk assessment and risk mitigation in literature: risk management and risk governance. An empirical study in three sectors reveals evidence of both perspectives in practice. Companies adopt hybrid approaches, which are essential for the quality of risk assessment and mitigation. Indeed, adopting just one perspective seems dangerous. We conclude that public regulators and inspectorates might provide incentives to focus on just one perspective and suggest two heuristics for public inspectorates that respect hybrid approaches of risk assessment and mitigation. |
Zoekresultaat: 5 artikelen
Praktijk |
Internationale tijdschriften en boeken |
Tijdschrift | Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 2 2018 |
Auteurs | Dr. Rik Reussing |
Auteursinformatie |
Artikel |
Pas op! Over beheerst risico’s beheersen in het governancetijdperk |
Tijdschrift | Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 3 2015 |
Trefwoorden | risk management, governance, inspection, organization, hybridization |
Auteurs | Dr. Mark de Bruijne, Dr. Bauke Steenhuisen en Dr. Haiko van der Voort |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Artikel |
Krachtig en kwetsbaarDe Nederlandse burgemeester en de staat van een hybride ambt |
Tijdschrift | Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 3 2014 |
Auteurs | Dr. Niels Karsten, Dr. Linze Schaap en Prof. dr. Frank Hendriks |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
This article describes, on the basis of a broad empirical research, the development of the office of mayor since 2002 (the year of the introduction of a dualist local system in the Netherlands) and the present state of the office. It shows a fundamental change in the office during the last decade and how the already existing hybrid nature of the office has continued to grow since 2002. The article describes the effects of this hybridization and identifies, on the basis of this description, eight power lines and vulnerabilities of the office of mayor. The authors relativize a number of issues that are frequently problematized in relation to the office of mayor, but they also point to new concerns amongst mayors. According to the mayors for example the presidency of the council and the presidency of the board of mayor and aldermen can be combined quite easily in practice. Mayors however, and with good reason, are concerned about the vulnerability of their authority and the sustainability of their neutral position ‘above the parties’, their most important source of authority. For this reason a reorientation of the office of mayor in the Netherlands is needed. This reorientation should start with an answer to the question which roles the mayor has to play in Dutch local government. |
Artikel |
Goed bestuur: Kiezen of delen? |
Tijdschrift | Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011 |
Trefwoorden | Good governance, public values, public management |
Auteurs | Leo Huberts en Eelco van Hout |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Good governance is a contested concept in public administration theory and practice. This concluding article builds on the presented contributions as well as on additional research. First, we summarize the diversity, leading to a sketch of two basic approaches towards good governance (organizational and value oriented). Additionally questions concerning the normativity, the pluralism of values and the object of good governance (process or policy) are addressed. Second, attention is paid to strategies to cope with values in governance, acknowledging the tensions between those values. Basic strategies aim at ‘choosing’ between values, ‘accommodating’ (in time, project, context) and ‘connecting’ values (through institutions or hybridization). |
Artikel |
De investeringsstaat en het verdelingsvraagstuk: waarom is de armoede niet gedaald? |
Tijdschrift | Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 2 2011 |
Trefwoorden | welfare state, poverty, inequality, new social risks, labour market, income protection |
Auteurs | Bea Cantillon en Wim Van Lancker |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
In the past decades, employment and incomes were on the rise, social spending remained high while passive welfare states were progressively transformed into so-called ‘investment states’. Despite these favourable conditions, however, contemporary welfare states did not succeed in reducing poverty and inequality. What lies beneath the disquieting poverty standstill and how did welfare states miss this ‘window of opportunity’? In this article, we aim to shed more light on this question. We identify three structural trends behind the poverty standstill: rising employment has benefited workless households only partially; income protection for the working-age population out of work has become less adequate; social policies and, more generally, social redistribution have become less pro-poor. In other words, the reorientation of social expenditures to the employed occurred at the expense of those at risk in the labour market. The success of future poverty-reducing strategies will depend on the way policies aimed at labour market inclusion will be implemented and the emphasis on redistributive policies. |