ERM adoption in the insurance sector

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to investigate various institutional pressures driving the adoption and implementation of a new risk management system; enterprise risk management (ERM). Design/methodology/approach The implementation of ERM-related practices is analysed based on an institutional framework and drawing on empirical evidence from multiple sources in ten large/medium-sized insurance companies. This paper focuses on extra-organisational pressures exerted by political, social and economic institutions on insurance companies which drove the adoption decision. Findings It was found that different change agents have taken part in the decision to introduce new risk management system as a part of ERM implementation process. Further, the institutional pressures, coercive, mimetic and normative, were found to differ in character and strength over different intervals of time in relation to the adoption of ERM. Companies that adopted ERM early were mostly driven by internal strategic drivers, whereas the recent adoption decision was more driven by coercive and mimetic pressures. Thus, evidence of divergence between insurance companies was found. Research limitations/implications The findings have implications for policy makers, regulatory agencies and innovation developers. ERM was considered not only as a necessity but also as a value added to the insurance companies under study. Thus, regulators and innovation developers should survey main players in any specific organisational field to understand their views before issuing new compulsory regulations or developing innovations. They also need to consider exploring companies’ experiences with ERM, which can provide a basis for the development of strengthened and more informative regulatory ERM frameworks. This will support a faster and easier understanding and implementation of ERM framework hindered by the confusions companies may face when considering the complicated/changing regulatory and risk requirements. Originality/value This study extends the scope of institutional analysis to the risk management field, particularly ERM and to the explanation of how different institutions affect the decision to move towards ERM and modify the risk management rules applied within the organisational environment. It looks not only at convergences but also divergences associated with the period of time when ERM adoption decision was made. Thus, it develops a processual view of change.

Predicting Islamic Finance Adoption Behavior by MSMEs: Institutional Theory Approach

“…In other words, their adoption behavior is not driven by reasons to follow professional norms because they have not considered it a norm that must be followed. This finding is in agreement with Shibin et al (2020), Jabbour andAbdel-Kader (2016), andBukhari et al (2020). However, studies in the context of MSMEs on IFRS adoption (Damak-Ayadi et al, 2020), environmental management accounting adoption (Chathurangani & Hemathilake, 2019), tax compliance (Sadress et al, 2019), and internet-based technology adoption (Azam & Quaddus, 2012;Li & Wang, Predicting Islamic Finance Adoption Behavior by MSMEs: … Jurnal Manajemen Bisnis, 2022 | 213 2018) showed a significant role for this normative pressure.…”

Enterprise Risk Management in Accounting Research: A Literature Review

“…In terms of corporate characteristics, many studies focus on financial institutions (Jabbour & Abdel-Kader, 2016;Paape & Speklé, 2012). Baxter et al (2013) showed that companies with high Standard & Poor's (S&P) ratings had higher average market responses than did companies with low ratings, which improved ERM quality and governance.…”

“…In addition, the timing of the introduction of ERM may affect the pressure on such regulations and ratings. For example, early adopters of ERM did so due to internal factors such as enhancing financial health and external factors such as improving their ratings (Jabbour & Abdel-Kader, 2016).…”

Benefits of Enterprise Risk Management: A Systematic Review of Literature

“…The goal of ERM is to reduce enterprise risk, which in turn would enhance performance. The analysis suggests that the ERM process and culture vary from firm to firm, but facilitating coordination among all departments of a firm remains the central theme (Jabbour & Abdel-Kader, 2016). It can also be noted that the effectiveness of ERM adoption to deliver benefits is mediated by firm-specific characteristics like firm size, firm complexity, encouragement from the board, and the management's willingness to accommodate feedback (Saeidi et al, 2020;Sax & Torp, 2015).…”