The Relationship Between Risk Management And Firm Efficiency in the Georgian Manufacturing Industry: A Data Envelopment Analysis Approach
Abstract
This study explores the relationship between corporate risk management (RM) practices and firm efficiency in the Georgian manufacturing sector—an area where empirical evidence remains scarce. While the theoretical value of RM is widely recognised, its measurable impact on firms' resource use in producing economic outputs has received limited attention, particularly in emerging economies.
The research applies a two-stage analytical approach. In the first stage, the researchers assessed the relative efficiency of 105 Georgian manufacturing firms in 2021 using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) under both Constant Returns to Scale (CCR) and Variable Returns to Scale (BCC) models, in both input- and output-oriented forms. The researchers tested seven model specifications that incorporated financial indicators, including assets, expenses, equity, debt, and income. A specialised two-stage DEA further separated operational efficiency (transforming resources into sales) from financial efficiency (turning sales into profit).
In the second stage, efficiency scores were regressed on comprehensive RM disclosure scores (ranging from 0 to 10) derived from the ISO 31000 and COSO ERM frameworks. The analysis found no statistically significant relationship between RM scores and DEA-based efficiency measures across any of the tested models.
The DEA results revealed significant heterogeneity in performance, with a wide dispersion of efficiency scores across the sample. The two-stage DEA indicated that, on average, firms were less efficient at converting sales into net income than at generating sales from initial inputs. Overall, the findings suggest that, within Georgia's manufacturing industry, formal risk management systems—at least as reflected in disclosure quality—do not have a clear or direct link to short-term operational or financial efficiency.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Charnes, A., Cooper, W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429–444. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8
2. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078–1092. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078
3. Wanke, P., & Barros, C. P. (2015). Efficiency drivers in Brazilian insurance: A two-stage DEA meta frontier-data mining approach. Economic Modelling, 53, 8–22. doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2015.11.005
4. Florio, C., & Leoni, G. (2016). Enterprise risk management and firm performance: The Italian case. The British Accounting Review, 49(1), 56–74. doi: 10.1016/j.bar.2016.08.003
5. Hoyt, R. E., & Liebenberg, A. P. (2011). The value of enterprise risk management. Journal of Risk & Insurance, 78(4), 795–822. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6975.2011.01413.x
6. Mikes, A., & Kaplan, R. S. (2013). Managing Risks: towards a contingency theory of enterprise risk management. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2311293
7. Tone, K. (2001). A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 130(3), 498–509. doi: 10.1016/s0377-2217(99)00407-5
8. Bowlin, W. F. (1998). Measuring Performance: An Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). The Journal of Cost Analysis, 15(2), 3–27. doi: 10.1080/08823871.1998.10462318
9. Jung, S., Son, J., Kim, C., & Chung, K. (2023). Efficiency Measurement Using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) in Public Healthcare: Research Trends from 2017 to 2022. Processes, 11(3), 811. doi: 10.3390/pr11030811
10. Portela, M. C. A. S., Thanassoulis, E., & Simpson, G. (2004). Negative data in DEA: a directional distance approach applied to bank branches. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55(10), 1111–1121. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601768
11. Simar, L., & Wilson, P. W. (2005). Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes. Journal of Econometrics, 136(1), 31–64. doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2005.07.009
12. Papke, L. E., & Wooldridge, J. M. (1996). Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables With an Application to 401 (K) Plan Participation Rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11(6), 619-632
13. Malmquist, S. (1953). Index numbers and indifference surfaces. Trabajos De Estadistica, 4(2), 209–242. doi: 10.1007/bf03006863
14. Veiga, G. L., De Lima, E. P., Frega, J. R., & Da Costa, S. E. G. (2021). A DEA-based approach to assess manufacturing performance through operations strategy lenses. International Journal of Production Economics, 235, 108072. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108072
15. Mao, S., Kremantzis, M. D., Kyrgiakos, L. S., & Vlontzos, G. (2022). R&D Performance Evaluation in the Chinese Food Manufacturing Industry Based on Dynamic DEA in the COVID-19 Era. Agriculture, 12(11), 1938. doi: 10.3390/agriculture12111938
16. Berishvili, V., & Mamedova, S. (2025). The Relationship between Risk Management and Firm Performance: Evidence from the Georgian Manufacturing Industry. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.5216357
17. Quang, L. V., Ngoc-Long, N., & Giang, P. X. (2024). Enterprise risk management and firm performance: Exploring the roles of knowledge, technology, and supply chain. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 22(2), 150–164. doi: 10.21511/ppm.22(2).2024.13
18. Resende, S., Monje‐Amor, A., & Calvo, N. (2024). Enterprise risk management and firm performance: The mediating role of corporate social responsibility in the European Union region. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(4), 2852–2864. doi: 10.1002/csr.2719
19. Sağlam, Ü. (2017). A two-stage data envelopment analysis model for efficiency assessments of 39 states' wind power in the United States. Energy Conversion and Management, 146, 52–67. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2017.05.023
20. Chen, Y., Cook, W. D., Li, N., & Zhu, J. (2008). Additive efficiency decomposition in two-stage DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 196(3), 1170–1176. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2008.05.011
21. Kao, C. (2014). Network data envelopment analysis: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 239(1), 1–16. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.02.039
22. ISO. (2018). ISO 31000:2018 Risk management — Guidelines. Retrieved from https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html#lifecycle
23. Jayantha, C. (2018). COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework and a Study of ERM in the Indian Context. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328686591_COSO_Enterprise_Risk_Management_ERM_Framework_and_a_Study_of_ERM_in_Indian_Context
24. Rampini, G. H. S., & Berssaneti, F. T. (2022). Similarities and differences between COSO ERM and ISO 31000: descriptive and content analyses. Anais Do Encontro Nacional De Engenharia De Produção. doi: 10.14488/enegep2022_tn_st_387_1915_43353
25. Dickinson, G. (2001). Enterprise Risk Management: Its origins and conceptual Foundation. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Issues and Practice, 26(3), 360–366. doi: 10.1111/1468-0440.00121
26. Pagach, D. P., & Warr, R. S. (2010). The effects of enterprise risk management on firm performance. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1155218
27. Ramlee, R., & Ahmad, N. (2015). Panel Data Analysis on the Effect of Establishing the Enterprise Risk Management on Firms' Performances. Proceedings of 4th European Business Research Conference, 72-76.
28. Halim, E. H., Mustika, G., Sari, R. N., Anugerah, R., & Mohd-Sanusi, Z. (2017). Corporate governance practices and financial performance: The mediating effect of risk management committee at manufacturing firms. Journal Of International Studies, 10(4), 272–289. doi: 10.14254/2071-8330.2017/10-4/21
Article Metrics
Metrics powered by PLOS ALM
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2025 Vakhtang Berishvili

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.




