IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ3/2435296.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling operational risk capital: the inconvenient truth

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick McConnell

Abstract

ABSTRACTSince 2008, over US$200 billion of operational risk losses have been incurred by large banks, mainly as a result of regulatory fines, lawsuits and demands for customer redress for various types of misconduct. A basic assumption underlying the modeling of operational risk regulatory capital (ORRC) under Basel II is that such operational risk losses can be modeled as being idiosyncratic to an individual institution, as this is the (microprudential) level at which banks are currently regulated. This paper challenges that assumption and shows that it is an "inconvenient truth" that the largest losses by banks are not firm specific. Instead, the largest losses involve multiple banks being fined at the same time by multiple regulators for the same types of misconduct. In this paper, such large multi-bank incidents are called systemic operational risk events and it is argued that, in addition to the firm level, ORRC should also be modeled at the "systemic", or macroprudential, level. The paper also discusses arguments made by academics against current approaches taken to modeling ORRC and, finally, makes a suggestion to the Basel Committee that, similar to the current reviewbeing undertaken for market risk, a comprehensive fundamental review be undertaken for operational risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick McConnell, . "Modeling operational risk capital: the inconvenient truth," Journal of Operational Risk, Journal of Operational Risk.
  • Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:2435296
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-operational-risk/2435296/modeling-operational-risk-capital-the-inconvenient-truth
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:2435296. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-operational-risk .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.