Inhibiting and Facilitating Factors for the Implementation of Risk Management in a Ministry of Justice and Public Security Agency
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8077.2024.e90226Keywords:
Risk management, Public sector, Factors associated with risk management, Risk management models, SWOT matrixAbstract
Goal: To identify factors that inhibit and facilitate the implementation of risk management in an entity of the Ministry of Justice and Public Security in Brazil.
Methodology/approach: This is a case study with data collection, including documentary research and interviews. To process the data, content analysis and SWOT analysis were used.
Originality/relevance: The originality of this study lies in its focus on the implementation of risk management in public agencies in Brazil, particularly in the Ministry of Justice and Public Security (MJSP). While risk management is widely discussed in the private sector and internationally in the public sector, it remains a relatively new phenomenon within Brazilian public organizations.
Main findings: Sixteen factors for the implementation of risk management were identified, divided into eight inhibiting factors and eight facilitating factors. Strengths are related to the actions of managers, while weaknesses refer to the lack of training, awareness, and participation of employees. Opportunities arise from government central policies, and threats are linked to changes in upper management.
Theoretical contributions: The theoretical contribution of this work resides in identifying and classifying inhibiting and facilitating factors for the implementation of risk management in an agency of the Ministry of Justice and Public Security (MJSP), providing a detailed analysis of these factors based on empirical evidence.
Management contributions: The study analyzes factors that impact the implementation of risk management in a public security agency, emphasizing the need to improve communication and awareness among employees.
References
Andrade, F. S. (2017). Análise de riscos e a atividade de inteligência. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Policiais, 8 (2), 91-116. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325613607_Analise_de_Riscos_e_a_Atividade_de_Inteligencia.
Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. (2018). Gestão de Riscos – Diretrizes. (ISO 31000: 2018). ABNT. https://www.abntcatalogo.com.br/norma.aspx? ID=392334.
Ávila, M. D. G. (2014). Gestão de riscos no setor público. Revista Controle: Doutrinas e artigos, 12 (2), 179-198. https://doi.org/10.32586/rcda.v12i2.110.
Bardin, L. (1977). Análise de conteúdo. Edições 70.
Blonski, F. (2017). O controle gerencial na perspectiva do New Public Management: o caso da adoção do balanced scorecard na Receita Federal do Brasil. Administração Pública e Gestão Social, 9 (1), 15-30. https://periodicos.ufv.br/apgs/article/view/4912.
Brasil. Presidência da República. Casa Civil. (2019). Decreto n.º 9.662, de 1º de janeiro de 2019. Casa Civil. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2019-2022/2019/Decreto/D9662.htm
Brasil. Ministério da Justiça e Segurança Pública. (2020). Portaria n.º 86, de 23 de março de 2020. MJSP. https://www.gov.br/mj/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/governanca/copy2_of_controle-interno/portaria/portaria-no-86-de-23-de-marco-de-2020.pdf/view
Brasil. Ministério do Planejamento, Orçamento e Gestão e Controladoria-Geral da União (2016). Instrução Normativa Conjunta n.º 1, de 10 de maio de 2016. MPOG/CGU. https://www.gov.br/mj/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/governanca/Gestao-de-Riscos/biblioteca/Normativos/instrucao-normativa-conjunta-no-1-de-10-de-maio-de-2016-imprensa-nacional.pdf/view
Brasil. Tribunal de Contas da União. Secretaria-Geral de Controle Externo (2018). Referencial Básico de Gestão de Riscos. TCU. https://portal.tcu.gov.br/referencial-basico-de-gestao-de-riscos.htm
Bruning, C., Godri, L., Takahashi, A. R. W. (2018). Triangulação em estudos de caso: incidência, apropriações e mal-entendidos em pesquisas da área de administração. Administração: Ensino e Pesquisa, 19 (2), 277-307. https://doi.org/10.13058/raep.2018.v19n2.889.
Carlsson-Wall, M., Kraus, K., Meidell, A., & Tran, P. (2018). Managing risk in the public sector: the interaction between vernacular and formal risk management systems. Financial Accountability and Management, 35 (1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12179.
Carvalho, L. N. G., Trapp, A. C. G., & Chan, B. L. (2004). Disclosure e risco operacional: uma abordagem comparativa em instituições financeiras que atuam no Brasil, na Europa e nos Estados Unidos. Revista de Administração, 39 (3), 264-273. http://rausp.usp.br/wp-content/uploads/files/V3903264-273.pdf.
Chermack, T. J., & Kasshanna, B. K. (2007). The use and misuse of SWOT analysis and implications for HRD professionals. Human Resource Development International, 10 (4), 383-399. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678860701718760.
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. (2004). Gerenciamento de riscos corporativos: estrutura integrada. COSO. https://www.coso.org/Documents/COSO-ERM-Executive-Summary-Portuguese.pdf.
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. (2017). Gerenciamento de riscos corporativos: estrutura integrada. COSO. https://www.coso.org/Pages/default.aspx.
Falqueto, J. M. Z., Hoffmann, V. E., & Farias, J. S. (2018). Saturação teórica em pesquisas qualitativas: relato de uma experiência de aplicação em estudo na área de administração. Revista Ciências da Administração, 20 (52), 40-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/2175-8077.2018V20n52p40.
Filho, O. M., Araújo, E. A. S., & Quintairos, P. C. R. (2014, 20 a 22 de outubro). A análise SWOT e sua relevância para o planejamento estratégico. III Congresso Internacional de Ciência, Tecnologia e Desenvolvimento. https://unitau.br/files/arquivos/category_154/MCH0396_1427385441.pdf.
Hayashi Jr., P., Abib, G., & Hoppen, N. (2019). Validity in qualitative research: a processual approach. The Qualitative Report, 24 (1), 98-112. https:// nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3443&context=tqr.
Leite, P. H. C., Alves, C. A. M., & Filho, C. A. P. M. (2010). Gestão de risco operacional em uma instituição financeira pública que atua no Brasil: um estudo de caso. Revista de Contabilidade do Mestrado em Ciência Contábeis na UERJ, 15 (2), 32-48. http://www.atena.org.br/revista/ojs-2.2.3-06/index.php/UERJ/article/viewFile/893/853
Martins, F. S. (2005). Alternativas Modais de Transporte de Peças Automotivas entre Brasil e Argentina. (Dissertação de mestrado, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro – UFRJ). http://www.dominiopublico.gov.br/pesquisa/DetalheObraForm.do?select_action=&co_obra=127109.
Miguelote, M. G. C., & Viana, J. D. (2020, 20 a 23 maio). Identificação de riscos em projetos de contratação de prestação de serviços com dedicação exclusiva de mão de obra: estudo de caso em instituição pública federal. VIII Simpósio Internacional de Gestão de Projetos, Inovação e Sustentabilidade. http://submissao.singep.org.br/ 8singep/arquivos/282.pdf.
Mikes, A. (2009). Risk management and calculative cultures. Elsevier: Management Accounting Research, 20 (1), 18-40. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 223740530_Risk_Management_and_Calculative_Cultures.
Oliveira, D. P. R. (2007). Planejamento estratégico: conceitos, metodologia e práticas (23ª ed.). Atlas.
Oliveira, V. G., & Abib, G. (2023). Risco na administração pública: uma revisão sistemática focada em uma agenda de pesquisas futuras. Revista de Administração Pública, 57 (6), e2022-0419. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220220419.
Palermo, T. (2014). Accountability and expertise in public sector risk management: a case study. Financial Accountability & Management, 30 (3), 322-341. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12039.
Paquette, S., Jaeger, P. T., & Wilson, S. C. (2010). Identifying the security risks associated with governmental use of cloud computing. Government Information Quarterly, 27 (3), 245-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.01.002.
Ramos, C. (2018). Gestão de riscos corporativos. Como integrar a gestão dos riscos com a estratégia, a governança e o controle interno? (2ª ed.). César Ramos.
Sampieri, R. H., Collado, C. F., & Lucio, P. B. (2013). Metodologia de Pesquisa (5ª ed.). Penso.
Santos, P. O. L., Silva, A. P. B., Neto, J. S., & Sousa Júnior, R. T. (2020). Proposta de construção de modelo de maturidade e, governança e gestão de TIC. Revista Eletrônica de Administração, 26 (2). https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-2311.291.97046.
Silva, D. A., Silva, J. A., Alves, G. F., & Santos, C. D. (2021). Gestão de riscos no setor público: revisão bibliométrica e proposta de agenda de pesquisa. Revista do Serviço Público, 72 (4), 824-854. https://doi.org/10.21874/rsp.v72.i4.3991.
Souza, F. S. R. N., Braga, M. V. A., Cunha, A. S. M., & Sales, P. D. B. (2020). Incorporação de modelos internacionais de gerenciamento de riscos na normativa federal. Revista de Administração Pública, 54 (1), 59-78. https://periodicos.fgv.br/rap/article/view/80970.
United Kingdom. (2001). The Orange Book: management of risk – principles and concepts. HM Treasury. UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ orange-book.
United Kingdom. (2009). Risk Management Assessment Framework: a Tool for Departments. HM Treasury. UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/ publications/management-of-risk-in-government-framework.
Woods, M. (2009). A contingency theory perspective on the risk management control system within Birmingham City Council. Management Accounting Research, 20 (1), 69-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2008.10.003.
Yin, R. K. (2005). Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos (3ª ed.). Bookman.
Zangirolami-Raimundo, J., Echeimberg, J. O., & Leone, C. (2018). Tópicos de metodologia de pesquisa: estados de corte transversal. Journal of Human Growth and Development, 28 (3), 356-360. https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.152198.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Bruno Cesar Gomes da Rocha, Carlos André de Melo Alves, Gustavo Abib, Francisco Antonio Coelho Junior
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The author must ensure:
- that there is complete consensus among all co-authors to approve the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
- that their work is original, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, these have been duly acknowledged.
Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. RCA reserves the right to use software or any other methods of plagiarism detection.
All submissions received for evaluation in the RCA journal are screened for plagiarism and self-plagiarism. Plagiarism identified in manuscripts during the evaluation process will result in the submission being archived. In the event of plagiarism being identified in a manuscript published in the journal, the Editor-in-Chief will conduct a preliminary investigation and, if necessary, retract it.
Authors grant RCA exclusive rights of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons (CC BY) 4.0 International License.
Authors are authorized to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository, on a personal website, publishing a translation, or as a chapter in a book), with an acknowledgement of its authorship and initial publication in this journal.
This license grants any user the right to:
Share – copy, download, print, or redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
According to the following terms:
Attribution – You must give appropriate credit (cite and reference), provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions – You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
