BU7009 Financial Risk Management Assignment Sample

Introduction :Comparative Analysis Of Financial Risk Management Strategies Of Sse Plc. And Legal & General Group Plc.

In light of the research objectives and questions stated above, this report seeks to investigate financial risk management approaches that two FTSE 100 companies, ly SSE Plc and Legal & General Group Plc employ. They include gaining an understanding of how these firms manage financial risks within their industries and passing relevant information to potential investors.

SSE Plc operates in the United Kingdom and its operations encompass generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity and gas. It is in a business environment that entails strict regulation privacy and is capital-intensive with exposure to market risks and environmentally related laws. In contrast, Legal & General Group Plc is a large financial service and insurance company with the products including the life insurance, pensions, and investment services. This company is in the financial industry where the market is shaped by factors like changes in laws, emergence and stability of the global economy and fluctuations in the market.

The considerations will include the firms’ competitive methods, their approaches to managing stakeholders and to handling risks, risk management policies and policies concerning reputational and cyber risks. Thus, based on the assessment of these factors, the report will present the findings of the effectiveness of risk management in each company and the corresponding effect it has on its financial health and appealing to investors.

Last-Minute Assignment Panic? Reliable UK Assignment Help Saves Your Grades – Study Free Samples for Inspiration!

Competitive Strategies and Their Risks

In order to analyze the competitive strategies and the related risks for SSE Plc and for Legal & General Group Plc, Porter classifications of the generic strategies and the Ansoff product/market matrix have been used.

Porter Generic Strategies

Porter framework identifies three primary strategies for gaining a competitive advantage: The identified strategies are cost leadership, differentiation, and focus (Islami, Mustafa, & Topuzovska Latkovikj, 2020). APart from a little integration strategy, SSE Plc mostly focuses on the differentiation strategy. This company specifically targets the delivery of a wide variety of energy services with special attention to issues of environmental conservation and emergence of better technologies. It strives to develop new sources of competitive advantage and market opportunities that place SSE Plc in a vantageous position of providing green energy solutions and innovative methods of energy production. Nevertheless, the costs related to this strategy are the high investments in new technologies and facilities and regulation risks connected with environmental legislations. Observance of the complex regulatory measures as well as evolutions in policies bearing weight at the level of performance and manoeuvrability (Kiragu et al., 2020).

However, Legal & General Group Plc uses some of the elements of the cost leadership and differentiation strategies. The idea is to be just as cheap on insurance and financial solutions as other players in the market, but stand out with service and an exceptional relation to customers. This two-pronged strategy helps the company to attract as many customers as possible and at the same time, able to offer its services at affordable prices. However, the main risks are market risks and these are risks in price sensitive goods where fluctuations in the market may alter the company prices and performance. Other threats existing in this environment include regulatory changes as this affects the operation cost and compliance to the set rules within the financial sector [Referred to Appendix 1].

Ansoff Product/Market Matrix

Ansoff matrix outlines four growth strategies: The four business level strategies are market penetration, market development, product development and diversification (Rifki & Kirana, 2024). Market development and diversification are the SSE Plc strategic direction in its current phase of strategic management. The company also plans to geographic diversity of services where it offers its services and energy diversity by adding renewable power. Despite these, the adoption of these strategies has the possibilities of gaining more market share and less reliance on conventional resources; it has the disadvantage of market entree barriers, local regulation, and technology risks.

The business level strategy that Legal & General Group Plc major implements is the product development strategy (Czinkota, et al. 2021). The financial service provider also constantly evolves and enlarges the types and varieties of financial services offered to the customers. It enables Legal & General to be more competitive and be able to meet the market requirements by the use of this approach. Nevertheless, there are certain threats characteristic to product development: high costs of innovations, high risks of product failures, the shifts in financial regulations.

Comparative Analysis and Risks

The identified SSE Plc differentiation and diversification threats include significant concerns that regard legal compliance and innovative advancements. On the other hand, there is a conflict between the cost leadership and product development strategies Legal & General employed, this will be threatened by market volatility and changing regulations. Each of these risks has to be managed effectively while at the same time the two firms have to sustain their competitive advantage and increase in size [Referred to Appendix 2].

Stakeholder Power/Interest Grid and Associated Risks

SSE Plc and Legal & General Group Plc have used the stakeholder power/interest grid to categorize the stakeholders to form the basis of managing their relations with them since the identified power/interest grid helps partition the stakeholders into four groups: Navigator, Defender, Mobilizer, and Passivist (Syaifullah, et al. 2024).

SSE Plc

Major Stakeholders

Regulators and Government Agencies: High power high interest. These are important stakeholders since they have policy and regulatory influence in aspects related to SSE business. These are key stakeholders in the implementation of policies in organizations hence; SSE must involve such stakeholders and work on them to ensure that they follow the standards in the implementation of favourable policies (Guðlaugsson, et al. 2020).

Shareholders and Investors: They have the power to influence and the population has medium interest in them. Their major interest is on the financial aspects of performance and profitability. These issues are resolved at SSE through clear corporate reporting and the execution of tactics for the creation of shareholder worth (ElWakeel, & Andersen, 2020).

Customers: Two people with medium power distance but high self-interest score on the PSI. Thus, managing customer demands for sustainable energy affects the company portfolio of products, as can be concluded from the analysis of the following factors within the context of the business environment. Customers also through their feedback in form of survay, research and other feedback mechanisms, are involved in finding out the needs of the market so that related services can be offered by SSE (Syaifullah, et al. 2024).

Employees: The peculiarities of media clout distribution are the following: Medium power and medium interest. A hypothesis can be derived from statement 1 which is employee satisfaction leads to organizational performance. In particular, SSE actively supports the employee engagement and development to secure and encourage the personnel high levels of motivation (Maqbool, Rashid, & Ashfaq, 2022).

Legal & General Group Plc

Major Stakeholders

Regulators and Government Agencies: When power is high and interest is high, you get immense attraction. Legal & General also experiences everyday regulation of operation and compliance like SSE. However, it is possible to control regulatory risks based on the interaction with these stakeholders (Guðlaugsson, et al. 2020).

Shareholders and Investors: High power means high interest is the manner in which this type of condition is conveyed. This is a general understanding of society goals for getting engaged in investments, and basically, this is why investors are interested in financial revenues and corporate control. In regard to the legal obligations of the firm, Legal & General employs communication and information disclosure to attend to the concerns of shareholders (ElWakeel, & Andersen, 2020).

Customers: Though power and interest are common, they’re high in this case. Customer satisfaction is especially important when one is dealing with legal and General, as the company is a financial services provider. The firm mitigates the expectations of consumers and improves on the quality of services it offers with the help of customer feedback and service initiatives (Maqbool, Rashid, & Ashfaq, 2022).

Employees: It moderately powerful, moderately interesting in at least a middle-of-the-road way. This ensures that the company has a stable pool of employees which increases the operational stability of the firm. Another element of the social capital includes that Legal & General really pays attention to the personnel training and personal development to ensure the staff feels comfortable at work (Syaifullah, et al. 2024).

Comparative Analysis and Risks

Figure 1: Stakeholder Power/Interest Grid and Associated Risks

(Source: Self-created in MS Excel)

From this table, it is clear that the regulators and government agencies occupational high power and interest for both SSE Plc and Legal & General Group Plc hence the importance of maintaining with regulations. Another significant power is held by the shareholders Investors also measure high power since they are prime in matters concerning finances and governance of companies. Though both companies have different shareholders and managers, the consumers and workers are key players as both the power and interest in guaranteeing the quality of services and the success of the company operations lie with them.

One has to note that while the management of stakeholders is important for both companies, it is conducted differently because SSE Plc and Legal & General Group Plc operate in different industries and thus have different concerns and obstacles. For example, SSE Plc, which works in the energy sector, has to deal with numerous regulatory requirements concerning the environment, while Legal & General Group Plc, focused on the financial sphere, has to address the issue of governance and customers’ satisfaction.

Altogether, awareness of these stakeholder relations is crucial to contain possible risks and to serve both businesses’ strategic goals. Thus, the inclusion of the table in this way of presenting stakeholder dynamics provides a detailed approach to analyzing how each company approaches stakeholder management [Referred to Appendix 3].

Risk Management Frameworks

In the general framework of risk management it is possible that both financial and non-financial risks of a business can be managed effectively. This section systematically analyses and assesses the risk management frameworks adopted by SSE Plc and Legal & General Group Plc based on COSO “Enterprise Risk Management” (ERM) and ISO 31000 frameworks.

COSO ERM Framework

The company that has been used as a case study is SSE Plc, and it follows the COSO ERM framework that addresses the linkage of risk management to strategy and performance. Thus, there are elements like risk identification, control activities, and monitoring present in COSO that organizes various risks in accordance with the organizational objectives (Pecina, Miloš Sprčić, & Dvorski Lacković, 2022). Risk management is integrated into all the company processes, and this integrated approach assists companies like SSE Plc in handling various calamities that may hereafter accompany the management of different projects.

ISO 31000 Risk Management Standard

As for the employed framework, Legal & General Group Plc uses the ISO 31000 method, and this tool might be considered rather universal and flexible. ISO 31000 is focused on risk identification, risk evaluation, and risk control and is an integral component of an organization activities (Hamir, & Sum, 2021). They are versatile and can be managed depending on the former; this versatility is important since it enables Legal & General to operate for a broad range of risks and changing environments and new risks emerging in future.

Comparison and Critical Evaluation

Figure 2: Risk Management Frameworks

(Source: Self-created in draw.io)

Although both the frameworks offer quite a strong risk management strategy, they are not identical in their approach. The COSO framework is so specific that it provides prescriptions in dealing with a certain subject, which may be helpful in the large complex structure of SSE Plc to adapt risk management as deeply rooted in enterprise operation (Lacković, Kurnoga, & Miloš Sprčić, 2022). On the other hand, ISO 31000 is relatively more flexible and can apply to different overall organizational risks that may exist in Legal & General, thus being ideal since it can efficiently and effectively be used to manage different kinds of risks within an organization (Masita, & Yuhertiana, 2022).

Last of all, while identifying risks, SSE Plc implementation of COSO and Legal & General adaptation of ISO 31000 are efficient in managing risks though aligned for different organisations and their requirements.

CAPM and Cost of Equity

Cost of Equity Calculations

The Calculation of COE by using the CAPM method is as follows:
[Cost of Equity= R_f + (β * (R_m - R_f)]

Where:

R_f= Risk-Free Rate

β = Beta of the company

R_m = Market Return

Data

Risk-Free Rate: 3.8020%

Market Return: 7.29%

Beta for SSE Plc: 0.56 [Referred to Appendix 4].

Beta for Legal & General Group Plc: 1.37 [Referred to Appendix 5].

Calculations

Figure 3: 

(Source: Self-created in MS Excel)

Analysis and Discussion

According to the CAPM, the cost of equity for SSE Plc and Legal & General Group Plc using beta, the risk-free rate and the expected market return have been computed as follows. In the same way, the cost of equity for SSE Plc as it prevails today is 5.76% for Legal & General Group Plc while the return on assets for Equities Group Plc is 8.58%. This has clearly illustrated the effect beta has on cost of equity, where Legal & General being a company with higher beta than SSE Plc which means it is riskier than the latter (Sukrianingrum, & Manda, 2020).

Another important component of the cost of equity is systematic risk that is described by beta in context of CAPM. Hence, Legal & General has a higher beta which indicates the sensitivity to the market movement hence a higher cost of equity capital. SSE Plc beta is lower than that of the above companies hence the lower market risk and therefore the cost of equity (Robbetze, 2023). OLS, or unsystematic risk, is excluded in CAPM but plays a role in total company risk, which determines investors’ expectations and the return (Rodney, 2024).

However, CAPM has weaknesses due to constant with one-period model and efficient market hypothesis that is unachievable in real life. These are some of the limitations that come with this model, however more robust models like the Fama French Three-Factor Model adds more risk factors hence offer a more robust model (Sarraj, & Ben Mabrouk, 2021). These models are expected to provide information which is beyond systematic risk; therefore the derivation of cost of equity and risk evaluation in complex financial structures can be well understood.

Approaches to Reputational Risks

Definition and Sources of Reputational Risks

A reputational risk is the possibility of suffering a loss of reputation due to an organization dealing with an external party or as a result of an event in the external environment. Reputational risk could be defined as the loss which is associated with adverse impacts on the reputation of the company and poor perception among citizens. This risk can be operational, unethical, financial, or environmental/social (Kamiya, et al. 2021). It can be further categorised in internal and external factors, meaning that the management of companies has to implement effective long-term strategies for avoiding or reducing negative impacts on their reputation.

Strategies of dealing with reputational threats

To manage reputational risk there are two major strategies that need to be practiced; the preventive and the corrective. In turn, they independently need to be aware, responsible, legal, and ethical while strengthening the company governance practices towards stakeholders (Butt, et al. 2022). Operationally, they require communication contingency plans to deal with adverse incidents and their consequences as soon as possible.

SSE Plc and Legal & General Group Plc: MANAGEMENT OF REPUTATIONAL RISKS

SSE Plc and Legal & General Group Plc do have a reputational risk issue but how they deal with this issue are different.

SSE Plc: SSE Plc supports sustainable business as it has polices and strategies that follow “corporate social responsibility” (CSR). The company formal documents, specifically the annual reports, differentiate it in terms of sustainability and its activities within the community; in an attempt to advance its image of being responsible for the environment and society as well (Kamiya, et al. 2021). SSE Plc has great strategies it follows, such as the development of good environmental management systems and consistency in the announcement of the company sustainability missions. There is also an effective management of risks specific to the company reputation that may result from operational disruptions or changes in regulations (Dvorsky, et al. 2021).

Legal & General Group Plc: To minimize on the reputational risk Legal & General ensures that it maintains high standards in both the transparency and good corporate governance. The management of the company has various policies in place in addressing risks that could affect the investors and the public Trust, and ethics and compliance policies are very well elaborated in the company (Bardas, & Dudnyk, 2022). It also manages their reputational risks since Legal & General also regulate their financial and non-financial reporting to the operation standards of stakeholders and government agencies. The crisis management plan the company has come up with is well detailed to timely respond to any events that may cause damage to the firm’S reputation (Mishchenko, et al. 2021).

Critical Analysis

It can be seen that both companies go a long way in the management of reputational risks but the key areas differ (Dvorsky, et al. 2021). When it comes to Stakeholders engagement, it is evident that, SSE Plc cares for sustainability since it is used as a tool to foster trust in the organisation as well as manage risks arising from environmental and social factors. However, it seems to be predicated on sustainability may not adequately cover reputational issues concerning operational or regulatory issues (Landi, et al. 2022).

Meanwhile, the risk management of Legal & General appears to be highly effective when it comes to the company reputation risks due to its emphasis on transparency and good governance of problems linked with financial and ethical concerns. However, the efficiency of its strategies might vary based on the organization ability to manage such disruptions and disseminate their management responses to the public (Butt, et al. 2022).

Each of the two methods of reputational risk management has its unique advantages, but the integration of the facets from the two methods would help improve them. For instance, SSE can make more significant changes to the focus on sustainability coupled with Legal & General transparency approach will likely be a more effective plan for managing more reputational threats.

Cyber-Security Threats and Measures Against Them

Cyber-Security Threats

The web threat risks are the most pressing concern to any organization especially for industries such as the financial and utilities. These threats include, but are not limited to data violations, ransomware, phishing schemes, and inside threats (Uddin, et al. 2020). The strategic data that is processed by the firms of the financial sector particularly Legal & General Group Plc exposes such organizations to certain risks. Equally, SSE Plc, in the energy industry, faces potential threats in the form of threats to infrastructures that are central to the firm operations in operational technology (Sohail, et al. 2020).

Measures for Mitigate Cyber-Security Threats

SSE Plc

Threat Detection and Response: SSE Plc has put in place modern threat identification measures; these include the “intrusion detection system” (IDS) and the “security information and event management” (SIEM). These tools assist in the screening of possible security occurrences as they happen in real-time (Lee, 2021).

Data Encryption and Access Controls: Concerning data security, it is important to note that the company employs strong encryption methods for the data that is both: stored and in transit. These sorts of access controls can be implemented using MFA and RBAC to reduce the chances of the unauthorized access (Kure, et al. 2022).

Employee Training and Awareness: SSE Plc takes part in the annual training of its employees on issues related to computer crime and protective measures. This comprises establishing routine occasional assessments, such as phishing emails to sharpen the employees’ perception and capacity to withstand such attacks (Ksibi, et al. 2023).

Figure 4: 

(Source: Self-created in Ms Word)

Legal & General Group Plc

Comprehensive Cybersecurity Framework: Currently, the cybersecurity practices of Legal & General are commensurate with the requirements of the industry having well-developed standards. This includes elements such as governance, risk management, and compliance as measures (Al-Alawi, & Al-Bassam, 2020).

Incident Response Plan: There is also an effective formal incident response plan to deal with cyber security incidents and their consequences. These are known as a dedicated response team and response plans.

Continuous Monitoring and Threat Intelligence: Legal & General uses continuous monitoring solutions, and threat intelligence feeds as methods of conducting threat assessments. These measures make it possible for the company to be proactive in devising the kind of defences that need to be deployed depending on the current threat intelligence (Lee, 2021).

Evaluation of Cyber-Security Measures

SSE Plc and Legal & General Group Plc are exceptional cases of organisations committed to cybersecurity measures, which are differed by their individual business requirements and risks.

SSE Plc: One has to appreciate the company efforts to apply advanced threat detection and provide constant training for the employees. However, due to the further development of sophisticated cyber attacks in the organization, SSE Plc might want to consider making additional investments in automated threat detection systems and more cooperation with external cybersecurity specialists (Kure, et al. 2022). Besides, the encryption methods and access controls should be reviewed periodical and updated to counter present and new threats.

Legal & General Group Plc: The case of Legal & General shows that it has a broad framework and an incident response plan to deal with risks. However, the company needs to develop an evaluation of its incident response strategies and their further improvement based on the analysis of previous incidents and the identification of new threats (Alahmari, & Duncan, 2020). Adoption of sophisticated technologies including artificial intelligence as well as machine learning in threat identification could again improve the security posture of its cyber space.

In regard to the management of cyber security risks, Legal & General Group Plc and SSE Plc are among those that are making great progress. Regarding their measures, these aspects can be discussed as manifestations of a solid understanding of the threats that the corresponding companies are exposed to and the efforts made to prevent these threats from becoming real.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Conclusion

In this analysis the risks and the performances of SSE Plc and Legal & General Group Plc were compared in terms of risk management strategies. SSE has a strong risk management policy concentrating on operational risk and cyber risk while Legal & General is keen on financial and reputation risk. SSE implementation strategies include threat intelligence and employee awareness, while Legal & General extensive cybersecurity strategy along with the objectives and contingency planning for cyber security incidents demonstrate its sensitivity to cyber risks. When comparing the companies’ cost of equity by employing the CAPM model, SSE is recognized to have a lower cost of equity given the relatively low systematic risk whereas Legal & General has higher costs because of increased systematic risk.

Recommendations

As for the prospective investors they, are advised to invest in Legal & General Group Plc. Legal & General has a higher cost of equity, but thorough immunizing activities and an excellent position in the financial sphere are promising and secure. Thus its complex strategies of dealing with reputational and cyber-security risks make it fit for long-term survival. On the same note, although SSE Plc seems to has a lower cost of equity compared to the industry mean, this report analysis shows that the company has operational risks and is vulnerable to cyber threats. Thus, for investors in search of stability and having the greatest possibility of managing risks on their own, it is suggested to take notice of Legal & General due to its solid strategic frameworks and potential.

Reference List

Journals

• Alahmari, A., & Duncan, B. (2020, June). Cybersecurity risk management in small and medium-sized enterprises: A systematic review of recent evidence. In 2020 international conference on cyber situational awareness, data analytics and assessment (CyberSA) (pp. 1-5). IEEE. Retrieved From: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bob-Duncan/publication/342933159_Cybersecurity_Risk_Management_in_Small_and_Medium-Sized_Enterprises_A_Systematic_Review_of_Recent_Evidence/links/6050d580458515e8344e4796/Cybersecurity-Risk-Management-in-Small-and-Medium-Sized-Enterprises-A-Systematic-Review-of-Recent-Evidence.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Al-Alawi, A. I., & Al-Bassam, M. S. A. (2020). The significance of cybersecurity system in helping managing risk in banking and financial sector. Journal of Xidian University, 14(7), 1523-1536. Retrieved From: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adel-Al-Alawi/publication/337086201_The_Significance_of_Cybersecurity_System_in_Helping_Managing_Risk_in_Banking_and_Financial_Sector/links/5f288580299bf134049ebe88/The-Significance-of-Cybersecurity-System-in-Helping-Managing-Risk-in-Banking-and-Financial-Sector.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Bardas, A., & Dudnyk, A. (2022). Management of financial institutions and risks under uncertainty. MANAGEMENT. Retrieved From: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Artem-Bardas/publication/361313579_Management_of_financial_institutions_and_risks_under_uncertainty/links/63a98ce203aad5368e41b825/Management-of-financial-institutions-and-risks-under-uncertainty.pdf?origin=journalDetail&_tp=eyJwYWdlIjoiam91cm5hbERldGFpbCJ9 [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Butt, M. A., Ayub, H., Latif, B., Asif, F., Shabbir, M. S., & Raja, A. A. (2022). Financial risks and performance of conventional and Islamic banks: do reputational risk matters?. Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, 13(4), 581-595. Retrieved From: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Malik-Shabbir-2/publication/359284686_Factors_Affecting_Profit_Distribution_Management_of_Islamic_Banks_Moderating_Role_of_Corporate_Governance/links/62394b8c1068bc3edd3d5b27/Factors-Affecting-Profit-Distribution-Management-of-Islamic-Banks-Moderating-Role-of-Corporate-Governance.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Czinkota, M. R., Kotabe, M., Vrontis, D., Shams, S. R., Czinkota, M. R., Kotabe, M., ... & Shams, S. R. (2021). Product and service decisions. Marketing Management: Past, Present and Future, 341-397. Retrieved From: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Demetris-Vrontis/publication/354106344_Product_and_Service_Decisions/links/6252f0404f88c3119cefe3c8/Product-and-Service-Decisions.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Dvorsky, J., Belas, J., Gavurova, B., & Brabenec, T. (2021). Business risk management in the context of small and medium-sized enterprises. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 34(1), 1690-1708. Retrieved From: https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/434655 [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• ElWakeel, O., & Andersen, B. (2020). Stakeholder evolution: A study of stakeholder dynamics in 12 Norwegian projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 13(1), 172-196. Retrieved From: https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/2598201/Elwakeel.pdf?sequence=4 [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Guðlaugsson, B., Fazeli, R., Gunnarsdóttir, I., Davidsdottir, B., & Stefansson, G. (2020). Classification of stakeholders of sustainable energy development in Iceland: Utilizing a power-interest matrix and fuzzy logic theory. Energy for Sustainable Development, 57, 168-188. Retrieved From: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SyaCoC3F5MqvM0Wne2roVljRQO_vVcgG/view [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Islami, X., Mustafa, N., & Topuzovska Latkovikj, M. (2020). Linking Porter generic strategies to firm performance. Future Business Journal, 6, 1-15. Retrieved From: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s43093-020-0009-1.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Kamiya, S., Kang, J. K., Kim, J., Milidonis, A., & Stulz, R. M. (2021). Risk management, firm reputation, and the impact of successful cyberattacks on target firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 139(3), 719-749. Retrieved From: https://ira.lib.polyu.edu.hk/bitstream/10397/89554/1/Kamiya_Risk_Management_Firm.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Kiragu, D. N. U., Ndirangu, A., & Irungu, J. S. (2020). Role of Porter generic strategies on determining competitive advantage of postal corporation of Kenya courier services. Retrieved From: https://repository.dkut.ac.ke:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/4659/role-of-porters-generic-strategies-on-determining-competitive-advantage-of-postal-corporation-of-kenya-courier-services(1).pdf?sequence=1 [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Ksibi, S., Jaidi, F., & Bouhoula, A. (2023). A comprehensive study of security and cyber-security risk management within e-Health systems: Synthesis, analysis and a novel quantified approach. Mobile Networks and Applications, 28(1), 107-127. Retrieved From: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11036-022-02042-1.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Kure, H. I., Islam, S., & Mouratidis, H. (2022). An integrated cyber security risk management framework and risk predication for the critical infrastructure protection. Neural Computing and Applications, 34(18), 15241-15271. Retrieved From: https://repository.essex.ac.uk/32252/1/After%20Revision_Final-Submission.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Landi, G. C., Iandolo, F., Renzi, A., & Rey, A. (2022). Embedding sustainability in risk management: The impact of environmental, social, and governance ratings on corporate financial risk. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(4), 1096-1107. Retrieved From: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/csr.2256 [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Lee, I. (2021). Cybersecurity: Risk management framework and investment cost analysis. Business Horizons, 64(5), 659-671. Retrieved From: https://e-tarjome.com/storage/btn_uploaded/2021-06-15/1623738581_11813-etarjome%20English.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Maqbool, R., Rashid, Y., & Ashfaq, S. (2022). Renewable energy project success: Internal versus external stakeholders' satisfaction and influences of power‐interest matrix. Sustainable Development, 30(6), 1542-1561. Retrieved From: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/sd.2327 [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Mishchenko, S., Naumenkova, S., Mishchenko, V., & Dorofeiev, D. (2021). Innovation risk management in financial institutions. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 18(1), 191-203. Retrieved From: https://www.businessperspectives.org/images/pdf/applications/publishing/templates/article/assets/14696/IMFI_2021_01_Mishchenko.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Rifki, M. B., & Kirana, D. H. (2024). Market Expansion Strategy for Sweet Potato Export Products Using the Ansoff Matrix (Case Study of CV SNR Bumi Indonesia). International Journal of Management and Business Economics, 2(3), 59-63. Retrieved From: http://www.putrapublisher.org/ojs/index.php/jamis/article/download/586/667 [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Robbetze, N. (2023). Developing a systematic risk model for JSE listed companies (Doctoral dissertation, North-West University (South Africa)). Retrieved From: https://repository.nwu.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10394/41867/Robbetze_N.pdf?sequence=1 [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Rodney, K. (2024). Analysing M&A performance Using CAPM to Evaluate the Acquiror systematic risk in investment strategies. Retrieved From: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1830845/FULLTEXT01.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Sarraj, M., & Ben Mabrouk, A. (2021). The Systematic Risk at the Crisis—A Multifractal Non-Uniform Wavelet Systematic Risk Estimation. Fractal and Fractional, 5(4), 135. Retrieved From: https://www.mdpi.com/2504-3110/5/4/135/pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Sukrianingrum, D. R., & Manda, G. S. (2020). The effect of systematic risk and unsystematic risk on expected return of optimal portfolio. SAR (Soedirman Accounting Review): Journal of Accounting and Business, 5(2), 181-195. Retrieved From: https://jos.unsoed.ac.id/index.php/sar/article/download/3772/2117 [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Syaifullah, A., Latief, Y., Dewi, M. P., & Darma, S. (2024). Power and Interest Matrix Stakeholders of the Geothermal Development Project in Indonesia. Action Research Literate, 8(6). Retrieved From: https://arl.ridwaninstitute.co.id/index.php/arl/article/download/382/561 [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]
• Uddin, M. H., Ali, M. H., & Hassan, M. K. (2020). Cybersecurity hazards and financial system vulnerability: a synthesis of literature. Risk Management, 22(4), 239-309. Retrieved From: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Md-Hamid-Uddin/publication/343724670_Cybersecurity_hazards_and_financial_system_vulnerability_a_synthesis_of_literature/links/5f59748e299bf1d43cf90811/Cybersecurity-hazards-and-financial-system-vulnerability-a-synthesis-of-literature.pdf [Retrieved On: 01.08.2024]

Author Bio

Jack Roberts   9 years | PhD

Greetings Students. I have obtained my PhD in finance from a reputed university in the UK. I worked as a finance professor for a few years and worked as a writer. I have been associated with New Assignment Help for 9 years, assisting students with their academic papers. Hire me for your finance paper and get the best results.