Abstract

Banks rely on risk managers to prevent their employees from making high risk low value investments. Why can't the CEOs directly incentivize their employees to choose the most profitable investment? I show that having a separate risk manager is more profitable for banks and is also socially efficient. This is because there is conflict between proving incentive to choose the most profitable investment and providing incentives to exert effort on those investments. Hence, if the tasks are split between a risk manager who approves the investments and a loan officer (or trader) who exerts effort, then both optimal investment choice and optimal effort can be achieved. I further examine some reasons for risk management failure wherein a CEO may ignore the risk manager when the latter is risk averse and suggests safe investments. As is usually the case before a financial crisis, my model predicts that the CEO is more likely to ignore the risk manager when the risky investments are yielding higher profits.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

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.