【正文】 摘要 在過去一年里 ,我們通過現(xiàn)場參觀金融服務公司來進行審查和評估其金融風險管理系統(tǒng)。 in others, it will shift the risk to other parties through a bination of pricing and product design. The banking industry recognizes that an institution need not engage in business in amanner that unnecessarily imposes risk upon it。s superregionals and quasi177。money center mercial banks, as well as a number of major investment banking firms. These results were then presented to a much wider array of banking firms for reaction and verification. The purpose of the present article is to outline the findings of this investigation. It reports the state of risk management techniques in the industry―questions asked, questions answered, and questions left unaddressed by respondents. This report can not recite a litany of the approaches used within the industry, nor can it offer an evaluation of each and every approach. Rather, it reports the standard of practice and evaluates how and why it is conducted in the particular way chosen. But, even the best practice employed within the industry is not good enough in some areas. Accordingly, critiques also will be offered where appropriate. The article concludes with a list of questions that are currently unanswered, or answered imprecisely in the current practice employed by this group of relatively sophisticated banks. Here, we discuss the problems which the industry finds most difficult to address, shortings of the current methodology used to analyze risk, and the elements that are missing in the current procedures of risk management and risk control. 2. What type of risk is being considered? Commercial banks are in the risk business. In the process of providing financial services, they assume various kinds of financial risks. Over the last decade our understanding of the place of mercial banks within the financial sector has improved substantially. Over this time, much has been written on the role of mercial banks in the financial sector, both in the academic literature and in the financial press. These arguments will be neither reviewed nor enumerated here. Suffice it to say that market participants seek the services of these financial institutions because of their ability to provide market knowledge, transaction efficiency and funding capability. In performing these roles, they generally act as a principal in the transaction. As such, they use their own balance sheet to facilitate the transaction and to absorb the risks associated with it. To be sure, there are activities performed by banking firms which do not have direct balance sheet implications. These services include agency and advisory activities such as 1 trust and investment management。 nor should it absorb risk that can be efficiently transferred to other participants. Rather, it should only manage risks at the firm level that are more efficiently managed there than by the market itself or by their owners in their own portfolios. In short, it should accept only those risks that are uniquely a part of the bank39。商業(yè)銀行的分析涵蓋了大量的北美超地區(qū)性和準貨幣中心機構 ,以及一些美國以外的公司獲得的信息包括了一些理念和財務風險管理的做法。 在某種程度上來說，這次活動是出于我們對行業(yè)財務風險弱點的認識。相反，它報告的是執(zhí)業(yè)標準和評價方法，以及它為什么選擇特定的方式進行。在這段時間，商業(yè)銀行在金融部門扮演的什么樣的角色已經(jīng)眾所周知，無論是在學術文獻或者金融新聞上都有體現(xiàn)。 通過第 20 條標準承保該控股公司的附屬公司 （包裝，證券化，分發(fā)，以及為消費和房地產(chǎn)領域的貸款債務提供服務。相反，對于企業(yè)來說，僅在原有的水平上管理風險要比管理市場本身或由業(yè)主自己的投資組合產(chǎn)生的風險來的有效的多。第三步，通過執(zhí)行機構管理層激勵兼容合同，要求員工承擔責任。除非該機構已在管理風險上有比較優(yōu)勢或者愿意接受嵌入式風險，我們沒有理由為銀行吸收這些風險，而不是轉(zhuǎn)化這些風險。此外，泄露客戶信息這種不正當?shù)母偁幨侄文芙o自己帶來好處。這些可以被看作是包含以下四個部分 : 1 標準和報告 持倉限額 或規(guī)則 3 投資指南和策略 4 激勵合同和賠償 一般來說，這些工具建立了權衡揭示、定義程序來管理這些風險，限制個別職位到可接受的水平，并鼓勵決策者管理采取與該公司的目標相一致的目標和風險的方式。顯