Validation of Dimensions and Component of Risk Culture: Using Fuzzy Delphi Method

Abstract Risk culture is a new issue that has entered the risk management literature after financial crises.While several studies have been conducted on quantitative risk management models, but behavioral aspects focusing on the concept of risk culture requires intellectual endeavors, the development of theories, and further researches. Recognizing the dimensions and components of risk culture in order to achieve a tools for the recognition and assessment of risk culture is the main objective of this research. On the other hand, a significant step in each research is the decision making regarding the appropriate component relevant to each construct. Maintaining inappropriate component an eliminating important component might mislead studies directions. In this research, the Fuzzy Delphi method is considered as a techniques of scientific analysis to accomplish agreement amongst panel members to determine the components and dimensions of risk culture. This method diminishes ambiguity, variety and discrepancies in viewpoint; furthermore, guaranteeing the fact that whether or not the gathered data is valid enough, increases the quality of selected component. Introduction Although the need for risk management has been widely accepted, organizations often consider the impact of their cultural aspects insignificantly, and little evidence of risk culture, especially in the banking sector (Binti Hamzah, 2014; Ariffin and Kassim, 2011). Creating and maintaining a suitable risk culture is still one of the major challenges in risk management. Considering the importance of risk culture in risk management, it is necessary to develop a scale for measuring it. By measuring the risk culture, it will be possible to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of efforts to shape and manage it. While quantitative models and governance frameworks for risk management are well established at the moment, the behavioral aspects, which focus on risk culture, are often unclear and under development and theorizing (Banks, 2012). In this regard, efforts have been made by international institutes and researchers to provide frameworks for risk culture in general (McConnell, 2013; Levy, Lamarre, & Twining, 2010; PWC, 2009; IRM, 2012; Tower Watson, 2011; EY, 2014; Deloitte, 2015; FSB, 2014; IIF, 2012; RMA, 2014; VMIA, 2016; Banks, 2012; Kells, 2014; Schoenfeld, 2013), which show that the dimensions and components of risk culture vary greatly in different fields and domains, therefore, Accor