From basics to boardroom: A holistic approach to ERM education

Dumm, Randy; Hubbel, Michael; Külpp, Leonard Article — Published Version From basics to boardroom: A holistic approach to ERM education Risk Management and Insurance Review Provided in Cooperation with: John Wiley & Sons Suggested Citation: Dumm, Randy; Hubbel, Michael; Külpp, Leonard (2025) : From basics to boardroom: A holistic approach to ERM education, Risk Management and Insurance Review, ISSN 1540-6296, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, Vol. 28, Iss. 3, pp. 471-492, https://doi.org/10.1111/rmir.70020 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/329791 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ DOI: 10.1111/rmir.70020 TEACHING CASE STUDY From basics to boardroom: A holistic approach to ERM education Randy Dumm 1 |Michael Hubbel 2 |Leonard Külpp 3 1 The Baldwin Group School of Risk Management and Insurance, Muma College of Business, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA 2 Department of Risk, Actuarial Science, Healthcare Management, and Legal Studies, Fox School of Business and Management, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA 3 Munich Risk and Insurance Center, LMU Munich School of Management, Munich, Germany Correspondence Leonard Külpp, Munich Risk and Insurance Center, LMU Munich School of Management, Munich, Germany. Email: [email protected] Abstract The case study method of learning has long been a teaching approach that uses a form of experiential learning to allow students to make the connection between classroom learning and real‐world applications. Cases such as those published by the Harvard Business Review utilize detailed historical information, financial data, and other relevant data, while others are created to highlight an existing set of problems or issues that also support or enhance the traditional lecture. In this paper, we present a course concept that provides a framework for multiple learning experiences where case studies build on core knowledge to prepare the student for real‐ time experiential learning opportunities based on live interactions with experts during company visits. The case studies serve to bridge the gap between traditional lectures and company visits and are complemented by the FM risk management game, online quizzes, and pre‐visit company research projects. While our paper is based on an Enterprise Risk Management course in a specific geographic market, we believe that the framework of online learning, case studies, and on‐site experiential learning is applicable in different locations and settings. Risk Management and Insurance Review. 2025;28:471–492. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/rmir | 471 This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2025 The Author(s). Risk Management and Insurance Review published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Risk and Insurance Association. 1|INTRODUCTION The educational sector has faced unprecedented challenges in recent years, marked by the global disruption of the COVID‐19 pandemic and the rapid emergence of Generative AI into mainstream awareness. These developments significantly impacted traditional teaching methods, necessitating alternate strategies to engage students effectively and deliver comprehensive instructional content. In response to such challenges, Lobos et al. (2023) highlight the importance of adaptability, digital proficiency, and the integration of practical experiences in academic curricula, particularly spotlighting the transformative effects of the COVID‐19 pandemic on educational paradigms. Similarly, Rusandi et al. (2023) delve into the problems introduced by the rapid emergence of Generative AI, stressing the need for educators to foster an environment that enhances students' critical thinking and social skills. Together, these perspectives highlight the benefits of considering educational strategies that are not only more holistic but also anticipate new technologies and evolving demands of future learning environments. The purpose of this article is to share an innovative approach to risk management education that incorporates different teaching methods within a specific course. Building on the case study approach highlighted in Hoyt et al. (2010), we present a course concept that utilizes a building block approach that incorporates online learning, focused case study applications, and experiential learning through a series of on‐site engagements with risk management professionals. Focused case studies play an important role in this approach, offering an effective means to engage students by providing a practical and targeted application of theoretical knowledge. While none of the individual elements of this approach are novel on their own, their distinctive combination within a single course provides a fresh perspective on an alternative option to risk management education, where case studies provide the foundation that enhances the on‐site, applied learning experience for students. 2|COURSE STRUCTURE The course is structured into four modules: Module I builds an ERM foundation, Module II utilizes case studies to examine specific risk management and ERM topics, Module III includes experiential learning through meetings with risk professionals, and Module IV deliverables provide the opportunity to evaluate learning, critical thinking, and written communications skills. Figure 1highlights the learning principles, objectives, and learning methods for each Module. In more general terms, Module I is an online module whose purpose is to provide students with a base level of knowledge about risk management. In addition to material on traditional risk management, Module I provides coverage of the ERM process and its implementation. Module I also provides coverage of the role of ERM in supporting firm strategic goals and objectives. Students work through videos, slides, and reading materials, and can monitor their progress through interactive quizzes. An example of a Canvas page for one section of the online module is shown below in Figure 2. Module II is important in this course for several reasons. Students from this course come from Europe, Asia, and the U.S., and they meet for the first time in person at the beginning of this Module. Module II also reflects a change in teaching method and focus, where case studies provide students with the opportunity to apply Module I foundational learning in a controlled 472 | DUMM ET AL. environment. The goal of Module II is to further prepare students to engage in experiential learning activities that are part of the third module, namely the corporate visits. As noted above, Module II incorporates cases selected to reinforce key risk management or ERM principles or evaluate specific applications of traditional risk management or ERM. 1 Learning in Module II expands further on concepts learned in Module I or in the case studies, as the faculty conducts FM's risk management game, where groups must allocate a fixed budget to various risk control projects. 2 This exercise allows students to apply what they learned from the case studies in an interactive, controlled environment and teaches them skills in prioritizing risk controls and making informed decisions on project implementation. The transition from Module II to Module III includes targeted company research projects where student groups evaluate and report on companies that the class will be meeting with in Module III. 3 Here, the company's annual reports serve as the basis of investigation where the student are asked to report on their company in terms of its history, products/operations, financials, material risks, and risk management practices as disclosed in the annual report. The students are also asked to investigate and report on recent significant events that are related to firm risk. In addition to preparing the class for upcoming visits, the project also serves to strengthen students' analytical, communication, and presentation skills while providing insights into an organization's approach to risk management or ERM. The objective of this transition is to ensure that students arrive at the corporate visits in Module III with a greater ability to engage and ask questions. In Module III, students interact directly with risk professionals. The participating companies span diverse industries and vary significantly in regulatory requirements, organizational size, and operational maturity levels. 4 Topics range from detailed descriptions of the companies' ERM systems and strategies for implementing ERM frameworks to specialized areas such as risk management approaches for energy trading and AI governance. Visits usually incorporate a standardized ERM component focusing on the company's ERM framework, setting the stage for subsequent cross‐company comparisons of risk management and ERM practices. The FIGURE 1 Overview of course structure and teaching goals. 1 See Appendix Cfor a list of the case studies and why they are used in this course. 2 See Appendix Dfor more information on the FM risk management game. 3 See Appendix F.1 for a sample instruction. 4 See Appendix Efor a list of companies that have participated in our seminar. DUMM ET AL. | 473 FIGURE 2 Example of a canvas page. 474 | DUMM ET AL. structure of the company visits has evolved significantly since our seminar's inception over a decade ago, when corporate site visits were uncommon in academic curricula. While such visits have become increasingly prevalent, the systematic preparation of students through applied learning experiences, particularly case studies, has emerged as a critical success factor, ensuring they can interact meaningfully with executives. In the final module, we incorporate a feedback loop where students meet with the course instructors in a casual setting to reflect on their learning from the first three modules. Students are then given 1 week to prepare an executive summary that synthesizes and analyzes the insights gained from the visits. 5 This exercise refines their writing skills and encourages them to reflect on their learning and experiences. The progressive structure ensures that students build competence systematically, moving from theoretical understanding through controlled application to real‐world engagement. 3|BENEFITS FOR STUDENTS, COMPANIES, AND SCHOOLS The ERM course generates benefits across multiple stakeholder groups. The course's active learning environment supports comprehensive student development from baseline knowledge in Module I through case study applications in Module II to experiential learning in Module III. Evidence of the success of this progression appears in several ways. Assessment scores improve from Module I to the final evaluations. 6 Additionally, company testimonials note the quality of student questioning and professional demeanor, 7 and the positive student feedback 8 indicates that this approach is effective in enhancing the understanding of the course materials. Critical thinking development becomes observable through the written reports, FM risk management game interactions, company research presentations, and professional discussions with executives, where students must articulate informed perspectives. The interactions with senior executives provide students with perspectives on ERM that are rarely available to students or even many industry professionals, creating substantial networking and professional development opportunities. For some students, this will translate into internship and employment opportunities. One testimonial, in particular, highlights the tangible benefits of the course, as shortly after finishing the course, this student decided to pursue a career in risk management and successfully transitioned into a job within the risk management sector. This type of professional success is not an isolated case, as numerous students have reported similar career opportunities. The course has also been beneficial to the participating companies. Testimonials from these companies have highlighted the advantages of interacting with students who are up to date with the latest risk management theories. Companies share their approach to ERM and have indicated that they not only value the fresh perspectives and solutions that students provide, but also appreciate the access to a pool of talented individuals. In terms of course development, 5 See Appendix F.2 for a sample instruction. 6 Grade trends reveal consistent improvement following our COVID‐19 pandemic reforms, as shown in Figure 3. Post‐implementation final grade averages of 85%–90% (equivalent to 1.3 in German grading) reflect exceptionally high learning outcomes. 7 See Appendices B.1 and B.2 for a list of comments from company representatives. 8 See Appendix B.3 for testimonials from prior students. DUMM ET AL. | 475 the corporate visits offer insights into important changes in risk management practices that faculty can incorporate into future iterations of the course. There is a potential benefit for programs that are Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accredited or are pursuing accreditation. Although this course was not designed with AACSB standards in mind, we suggest that the course features support AACSB standards four to seven. Unlike traditional company visits that often lack systematic integration, in our implementation of the course, the topic‐focused company presentations directly support AACSB Standard 4.1 by delivering current, relevant, forward‐looking, globally oriented content through participation of international companies. At the same time, case studies prepare students to engage meaningfully with these current issues. The course supports Standard 4.3 through extensive experiential learning components, including the FM risk management game, case studies, and company visits that provide hands‐on application of theoretical concepts. Our approach also supports Standard 4.4's learner‐to‐learner and learner‐to‐faculty engagement requirements through group activities (case studies, FM risk management game, group presentations), informal debriefing sessions with instructors, and professional engagement during corporate visits. While Standard 5.1's formal Assurance of Learning processes are not currently implemented, our existing assessment framework (online quizzes, presentations, company interactions, executive summaries) could easily be formalized to meet Assurance of Learning requirements, and our constant exchange with industry partners facilitates measurement of postgraduation outcomes. The course demonstrates alignment with Standard 6.2 through documented postgraduation success, evidenced by company testimonials, executive feedback, and student reports of improved employment prospects and internship opportunities resulting from course participation. Additionally, our approach supports Standard 7.3 by ensuring faculty exposure to diverse perspectives through varied company representatives and industry contexts. Finally, Standard 7.4 is addressed through consistent evidence of teaching impact: high student satisfaction, academic performance, and positive post‐course outcomes. 4|TRANSFERABILITY The ERM course concept can be successfully implemented across diverse educational environments and institutional contexts. The course concept provides a flexible template that educators can customize to supplement existing risk management courses, utilizing widely available online resources and compatible case studies that may already exist in educators' FIGURE 3 Average grades over the years, with black bars indicating standard errors. Grades follow the German system, which ranges from 1.0 (very good) to 4.0 (sufficient) and uses a 5.0 for a fail. 476 | DUMM ET AL. curricula. This adaptability makes the framework particularly valuable for Risk Management and Insurance programs seeking to enhance their experiential learning components regardless of institutional size, geographic location, or resource constraints. The course, as described above, works well for a class size of up to 25 students. Most of the case studies used in this course are publicly available online, providing educators with immediate access to proven teaching materials. However, the framework offers flexibility for educators to either employ these existing case studies or integrate similar ones that align with their specific course objectives and regional contexts. Cases focusing on emerging topics such as Catastrophe Risk Management (Neale & Medders, 2025), Generative AI governance, evolving regulatory frameworks, or climate change adaptation can provide valuable contemporary supplements to established case studies. An essential feature of our approach is incorporating company visits and talks. While the difficulty of organizing these will vary by school, they should be feasible for any institution. 9 Large urban universities benefit from proximity to diverse industries and established corporate networks, allowing them to leverage metropolitan locations to secure company visits across multiple sectors, from Fortune 500 corporations with sophisticated ERM frameworks to innovative Fintech startups navigating emerging risk landscapes. Urban programs can typically support larger cohorts while maintaining the intensive, interactive experience that characterizes effective experiential learning. In contrast, small regional schools can successfully implement this framework through strategic partnerships and creative resource utilization. While these institutions may have fewer local corporate options, they often enjoy closer relationships with regional businesses. Therefore, they can develop deep partnerships with local insurance agents, community banks, healthcare systems, and manufacturing companies. The intimate scale of smaller programs can actually enhance the learning experience, allowing for more personalized interactions with corporate partners and deeper individual engagement with course materials. Technical and professional schools can adapt the framework to emphasize practical skills development and immediate industry applications. These programs might focus more heavily on operational risk management, regulatory compliance, or sector‐specific risk challenges, tailoring company visits to align with their students' career trajectories in specialized fields such as cybersecurity, supply chain management, or environmental risk assessment. The framework's flexibility allows each institutional type to emphasize aspects most relevant to their student populations while maintaining the core experiential learning benefits. Based on our experience, incorporating between six and nine company presentations strikes an appropriate balance, providing students with comprehensive exposure to risk management practices across various industries without creating excessive logistical burden. This range has been refined over time based on student feedback and instructor experience, reflecting our commitment to optimizing the learning experience. For programs implementing this approach for the first time, beginning with three to five company visits provides a manageable starting point while building the network of cooperating organizations. As relationships develop and institutional capacity grows, programs can gradually increase to the optimal six to nine company engagements. Depending on the length of the course, course scheduling, and available resources, expanding to more than ten company meetings is possible, though not 9 Even without existing corporate networks, implementing this course should be feasible, since companies generally demonstrate receptiveness to educational initiatives. DUMM ET AL. | 477 recommended. 10 The most effective approach combines on‐site company visits with university‐ based presentations. While visits to company premises provide students with a richer experience, university‐based talks offer significant logistical advantages and can accommodate larger groups more easily. When in‐person meetings are not feasible due to geographic, scheduling, or resource constraints, video conference presentations provide a viable alternative, though they may slightly reduce engagement levels compared to face‐to‐face interactions. Company selection should prioritize diversity across multiple dimensions to maximize learning outcomes. 11 This means engaging organizations ranging from large insurance firms with mature ERM programs to noninsurance startups navigating unique risk landscapes, from traditional manufacturing companies to technology firms addressing emerging digital risks. Selection criteria should consider industry variety, organizational maturity levels, and risk management sophistication. Geographic diversity also enhances learning, exposing students to different regulatory environments, market conditions, and cultural approaches to risk management. Beyond ERM courses, this framework can be effectively adapted for various related curricula. Insurance operations courses could include cases such as the one by Pan et al. (2025) and the Health Insurance Game by Ellis and Esson (2024). Corporate visits could then range from small local brokers and Insurtech startups to established mid‐sized carriers across different lines of business, as well as large reinsurers and captives. Corporate finance programs could use cases such as the one by Rosenthal et al. (2021) and then emphasize financial risk management through visits to banks, investment firms, and corporate treasury departments of various nonfinancial companies. The key to successful adaptation lies in incorporating applied learning experiences before the corporate visits and ensuring broad industry exposure while maintaining a central thematic focus throughout company presentations. This framework particularly lends itself to multi‐school collaborations, as demonstrated in our current implementation 12 , where participating institutions maintain flexibility to build courses that benefit all participants. Such collaborations can take several forms, with schools working independently to leverage local resources for company visits while sharing online modules and case studies. Alternatively, institutions can coordinate to host joint company visit series that all participating schools attend, either virtually or through student travel arrangements. Multi‐ school partnerships prove particularly beneficial for smaller institutions, providing the scale necessary to arrange company visits in major financial centers while sharing associated costs and logistical complexity. Regional consortia of Risk Management and Insurance programs can pool resources to bring industry executives to central locations or simultaneously coordinate virtual presentation series that benefit multiple student cohorts. 5|CONCLUSION This article outlines an educational framework that integrates theoretical knowledge with practical application to maximize the educational value of case studies and offer a comprehensive learning experience. Illustrated through an ERM course example, this concept deepens students' understanding of complex issues in modern corporate environments. The course 10 We have run the course with 10 company meetings in the past, but this increases organizational complexity, and students report being overwhelmed and having difficulties managing their overall schedule. 11 See Appendix Efor a list of companies that have participated in our seminar. 12 Currently, our ERM course is a collaborative effort involving three universities. 478 | DUMM ET AL. Dr. Thomas Wilson, Former Chief Risk Officer at Allianz Group & CEO, President and Country Manager, Allianz Ayudhya “The ability to participate in Board discussions depends on the individual's confidence level, their willingness to “stand out”and ask questions openly and not rely on being an “expert.”There are many professionals who, after even 5 years of on‐the‐job training, may not have the confidence and personality trait needed to engage fully in a Board discussion. Having said this, I believe that the course offers an excellent opportunity to develop the capabilities by exposing the students to professionals in a quasi‐business environment. Although my time with these students is more limited than with those in the Master's course I teach, I believe that the students are generally high quality and are comparable to full‐time Master's students I teach in terms of quality of questions and interaction.” Nodjan Abolkhirian, Manager, PwC “The students who come out of the course really stand out for their proactive and in‐ depth approach. Their questions are usually already at a very advanced level, which indicates that they not only understand the basics, but, for example, also question AI governance use cases in real‐life scenarios. When interacting, the course participants always stand out for their inquisitive nature, which often goes beyond what we know from other students and interns from other courses of the same type. This suggests that the mix of online modules, cases, business games, and company visits is effective in encouraging more critical and conceptual thinking. Over the years, we have noticed a significant increase in the students' independence and self‐confidence in their approach. They seem to be increasingly better prepared to independently prepare and present complex problem solutions, such as our AI Health Check. This boost in development could well be related to the structure and elements of your course, which seems to not only impart knowledge but also strongly encourages the practical application and integration of this knowledge into the professional context.” Testimonials from students Student 1 “Throughout the course, I found immense value in the diverse range of companies visited, which provided a comprehensive view of enterprise risk management across different sectors. This exposure not only broadened my understanding but also underscored the significance of risk management in all its facets. Engaging with these companies not only deepened my appreciation for the complexities of risk management but also reshaped my perspective on how businesses operate within today's dynamic economic landscape. Witnessing firsthand how risk management strategies are implemented differently highlighted the adaptability and critical nature of these practices. DUMM ET AL. | 485 Moreover, the course fostered a proactive learning environment, blending theoretical concepts with practical applications. This interactive approach not only enhanced my comprehension of enterprise risk management but also nurtured skills in critical thinking and innovation. Following the course, my enthusiasm for risk management was further fueled, leading me to pursue opportunities with companies like Allianz and MEAG. These experiences solidified my passion for the field and inspired me to pursue advanced studies in economics, focusing on finance and insurance at LMU. Personally, for me, the course not only provided a platform for learning but also sparked a journey of personal and professional growth. I am deeply grateful for the opportunity and look forward to applying the knowledge and skills acquired to contribute meaningfully to the field of risk management.” Student 2 “A highlight of the course was obviously the firm visits, allowing us to turn the hypothetical we had learned into practical knowledge. I thought it was good to have us create extensive presentations over some of the firms we visited, as this allowed us to ask more in‐depth questions during our firm visits. Providing videos alongside our in‐ class lectures also helped us get a better grasp of the content itself. This content was also extremely applicable and interesting (especially noticeable during our firm visits), which is a nice change to much of the merely theoretical content we learn during usual courses at German universities.” Student 3 “Short videos to raise the appetite. Interesting company visits ‐very diverse 3 weeks course ‐very intense engagement.” Student 4 “Company visits give us the opportunities to see what real‐life business looks like, we can see the theories teach in class used and the variation to cope with different companies and industries.” 486 | DUMM ET AL. Student 5 “What I liked about the course was learning about different companies in different sectors and their risk management processes, as well as real‐life cases. The first week, which focused on theory and learning key concepts, was also very well structured and enabled me to better apprehend the rest of the course.” Student 6 “I liked the different materials that were provided. Also, the different company visits and the possible discussions. The group was very nice and diverse. I appreciated the possibility to openly talk about any topic with the professors and students.” APPENDIX C: OVERVIEW OF CASE STUDIES Enterprise risk management at Hydro One (A) Authors: Anette Mikes Publisher: Harvard Business Publishing Publication Date: July 2008 (Revised January 17, 2012) Pages: 22 Overview and Educational Value: Hydro One is a public utility in Ontario, Canada. The case is used to identify and assess risks, and create risk maps. The case study includes a number of helpful exhibits including an impact matrix, an impact‐probability risk map, and corporate risk profile trends. We also use the case to gain insights into the drivers of ERM at Hydro One, structuring ERM and monitoring its effectiveness, the use of the Delphi Method to identify and prioritize Hydro One risks, and risk‐based project investment decisions. Enterprise risk management at textron Authors: James Laney and Dr. Laureen Regan Publication Date: August 2008 Pages: 4 Overview and Educational Value: Textron is an industrial conglomerate in the defense and aerospace sectors in the United States. We use this case study to focus on managing the risk of supply chains, specifically how to screen and prioritize supply chains critical to Textron's manufacturing operations. The case also provides a brief description of the integration of ERM in Textron's governance structure. Environmental risk management at Chevron Corp Authors: Forest L. Reinhardt, Monica Mandelli, and Jennifer Burns Publisher: Harvard Business Publishing Publication Date: March 1999 (Revised March 31, 1999) Pages: 28 DUMM ET AL. | 487 Overview and Educational Value: Chevron is a major, global oil company based in the United States. This case focuses on environmental risk management, and how that is used to support Chevron's corporate strategy. The case focuses on the implementation of a formal risk analysis, prioritization tool, and decision‐making model. We use the case in two discussions: integration of risk management in corporate strategy and getting operational support, and risk management decision‐making and monitoring. We use this case along with Chevron's most recent annual 10K report submitted to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. Honeywell, Inc. and integrated risk management Authors: Lisa Meulbroek and Jonathan Barnett Publisher: Harvard Business Publishing Publication Date: February 2000 (Revised July 11, 2000) Pages: 22 Overview and Educational Value: Honeywell is a global company based in the United States that creates technologies for energy, safety, security, air travel, and productivity organizations. We use this case to focus on initiatives to integrate risk management, beginning with an innovative combination of traditionally insured risks with financial risks in one insurance contract, illustrating the “portfolio effect,”and analyzing the total cost of risk under Honeywell's current and proposed insurance programs. The case includes a number of helpful exhibits including the risk profiles of seven of Honeywell's competitors with their volatilities (an indicator of risk assumed by each competitor), retentions, and coverage limits in the current and proposed insurance programs, and the total cost of risk with standard deviations under the current and proposed programs. Tetra tech EC and risk management Authors: Donna Fletcher and Susan Newell Publisher: Harvard Business Publishing Publication Date: May 2007 Pages: 14 Overview and Educational Value: Tetra Tech EC is a remediation firm in the United States specializing in the cleanup of contaminated sites. Students learn about the project‐based approach to risk management, how an organization determines its risk appetite, how it integrates risk management in the strategic decision‐making process, how Tetra Tech inculcates risk management in its organization, how it aligns with risk management standards, lessons learned methodology, ethics in risk management, the decision‐making process and how it compares and differs with the decision‐making process in the Chevron case study. APPENDIX D: FM RISK MANAGEMENT GAME The FM risk management game was created by FM in 1990 to conduct workshops for risk managers. It was recently updated and Michael Hubbel further adjusted it for the use with students Figure D1. The scenario uses a fictional organization with five subsidiaries and focuses on property risk control and qualifying for highly protected risk rating for deep discounts in insurance pricing. Twenty risk control recommendations are provided with loss expectancies, costs to implement, and the number of months to complete the projects. Teams are created and each team is given the same budget each “year”in a 4‐year cycle to prioritize and implement risk control projects. 488 | DUMM ET AL. After risk control decisions are made, three randomly selected loss scenarios are described (based on real scenarios) Figure D2. The competing groups are scored on their results after measuring the impact of the losses on their team, based on the risk control measures that were adopted. The objectives of the game are to protect the group's corporation from property losses and reduce insurance premium when possible. The game has been programmed in an Excel spreadsheet to automatically score the performance of each team to determine a winning team for “bragging rights”and a certificate for team members. By participating in the game, students experience frustrations of budget limitations, and gain experience in prioritizing projects based on loss expectancies, costs FIGURE D1 FM risk management game structure. FIGURE D2 Instructions for the FM risk management game. DUMM ET AL. | 489 to implement, and time to complete. Students also learn that sometimes losses occur, whether or not risk control measures were adopted. The Loss Scenarios and the Excel spreadsheet can be found in the Online Appendix. APPENDIX E: PARTICIPATING COMPANIES ACROSS TIME (TABLE E1) TABLE E1 List of companies, their industries, and their presentation topics. Company name Industry Presentation topic Allianz Insurance Evolution and Current State of Allianz Group Risk Management Bayern LB Banking Risk Management at Bayern LB with a Focus on Large‐Scale Events BMW Financial Services Financial Services & Automotive Strategic Risk Management at BMW Bank with a Focus on ESG Risks Diehl Defence Defense & Aerospace Risk Management at Diehl Defence with a Focus on Long‐Term Projects E.ON Energy Risk Management at E.ON Munich Airport Transportation Risk Management at Munich Airport Munich Re Insurance Risk Management at Munich Re with a Focus on the Internal Model PwC Consulting Case Study: AI Governance Scalable Finance FinTech How to implement an Enterprise‐Wide Risk Management Framework with a Focus on Operational Risk Siemens Electronics, Industrial Equipment & Healthcare Risk Management at Siemens Stadtwerke München Energy & Utilities Risk Management for Energy Trading with a Focus on Liquidity Risk Swiss Life Insurance Risk Management at Swiss Life Swiss Re Insurance Risk Management at Swiss Re Telefónica Telecommunications Financial Risk Management at Telefónica with a Focus on Credit Risk Tesa Chemicals & Manufacturing Risk Management at Tesa Traton Automotive & Commercial Vehicles Manufacturing Enterprise Risk Management at Traton Uni Credit Banking Risk Management at Unicredit 490 | DUMM ET AL. APPENDIX F: EXAMPLE OF ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS Example of company research group project assignment instructions GROUP PROJECT Company Overview and Risk Presentations For this assignment, you will evaluate the annual reports filed by your companies and provide a 30 min presentation of your findings in a group of 2 to 3 students. The presentation should include a high‐level overview of the relevant financial results (e.g., key performance indicators, revenue, profits), operational information (e.g., customers, employees, business segments, key markets), and other information that you deem relevant (e.g., climate change, diversity). Thenextpartofthepresentationwillfocus on the risks and risk management process as discussed by the company. This will appear in its own part of the annual report and risk identified would be key risks. The last part of the presentation will be to report on important company‐related risk management issues that may have appear in the newspapers and trade publications within the past 6 months. •Resource 1: Annual Report •Resource 2: Sustainability Report Example of written assignment instructions WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT Executive Summaries of Company Visits Your firm is considering options as it looks to diversify, and one of those is in the risk management consulting and servicing area. You have been asked by senior management to attend a series of 10 meetings where a variety of firms share information on risk management at their organizations and then provide executive summaries (1 to 2 pages) on the eight meetings that capture both the differences in firm types and risk management processes and also a broad range of key risks. Note that management is just seeking information on risk management across firms and is not looking for an opinion on whether to expand into this area. Each summary should include: •A description of the meeting details (who you met with, location, and other relevant information). •A general overview of the company (what it does, where it operates, revenues, etc.). If the firm that you met with is part of a larger organization, reference that organization and provide relevant information on your subsidiary company. •A discussion of the process that the organization uses to manage its risk (e.g., does it use an ERM approach or something more basic? Does it use a framework for its processes? What types of internal controls does it employ?) •A listing, and where relevant, a brief description of the key risks of the organization. •A discussion of key risks (if any) that appear to be unique to that organization (e.g., you did not hear about it or them in other meetings) or appear to be unique to a particular segment (e.g., financial services, manufacturing, consulting). DUMM ET AL. | 491 Feel free to include any additional information that you deem relevant, but note that the maximum executive summary for each organization is two pages. Please also note that management is looking for clear and concise summaries, but these summaries should primarily be in paragraph form (i.e., use of bullets should be limited). In terms of formatting, use either single space or 1.5 spacing and 1‐inch margins, and make sure the font size is reasonable (e.g., 11 or 12 pica). The report is due 1 week after the last company meeting. 492 | DUMM ET AL.