european journal of social sciences issn: 1450-2267 - EuroJournals

More documents

Recommendations

Info

European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 5, Number 3 (2007) Step 3: In this step alternatives are determined as: Fraport A.G. and TAV Airport Holding Co. Selecting the alternatives from the more effective and successful ones in their ERM field of practices by using the preliminary elimination will increase the quality of the decision. Step 4: Performing pairwaise comparisons between factors. I this step the interactions between clusters and elements are determined. The selection of best ERM operator model’s control hierarchy according to the determined criterias is given in fig.-3. Step 5: Obtaining the overall outcome. Following weighting is acquired by the pairwise. Table-2 shows the priorities of all the factors in the decision-making model. Table 2: Final pritioritization of alternatives that it is derived from ANP model. Graphic Alternatives Total Normal Ideal Ranking FRAPORT A.G. 0.3449 0.6898 1.0000 1 TAV 0.1551 0.3102 0.4497 2 The proposed decision model of best operator selection was implemented for 16 criteria under three main criteria cluster and two main alternative operators. After this step, I had mine unweighted supermatrix. Then clusters’ priority weights were calculated by using experts’ opinion. Multiplying this priority weights by the unweighted supermatrix I had the weighted supermatrix. The final step is the calculation of the limiting priorities of the weighted supermatrix. According the final prioritization of alternatives is given in Table-2, the Fraport A.G. is the highest priority from the TAV Airport Holding Co. Because of this reason Fraport selected as best operator about ERM implementations. To sum up, what best practice for ERM is hard to say as certainly since ERM is not standardize application. Also, ERM is shaped according to tje organizational factors. As a mention nefore, ERM is not “one size fits all” approach. It really is all hinging on the differences of purposes, the condition of resources and capabilities, and the existing organizational cultures. But this study is showed that Fraport is best operator according to the current practice. However they are should do many improvements in their ERM system to achievement of best practice. Final prioritizationof alternatives and all factors are given following Table-3. Table 3: Final Prioritization of criteras as ANP model result. Name Normalized By Cluster Limiting FRAPORT A.G. 0.344904 0.68981 TAV 0.155096 0.31019 Establish ERM Framework 0.023149 0.18519 Providing resource to sustainability of the ERM development and continuity 0.026044 0.20835 Resource allocation ERM efforts, requirements and infrastructure 0.024881 0.19905 Supply to Modeling, tools and techniques 0.024881 0.19905 Use and suppy of outsources about ERM 0.026044 0.20835 Determining corporate risk appetite and tolerance lline, creating corporate risk profile 0.023501 0.18800 Establish ERM information system 0.019861 0.15889 Establishing open communication and feedback systems 0.022057 0.17645 Overall enterprise risk assessment and analysis, enterprise risk mapping and prioritization 0.019861 0.15889 Setting up an ERM framework for all aspects of corporate based risks 0.019861 0.15889 Setting up ERM function and committee 0.019861 0.15889 Achivement to Corporate Risk Optimization 0.050000 0.20000 Creating and Promoting an ERM culture and common language 0.050000 0.20000 Developing and Establish to ERM vision, mission and strategy 0.050000 0.20000 Developing organizational ERM policy and prosedures 0.050000 0.20000 Integration of ERM into other management practices and management funcions 0.050000 0.20000 72
European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 5, Number 3 (2007) 8. Conclusion and Suggesstions The paper presents a method for applying ANP in determination of best operator to ERM implementation in the airport business. By managing risks, managers are more likely to achieve their objectives. Hence, they would be more likely to meet service delivery objectives and targets. Practices such as the organizational philosophy, open communication channels, teams and committees, guidance, and training contribute to a supportive work environment. These practices also support innovation. While the practices do facilitate management decision-making and planning, the link to sound resource allocation is less strong. However, the tools for mapping, modelling, identifying and assessing risks do help focus the resources on key risks and, in this way, allocate the resources to the most critical areas. There may be significant barriers to implementing those best practices that are very different from the status quo. Most federal departments and agencies operate with traditional organizational structures having a defined reporting and management hierarchy. Hence, implementing a philosophy and culture that everybody is a risk manager may be a stretch target. Similarly, the current environments do not welcome bad news or open communication channels. Departments and agencies will need to adopt the practices that make sense for the organization and are linked with the benefit targeted by the organization. There are many different ways that these practices can be implemented in organizations. The major contribution of this paper lies in the development of a comprehensive methodology, for the selection of a best ERM operator in the airport business. The paper also provides for a review of the issues, which influence the best practice of ERM. The ANP approach, as a part of this methodology, not only leads to a logical result but also enables the decision-makers to visualize the impact of various criteria in the final result. Further, I have demonstrated that the interdependencies among various criteria can be effectively captured using the ANP technique, which has rarely been applied in the context of ERM. The proposed methodology serves as a guideline to the airport managers ERM implementation-related decisions. ERM implementation, which is one of the company’s most important managerial approaches, must be systematically considered from the decision makers. For this reason, ERM implementation is evaluated in a sample ERM framework and guidelines consist of various techniques from the experimental to the analytical ones and its successful applications were performed in numerous sectors. In this paper, selection of best ERM operator was considered as an multi criteria decision problem (MCDP) and a model is proposed by using ANP. The evaluation criterias were developed according to the best practice surveys and ERM guidelines and the model was applied to actual two ERM operators in the airport business. This paper shows that, ANP is a decision tool by making strategical decisions, such as selecting a best ERM operator. Generally, managers might be inclined not to use a sophisticated method, but by using user-friendly software like super decision, developed by Saaty, the decision making process by using ANP will be handled more easy. Evaluating the operators from both objective and subjective criterias will gain flexibility to the decision process.. Another important finding is that the proposed model is more reflecting the relation of how the best practice criterias affect the selected operators. This paper moves us one step closer to the implementation of ERM as best practice in real airport business. The effective management largely starts with a proper strategy. Hence, in order to implement the ERM successfully, there has a critical issue of how companies can better evaluate and select a favorable ERM strategy, framework and it’s best practice. However, the best operator selection of ERM usually involves subjective and qualitative judgment. In particular, ERM best practice is a strategic issue, which is restricted by resource needs, realistic support, time requirements, and conformity with expected outcomes or business purposes. In this sense, the treatment of ERM best operator selection is required to handle several complex factors in a better objective and logical manner. Thus, the ERM best operator selection is a kind of MCDM problem, and requires MCDM 73
Page 1 and 2:
European Journal of Social Sciences
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22: European Journal of Social Sciences
Page 71: European Journal of Social Sciences
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
3. Result and Discussion 1. Profile
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Table 2: The Channels of the respon
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143:
show all

european journal of social sciences issn: 1450-2267 - EuroJournals

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?