A Firm’s Operational Risk: Data Set and Empirical Evidence

Problem definition: A firm’s stakeholders would benefit from a quantitative measure of the managerial disclosure of its operational risk and the implications of this disclosure. However, a quantitative and scalable measure of a firm’s disclosed operational risk is unavailable. Thus, the firm’s stakeholders remain unaware of its disclosed operational risk and the risk’s implications. Methodology/results: U.S. law requires a public firm to textually disclose its operational and nonoperational risks in Item 1A of its annual report (i.e., Form 10-K). We train 64 transformer models on U.S. public firms’ Item 1A text to score 131,920 firm-years (16,959 firms, 2005 to 2024) on eight risk factors: (1) accounting, (2) finance, (3) international, (4) legal, (5) management, (6) marketing, (7) operations, and (8) technology. We measure each transformer’s performance on eight metrics. Next, our Python code retains each risk factor’s best-performing transformer (among the eight). Subsequently, our regression estimates report that a firm’s disclosed operational risk is positively associated with its operational cost and that its disclosed nonoperational risk strengthens this positive association, thus supporting our two hypotheses. Our OSF repository includes an Excel file that contains a data dictionary and count and probability scores of the eight risk factors for 131,920 firm-years (16,959 firms, 2005 to 2024). The repository also includes our Python code file and trained models’ files. Managerial implications: First, our empirical evidence informs managers and corporate stakeholders that a firm’s disclosed operational and nonoperational risks are associated with its operational cost, thus showcasing disclosure’s relevance. Second, our Excel data file provides stakeholders with eight risk factors for 131,920 firm-years (16,959 firms, 2005 to 2024). Third, one can also use our Python code files and trained transformers to measure risk reflected in other sources of firm-generated text (e.g., managers’ answers in earnings calls, CEO interviews, and press releases). Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2025.0134 .

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management
Published
2025-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2025.0134
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Risk Management in Financial Firms
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.91
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Firm’s Operational Risk: Data Set and Empirical Evidence

Vivek Astvansh, Joseph Simpson
1 citations
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management
Risk Management in Financial Firms
3.91
article

A Firm’s Operational Risk: Data Set and Empirical Evidence

Vivek Astvansh, Joseph Simpson
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Problem definition: A firm’s stakeholders would benefit from a quantitative measure of the managerial disclosure of its operational risk and the implications of this disclosure. However, a quantitative and scalable measure of a firm’s disclosed operational risk is unavailable. Thus, the firm’s stakeholders remain unaware of its disclosed operational risk and the risk’s implications. Methodology/results: U.S. law requires a public firm to textually disclose its operational and nonoperational risks in Item 1A of its annual report (i.e., Form 10-K). We train 64 transformer models on U.S. public firms’ Item 1A text to score 131,920 firm-years (16,959 firms, 2005 to 2024) on eight risk factors: (1) accounting, (2) finance, (3) international, (4) legal, (5) management, (6) marketing, (7) operations, and (8) technology. We measure each transformer’s performance on eight metrics. Next, our Python code retains each risk factor’s best-performing transformer (among the eight). Subsequently, our regression estimates report that a firm’s disclosed operational risk is positively associated with its operational cost and that its disclosed nonoperational risk strengthens this positive association, thus supporting our two hypotheses. Our OSF repository includes an Excel file that contains a data dictionary and count and probability scores of the eight risk factors for 131,920 firm-years (16,959 firms, 2005 to 2024). The repository also includes our Python code file and trained models’ files. Managerial implications: First, our empirical evidence informs managers and corporate stakeholders that a firm’s disclosed operational and nonoperational risks are associated with its operational cost, thus showcasing disclosure’s relevance. Second, our Excel data file provides stakeholders with eight risk factors for 131,920 firm-years (16,959 firms, 2005 to 2024). Third, one can also use our Python code files and trained transformers to measure risk reflected in other sources of firm-generated text (e.g., managers’ answers in earnings calls, CEO interviews, and press releases). Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2025.0134 .

Manufacturing & Service Operations ManagementVol. 28(1)
Indiana University Bloomington (US), Virginia Tech (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Risk Management in Financial Firms
3.91
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.