监管与风险管理:银行与科技的交叉

H. Scott, D. Campbell, John W. Gulliver
{"title":"监管与风险管理:银行与科技的交叉","authors":"H. Scott, D. Campbell, John W. Gulliver","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3887043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Executive Summary: In this paper, we evaluate the regulatory structure for risk management at U.S. banking institutions as compared to technology companies. We also evaluate the appropriate regulatory structure for cloud service providers to U.S. banking institutions, as banking institutions are increasing their reliance on cloud service providers for their data needs and effective risk management regulation can safely facilitate that transition. Part I of our paper provides a comprehensive review of the regulation of corporate governance and risk management at U.S. banking institutions with a focus on how the regulatory structure is tailored to address the business activities of U.S. banks. We find that the regulation of risk management processes by U.S. banking institutions is highly prescriptive and that U.S. banking regulators have centralized key risk management responsibilities with the board of directors and senior management. Part II of our paper reviews the regulation of corporate governance and risk management at U.S. technology companies. We find that the regulation of risk management at technology companies is principles-based and does not shift prescriptive responsibilities to technology companies’ board of directors. Part III of our paper considers whether the banking approach to the regulation of risk management or the technology approach to the regulation of risk management is better suited for cloud service providers to U.S. banks. In doing so, we consider key differences between the risks faced by U.S. banking institutions as compared to cloud service providers. We conclude that a principles-based and decentralized approach to the regulation and supervision of cloud service providers and other technology services providers to U.S. banking institutions would better address the risks inherent in such services and facilitate continued adoption of cloud services by U.S. banking institutions.","PeriodicalId":306152,"journal":{"name":"Risk Management eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulation of Governance & Risk Management: The Intersection of Banking & Technology\",\"authors\":\"H. Scott, D. Campbell, John W. Gulliver\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3887043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Executive Summary: In this paper, we evaluate the regulatory structure for risk management at U.S. banking institutions as compared to technology companies. We also evaluate the appropriate regulatory structure for cloud service providers to U.S. banking institutions, as banking institutions are increasing their reliance on cloud service providers for their data needs and effective risk management regulation can safely facilitate that transition. Part I of our paper provides a comprehensive review of the regulation of corporate governance and risk management at U.S. banking institutions with a focus on how the regulatory structure is tailored to address the business activities of U.S. banks. We find that the regulation of risk management processes by U.S. banking institutions is highly prescriptive and that U.S. banking regulators have centralized key risk management responsibilities with the board of directors and senior management. Part II of our paper reviews the regulation of corporate governance and risk management at U.S. technology companies. We find that the regulation of risk management at technology companies is principles-based and does not shift prescriptive responsibilities to technology companies’ board of directors. Part III of our paper considers whether the banking approach to the regulation of risk management or the technology approach to the regulation of risk management is better suited for cloud service providers to U.S. banks. In doing so, we consider key differences between the risks faced by U.S. banking institutions as compared to cloud service providers. We conclude that a principles-based and decentralized approach to the regulation and supervision of cloud service providers and other technology services providers to U.S. banking institutions would better address the risks inherent in such services and facilitate continued adoption of cloud services by U.S. banking institutions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":306152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Risk Management eJournal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Risk Management eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3887043\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Management eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3887043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:在本文中,我们评估了与科技公司相比,美国银行机构风险管理的监管结构。我们还评估了美国银行机构云服务提供商的适当监管结构,因为银行机构越来越依赖云服务提供商来满足其数据需求,有效的风险管理监管可以安全地促进这种过渡。本文的第一部分对美国银行机构的公司治理和风险管理监管进行了全面回顾,重点是如何调整监管结构以应对美国银行的业务活动。我们发现,美国银行机构对风险管理过程的监管是高度规范的,美国银行监管机构将关键风险管理责任集中于董事会和高级管理层。本文的第二部分回顾了美国科技公司的公司治理和风险管理监管。我们发现,科技公司风险管理的监管是基于原则的,并没有将规范性责任转移到科技公司的董事会。本文的第三部分考虑的是,银行业的风险管理监管方法还是技术的风险管理监管方法更适合美国银行的云服务提供商。在此过程中,我们考虑了与云服务提供商相比,美国银行机构面临的风险之间的关键差异。我们的结论是,对美国银行机构的云服务提供商和其他技术服务提供商进行基于原则和分散的监管和监督,将更好地解决此类服务固有的风险,并促进美国银行机构继续采用云服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regulation of Governance & Risk Management: The Intersection of Banking & Technology
Executive Summary: In this paper, we evaluate the regulatory structure for risk management at U.S. banking institutions as compared to technology companies. We also evaluate the appropriate regulatory structure for cloud service providers to U.S. banking institutions, as banking institutions are increasing their reliance on cloud service providers for their data needs and effective risk management regulation can safely facilitate that transition. Part I of our paper provides a comprehensive review of the regulation of corporate governance and risk management at U.S. banking institutions with a focus on how the regulatory structure is tailored to address the business activities of U.S. banks. We find that the regulation of risk management processes by U.S. banking institutions is highly prescriptive and that U.S. banking regulators have centralized key risk management responsibilities with the board of directors and senior management. Part II of our paper reviews the regulation of corporate governance and risk management at U.S. technology companies. We find that the regulation of risk management at technology companies is principles-based and does not shift prescriptive responsibilities to technology companies’ board of directors. Part III of our paper considers whether the banking approach to the regulation of risk management or the technology approach to the regulation of risk management is better suited for cloud service providers to U.S. banks. In doing so, we consider key differences between the risks faced by U.S. banking institutions as compared to cloud service providers. We conclude that a principles-based and decentralized approach to the regulation and supervision of cloud service providers and other technology services providers to U.S. banking institutions would better address the risks inherent in such services and facilitate continued adoption of cloud services by U.S. banking institutions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信