Journal of Risk and Insurance

Prior studies show that enterprise risk management improves firm performance. This article investigates which aspects of enterprise risk management add value. We find that the use of economic capital models and dedicated risk managers improve operating performance. Requiring the dedicated risk manager report to the board of directors or to the chief executive officer (CEO) also increases value. The following combination of enterprise risk management initiatives yields the greatest increase in firm value: a simple economic capital model, a dedicated risk manager that is a cross‐functional committee, and requiring the risk manager report to the board or CEO.

Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) is the discipline by which enterprises monitor, analyze, and control risks from across the enterprise, with the goal of identifying underlying correlations and thus optimizing the risk‐taking behavior in a portfolio context. This study analyzes the valuation implications of ERM Maturity. We use data from the industry leading Risk and Insurance Management Society Risk Maturity Model over the period from 2006 to 2011, which scores firms on a five‐point maturity scale. Our results suggest that firms that have reached mature levels of ERM are exhibiting a higher firm value, as measured by Tobin's Q. We find a statistically significant positive relation to the magnitude of 25 percent. Upon decomposition of the maturity score, we find that the most important aspects of ERM from a valuation perspective relate to the level of top–down executive engagement and the resultant cascade of ERM culture throughout the firm. Firms that have successfully integrated the ERM process into both their strategic activities and everyday practices display superior ability in uncovering risk dependencies and correlations across the entire enterprise and as a consequence enhanced value when undertaking the ERM maturity journey ceteris paribus.

This article provides evidence that Social Security benefit claiming decisions are strongly affected by framing and are thus inconsistent with expected utility theory. Using a randomized experiment that controls for both observable and unobservable differences across individuals, we find that the use of a “breakeven analysis” encourages early claiming. Respondents are more likely to delay when later claiming is framed as a gain, and the claiming age is anchored at older ages. Additionally, the financially less literate, individuals with credit card debt, and those with lower earnings are more influenced by framing than others.