期刊文献+

会计师事务所风险管理策略:高阶期望风险视角 被引量:5

Risk management strategies in accounting firms:View on high order expected shortfall
原文传递
导出
摘要 根据会计师事务所客户组合的风险特征,在给出客户组合风险的高阶期望损失风险测度方法的基础上,建立了客户组合风险管理决策的两阶段优化模型,求出了客户组合的风险边界值,并分析了风险边界值的决定因素.研究结果表明:会计师事务所可接受客户组合风险的大小及最终客户的多少,主要由可能发生的诉讼损失决定,即发生的诉讼损失越多,会计师事务所接受新客户和续聘客户的风险越谨慎,拒聘新客户或辞聘老客户的数量也越多.该研究结果对我国会计师事务所的风险管理决策实务和现有的审计风险理论研究都有一定的借鉴和参考价值. According to specialities of a client portifolio risk in accounting firms, the article established a second-period optimizing model and gave their risk boundaries based on a quantitative method of high order expected shortfall. Then it analyzed and exemplified the decisive factors of risk management strategies. The result indicates that both the accepted risk level and the number of accepted clients depend on the level of litigation losses, i.e. the more the litigation loss is, the more cautious the accounting firms when they decide to accept new clients and continue with old clients and the more the resigned or rufused clients. The conclusion will be benificial to both risk management practice and the present audit risk theory of accounting firms.
出处 《系统工程理论与实践》 EI CSCD 北大核心 2009年第9期23-31,共9页 Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice
关键词 高阶期望风险 客户组合风险 组合决策 风险边界 诉讼损失 high order expected shortfall client portfolio risk portfolio decision-making risk boundary litigation loss
  • 相关文献

参考文献18

二级参考文献30

  • 1杨志国,常志安.关于上市公司审计风险成因的调查研究[J].审计研究,2004(4):27-32. 被引量:26
  • 2张继勋,陈颖,吴璇.风险因素对我国上市公司审计收费影响的分析——沪市2003年报的数据[J].审计研究,2005(4):34-38. 被引量:81
  • 3审计.财政部注册会计师考试委员会办公室[M].经济科学出版社,2002..
  • 4Acerbi, Carlo and Dirk Tasche. 2001 (Sep.). On the Coherence of Expected Shortfall. Working paper(October).http://www.gloriamundi.org/var/wps.html.
  • 5Artmer. P., F. Delbaen, J. Eber and D. Heath, 1997, Thinking Coherently. RISK 10 ( 11 ) : 68 - 71.
  • 6Artzner. Pphilipe, Freddy Delbaen, JeanMare Eber and David Heath, 1999, Coherent Measures of Risk, Mathematical Finance 9(July) ,203 - 228.
  • 7Delbaen, Freddy. 1998. Coherent Risk Measures on General Probability Spaces. Working paper, Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule, Zurich(November).http://www.gloriamundi.org/var/wps.html.
  • 8Mao, James C.T., May 1970, Survey of Capital Budgeting: Theory and Practice. Journal of Finance 25. 349 - 360.
  • 9Jaschke, Stefan R. 2001. Quantile-VaR is the Wrong Measure to Quantify Market Ri~ for Regulatory. Purposes. Working paper,Weierstrass-Institut fitr Angewandte Analysis und Stochastik. (May).
  • 10Jorion, Philippe., 1997. Value at Risk:The New Benchmark for Controlling Market Risk. McGraw-Hill.

共引文献48

同被引文献63

引证文献5

二级引证文献42

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部