Abstract
This Article queries what if a Systemically Important Financial Institution (SIFI) placed Professor Nassim Taleb on its Board and empowered him to set up its long-term risk committee so its corporate governance would then be more concerned with avoiding disaster than with short-term profits, especially if of a speculative nature whose true risk was underestimated due to a faulty reality paradigm (Gaussian). More pertinent than asking if the bank is making a profit, the long-term risk committee should be asking how antifragile the bank is if a certain event occurs. In enabling banking corporate governance to better spot Grey/Black Swans, this Article asks why bank directors took such a false comfort from their regulatory capital ratios. In other words, regulatory compliance too often acts as a substitute to effective risk-management. Rather than taking the position of effectuating evermore compliance in lieu of effective long-term large bank risk management, corporate governance for banks should entail avoiding Grey/Black Swans by incessantly assessing the Pareto assumptive givens of the banking world. And banking corporate governance should also include learning when to utilize a bit of lateral thinking, imagination and prudent risk-taking instead of leaning so heavily on models, particularly Gaussian-based models.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.