The concept of risk

Definition 1

Risk is a cost expression of a probabilistic event that can lead to losses.

The greater the chance of making high profits, the higher the risk levels. Risks are formed when the actual and estimated data do not coincide with each other and can be both positive and negative. Making a profit is possible only if possible losses are foreseen and insured.

Risk functions

There are several risk functions. These include:

• Innovative, stimulating the search for non-traditional solutions to problems. Innovation leads the enterprise to competitiveness and rapid growth;
• Regulatory function, acting as a constructive or destructive, and aimed at obtaining results;
• Protective, expressed through a tolerant attitude towards failures, while realizing that risk is an integral part of any production;
• Analytical - a function that assumes the choice of one single correct solution from a set.

Remark 1

It should be noted that, despite the threats that risk carries, it is an integral part of making a profit. In this regard, the main task of the manager is not a complete rejection of risks, but the choice of a solution related to determining the possible development of risk situations.

Risk assessment

The set of analytical enterprises that make it possible to forecast the possibility of obtaining additional income, or to determine the amount of damage from a situation that has arisen, is a risk assessment. Risk assessment is carried out on the basis of qualitative quantitative analyses. They are carried out on the basis of an assessment of the influence of external and internal factors. Such an analysis is a rather time-consuming procedure, but it always bears fruit if it is carried out qualitatively.

If possible losses can be estimated and predicted in one way or another, then a quantitative assessment has been obtained. Speaking about the fact that the risk is measured by the value of losses, their random nature should be taken into account. To obtain data on the likelihood of a risky situation, an objective analysis is used.

Any type of risk has a mathematically expressed probability of the situation occurring. It is based on statistical data and can be calculated to a reasonable degree of accuracy. All possible consequences of any single risk must be known in order to calculate the quantitative consequences.

Expert risk assessment

Definition 2

An expert assessment is an opinion of experts on a given issue, performed according to a specially developed methodology.

Expert risk assessment involves the collection and study various estimates performed by the company's specialists or external experts, and concerning the probability of occurrence of certain losses. Such estimates should be based on taking into account all economic criteria and on statistical data. At a small amount indicators, the implementation of the method of expert assessments looks difficult.

The role of the method of expert assessments increases due to the variability of the influence of many economic processes. At certain stages, the role of such a method increases, at others it decreases many times over. An expert assessment can be obtained only in the case of a special study, as well as using the experience of other specialists in the field. In view of the many indicators that are often mutually exclusive, the method of expert assessments is used to construct quality criteria. The role of the human expert in this method is decisive.

Often in economics, the factors to be taken into account are so new and complex that there is not enough information about them, and the probability of a particular outcome cannot be estimated by statistical methods. Therefore, due to the lack or lack of necessary information, it is necessary to use expert methods.

The essence of the method of expert assessments lies in the rational organization of expert analysis of the problem with the quantitative assessment of judgments and the processing of their results. The generalized conclusions of experts are considered a solution to the problem.

The application of expert methods is quite wide. For example, expert risk assessment is carried out by specialists of banking institutions when granting loans. Various international agencies compile risk ratings, in particular, investment, country, political risks, investment attractiveness ratings, and the like.

In practice, apply individual and group (collective) expert assessments (survey).

Main purposes of use individual expert assessments:

Forecasting the course of development of events and phenomena in the future, as well as their current assessment;

Analysis and generalization of the results provided by other experts;

Drawing up action scenarios;

Issuance of work permits for other professionals and organizations.

Collective peer reviews are usually less subjective and decisions

adopted on their basis, have a significant probability of implementation.

There are three main types of group expert procedures :

Open discussion of the issues raised, followed by open or closed voting;

Free expression without discussion and voting;

Closed discussion followed by closed voting or filling out expert survey questionnaires.

Methods of expert assessments are divided into axiomatic and straight.

Axiomatic Methods are based on the construction of the utility function of the control subject. At the same time, a statement is formed regarding the type of utility function, as well as its most important features. These statements are called axioms . All information received from the subject of management is considered as a means of testing the hypothesis about the form of the utility function. With the axiomatic approach, each multi-criteria solution provides an estimate of utility.

Direct Methods are based on the fact that the type of dependence of the utility function on assessments according to many criteria is set without theoretical justification, and the parameters of this dependence are either also set or directly evaluated by the subject of management.

The most common of the direct methods are:

- Weighted sum method of criteria evaluations. According to this method, the utility (V) multicriteria object is calculated by the formula:

where is the weight of the i-th criterion, measured on a quantitative scale;

Object valuation with and -th criterion ().

- Decision tree method : the subject of management gives estimates of utility and subjective probability for each of the solution options;

- Method brainstorming (see Section 3);

- Delphi method(See Section 3) .

General examination scheme includes the following main steps:

Selection of experts and formation of expert groups;

Formation of questions and compilation of questionnaires;

Working with experts;

Formation of rules for determining total marks based on the marks of individual experts;

Analysis and processing of expert assessments .

At selection of experts and formation of expert groups , based on the objectives of the expert survey, the structure of the expert group, the number of experts and their necessary individual qualities are determined. That is, the requirements for the specialization and qualification of experts, the required number of experts of each specialization and their total number in the group are determined. The quantitative and qualitative composition of experts is selected based on an analysis of the breadth of the problem, the reliability of estimates, the characteristics of experts and the cost of resources. Provided that experts are sufficiently reliable measurers of the degree of risk, with an increase in the number of experts, the accuracy of the results of the examination will also increase, but at the same time, the time and money spent on its implementation will increase.

At forming questions and compiling questionnaires it is necessary to comply with the rules that ensure compliance with the conditions conducive to the formation of an objective opinion by experts. To ensure that these conditions are met, the rules for conducting the survey and organizing the work of the expert group should be developed.

Working with experts includes three stages:

Experts are involved on an individual basis in order to clarify the object model, its parameters and indicators that are subject to expert assessment, clarify the wording of questions and terminology in the questionnaires, agree on the appropriateness of one or another form of presentation of tables of expert assessments and clarify groups of experts;

Experts are provided with questionnaires with an explanatory letter that describes the purpose of the work, the structure and procedure for constructing tables with examples;

After receiving the survey results, they are processed and analyzed.

When forming the rules for determining the total estimates for the rational use of information received from experts, it is necessary to turn it into a form convenient for further analysis.

Expert assessments can have different scales and units of measurement (points, percentages, physical assessments, etc.).

Analysis and processing of expert assessments involves streamlining the information received and presenting it in a form convenient for decision-making, as well as determining the consistency of the actions of experts and the reliability of expert assessments.

An important stage of expert procedures is assessment of the consistency of expert opinions and the reliability of expertise . The existing methods for determining the reliability of expert assessments are based on the assumption that if the actions of experts are consistent, the reliability of assessments is guaranteed. Most often, the coefficient of variation, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, and the concordance coefficient are used for this purpose.

Coefficient of concordance (consent) allows you to judge the degree of agreement between the opinions of experts and the probability of their assessments and is determined by the formula:

(15.74)

where is the actual variance of the total (ordered) estimates provided by the experts;

Dispersion of the total (ordered) estimates provided by experts in full agreement of opinions;

Evaluation given to the ι-th object j -th expert;

The total score received by / -th object; t - number of evaluated objects;

P - number of experts;

The average value of the total score for t facilities provided P experts with full agreement of opinions of experts.

The value of the concordance coefficient can vary from 0 to 1. When W = 0 - there is no consistency, that is, there is no connection between the experts' assessments; At - the agreement of opinions of experts is complete. When consider that the opinions of experts are more consistent than inconsistent.

If, in accordance with the accepted criteria, the opinions of experts can be considered agreed, then the assessments they provide are accepted and used in the process of preparing and implementing management decisions.

Example 15.24.

It is necessary to determine the degree of agreement between the opinions of experts based on the results of their assessment of seven investment objects, which are given in Table. 15.14.

Table 15.14

Expert assessments of investment objects

Investment object number	Expert assessments, points					Evaluation of the object with full agreement of expert opinions, points

decision

1. Determine the total ranks of importance for each investment object according to expert estimates:

Object "1": 4 + 6 + 4 + 4 + 3 = 21 points;

Object "2" 3 + 3 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 15 points;

Object "3": 2 + 2 + 1 + 2 + 2 = 9 points;

Object "4" 6 + 5 + 6 + 5 + 6 = 28 points;

Object "5" 1 + 1 + 3 + 1 + 1 = 7 points;

Object "6" 5 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 5 = 25baliv;

Object "7" 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 = 35 points.

So the highest total rank of importance (35 points) has the investment object "7", the smallest (7 points) - the object "5". That is, investing in object "7" is the most appropriate.

2. The total ranks of the importance of investment objects, provided that the opinions of experts are fully consistent:

Object "1": 5 ∙ 5 = 25 points;

Object "2" 3 5 = 15 points;

Object "C": 2 5 = 10 points;

Object "4" 6 5 = 30 points;

Object "5": 15 = 5 points;

Object "b": 4 5 = 20 points;

Object "7" 7 5 = 35 points.

With complete agreement of opinions, the object of expertise "7" will have the highest total rank of importance (35 points), the object "5" will have the lowest (5 points). That is, the most appropriate investment is in the object "7".

3. Determine the average value of the total score:

4. The actual variance of the total assessments of experts:

5. Dispersion of total estimates with full agreement of opinions of experts:

6. The coefficient of concordance is determined by the formula (15.74):

or 90%.

Since the value of the concordance coefficient (0.9) is higher than 0.5, then the opinions of experts can be considered agreed, and the estimates they provide can be used to develop and make management decisions.

Expert risk analysis is used at the initial stages of working with a project if the amount of initial information is insufficient for quantification efficiency (the error of results exceeds 30%) and risks of the project.

The advantages of expert risk analysis are: the absence of the need for accurate initial data and expensive software, the ability to evaluate before calculating the effectiveness of the project, as well as the simplicity of calculations. The main disadvantages include: difficulty in attracting independent experts and subjectivity of assessments.

The experts involved in the risk assessment should:

• - have access to all information about the project available to the developer;
• - have a sufficient level of creative thinking;
• - have the necessary level of knowledge in the relevant subject area;
• - be free from personal preferences regarding the project.

The expert method of risk assessment is based on the generalization of the thoughts of experienced entrepreneurs and specialists. At the same time, experts should supplement their own estimates with data on the probability of different sizes of losses.

The essence of this method is as follows:

• all possible causes (sources) of investment risk are identified;
• All identified causes are ranked according to the degree of significance (influence on investment risk), and for each of them a certain score and a weighting factor in fractions of a unit are set;
• A generalized risk assessment is determined by multiplying the value of each cause in points by a weighting factor and summing them according to the formula

where P and- generalized risk assessment;

d i- weighty coefficient of each reason of investment risk;

Z i- the absolute value of each cause in points.

Usually, the absolute value in points ranges from 1 to 10 or from 1 to 100, but most often from 1 to 10.

As the value approaches P and to unity, the value of investment risk decreases and vice versa.

The expert risk analysis algorithm has the following sequence:

• 1) for each type of risk, the maximum level acceptable for the organization implementing this project is determined. The maximum level of risks is determined on a 100-point scale;
• 2) if necessary, a differentiated assessment of the level of expertise of experts is established, which is confidential. The score is given on a 10-point scale;
• 3) risks are assessed by experts in terms of the likelihood of a risk event (in fractions of a unit) and the danger of these risks for the successful completion of the project (on a 100-point scale);
• 4) estimates put down by experts for each type of risk are summarized by the project developer in tables. They define the integral level for each type of risk.
• 5) the integral level of risks obtained as a result of an expert survey and the limit level for a given type of risk are compared, and a decision is made on the acceptability of this type of risk for the project developer. If the accepted limit level of one or several types of risks is lower than the obtained integral values, a set of measures is developed aimed at reducing the impact of the identified risks on the success of the project, and a re-analysis of the risks is carried out.

The expert risk assessment method consists of five stages.

Table 2.1 - The content of the stages of expert assessment of investment risks

	Risk assessment stage
	Putting together an exhaustive list of simple risks	Specialists develop an exhaustive list of simple project risks for each of its stages.
	Expert assessment of risk probability	Independent experts determine the likelihood of simple project risks. Experts work independently. The system for assessing the probability of simple risks should be the same for all experts
	Analysis of expert assessments	Contradictions in experts' assessments are determined. Expert assessments are being coordinated at a meeting of experts
	Associations of expert opinions	The arithmetic mean estimate of the probability of simple risks is calculated
	Integral risk assessment of an investment project	Specialists define priority groups of simple risks. The calculation of the weight value of simple risks that are included in the priority groups is carried out

Stage 1. At the first stage, an exhaustive list of risks is formed. Such a list should be compiled by relevant specialists - builders, technologists, economists, lawyers who are involved in the development, operation of the project, and have relevant experience with similar projects. It is advisable to group the exhaustive list into thematic groups - technological risks, financial and economic, socio-political, commercial and the like.

Stage 2. Each expert, who works individually, is provided with an exhaustive list of simple risks for all stages of projects, and is invited to evaluate them, guided by the following rating system:

• 0 - the risk is considered insignificant;
• 25 - the risk is most likely not realized;
• 50 - nothing definite can be said about the onset of the event;
• 75 - the risk is likely to manifest itself;
• 100 - risk confidence is high.

Stage 3. Contradictions in the assessments of experts are determined. For this, the following rules apply.

1. The maximum allowable difference in marks between two experts should not exceed 50:

2. Allows you to find a pair of experts whose thoughts have the greatest divergence:

where a i , b i- estimates i- th simple risk by experts a and b, respectively; N- the number of simple risks.

In the event that there are contradictions between the thoughts of experts, that is, at least one of the rules is not followed, they are discussed and agreed upon at an open meeting of experts.

Stage 4. Individual assessments of experts are combined into a single one. Each consolidated expert assessment of the probability of simple risks should be weighted against it, which gives an idea of ​​the importance of each estimated event for the project as a whole. This work should be carried out by project developers, that is, those who prepare an exhaustive list of risks.

Stage 5. An integrated risk assessment of projects is determined. Such an assessment, in turn, is carried out in two stages:

• - an assessment is determined for each of the stages of the investment project, having previously calculated the risks for individual substages;
• - a risk assessment for the entire project is determined.

It is also possible to combine statistical and expert methods, that is, a combined risk assessment method can be used.

A. Point assessment of risk indicators. In order to use an indicator of this type, it is necessary to know both the type and the parameters of the law of distribution of values ​​that reflect the results of activities. Assuming that a sufficiently large number of not only internal, but also external risk factors affect the results of entrepreneurship, we put forward the hypothesis that these results obey the normal distribution law.

On fig. 2.3 shows the curve density functions of the normal distribution. This is a graphical reflection of the dependence of the probability distribution density of the expected values ​​of the result. After analyzing this curve, you can see that all the values ​​of the result are more densely grouped around the value X(the density curve at this point has max), however, as the results are distributed both to the left and to the right of the value X a decrease in density is observed.

Rice. 2.3.

For example, the risk score R(probability of getting a result at the required level) is defined as the area under the curve, which can be calculated using the following formula:

where are the numerical characteristics of the distribution: mathematical expectation and dispersion; Dtp is the required result value.

To build probability density curves for possible entrepreneurial outcomes a large array of statistical information is required to test the statistical hypothesis about the parameters and the form of the distribution law. Basically, it is difficult to obtain such initial data in advance, therefore, in this form, probabilistic indicators are rarely used.

B. Interval assessment of risk indicators. dotted risk assessment does not provide information about the accuracy of the estimation procedure. In this regard, an entrepreneur who assesses the risk of his own activities should also use interval approach, which is a determination of the probability of obtaining a certain result within given and necessary limits.

For example, the probability that the result will be equal to the value belonging to the interval [ X 1, X 2] is equal to

or

Let's represent this interpretation graphically (Fig. 2.4).

Rice. 2.4.

Such interval estimation of the risk level serves as the basis for risk value conceptsVaR (VaR – value al risk ), which was developed in the late 1980s. last century. A certain amount of risk value as a generalized assessment of market risk is primarily necessary to coordinate operational decisions at the level of the company's top management.

VaR recognized as the most universal technique used to calculate the following types of risk:

• price risk - changes in the market value of the price of a financial asset;
• currency risk - associated with a change in the exchange rate of the national currency against foreign currency in the market;
• credit risk - arising from the complete or partial insolvency of the borrower on the received loan;
• liquidity risk - associated with the inability to sell financial asset or the ability to sell only at a large loss, which arises when selling an asset due to a significant difference in the size of the purchase to sale that exists in the market.

risk costVaR reflects the maximum possible loss from a change in the value of financial instruments, a portfolio of assets, etc., which will occur over a given period of time with a predetermined probability of its occurrence.

From this we can conclude that the main indicators in determining the risk value can be considered the level of the confidence interval (confidence probability) and the time horizon.

Confidence interval level is the boundary that (based on the opinion of the risk manager) separates "normal" market fluctuations from unforeseen, extreme bursts of price in terms of their frequency. As a rule, the probability of losses is within 1 - γ = (1.0; 2.5 or 5% ) (the corresponding level of the confidence interval is equal to g=(99; 97.5 or 95%)). In this case, it should be taken into account that with an increase in the level of the confidence interval, the risk value indicator will also increase: it is obvious that losses that occur with a probability of no more than 1% will be higher than losses that occur with a probability of 5%.

When choosing time horizon it is worth considering, firstly, how often transactions with these assets are carried out; secondly, their liquidity. For those financial institutions that are active in the capital markets, the traditional settlement period is one day, while for strategic investors it may be acceptable to use longer time periods. In addition to the lengthening of the time horizon, the risk value also increases. Obviously, the possible profits and losses, for example, in five days, can be larger than in one day. In practice, it is usually assumed that during the period P days, the value of the risk value will approximately equal the value of times more than in one day.

Expert risk assessment methods

In today's unstable environment, when it is almost impossible for an entrepreneur to repeat any economic situation under the same conditions and there is no up-to-date information about the likelihood of risk events, it is worth turning to subjective methods expert assessments, judgments and personal experience an expert, the opinion of a financial manager, etc. Expert assessment methods make it possible to determine levels of financial risks, if there is no company the necessary information for making calculations or comparisons. These methods consist in interviewing experts (qualified specialists from insurance, tax, financial authorities, investment managers, employees of relevant specialized firms) and further statistical processing of the survey results. The survey should focus on specific types of risks identified in this transaction.

An expert assessment of the level of risk is not a decision in itself, but only necessary and useful information that helps to make an informed decision. Only the risk manager can decide on the level of risk, and the responsibility lies with him.

Most often, expert evaluation methods are used in determining the levels of inflationary, interest rate, emission, currency, investment and some other types of financial risks.

It is possible to attract heuristic rules, representing a set of logical methods for finding truth (Fig. 2.5).

Rice. 2.5.

So, we have considered many methods of risk assessment (calculation and analytical, probabilistic, statistical and expert). These methods are often used in combination with each other, for example, computational and analytical methods with statistical (correlation-regression) methods. Combined methods include methods for predicting bankruptcy, assessing the financial condition of an enterprise, assessing financial and other risks based on financial and operational leverage, etc. On the basis of such a combination of methods, methods of financial rating analysis, etc. have been developed. Other, more specialized risk assessment methods are also possible.

Now let's look at some of the approaches in more detail.

• Tokarenko G. S. Financial risk management technology // Financial management. 2006. № 5.
• Cm.: Tokarenko G. S. Financial risk management technology.

Introduction

Risk is inherent in any field economic activity. The problem of risk is of particular importance in entrepreneurship, where intensive changes in the environment of a business entity necessitate a prompt and energetic response to the transformations that come in business. At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the industry specifics that determine the risk factors, the degree of their manifestation and significance.

The lack of evidence-based approaches to the analysis and risk assessment of research and production enterprises leads to such undesirable consequences as loss of profits, unsold stocks of goods, reduced investment efficiency, the occurrence of losses in transactions, a reduction in the resource base, etc.

The works of domestic and foreign scientists are devoted to the issues of analysis and assessment of risks in the activities of enterprises. A significant contribution to the development of these issues was made by economists: V. A. Abchuk, A. P. Algin, K. M. Arginbaev, M. I. Bakanov, I. T. Balabanov, V. V. Bokov, V. A. Borovkova, E.S. Vasilchuk, V.V. Glushchenko, P.G. Grabovyi, V.M. Granaturov, A.M. Dubrov, B.A. Lagosha, A.A. Pervozvansky, B.A. Raizberg, V.T. Sevruk, A.A. Spivak, V.A. Chernov, A.S. Shapkin, A.D. Sheremet and others. Among foreign scientists, the following works can be noted: W. Barton, T. Bachkai, E. Vogkhan, M. Green, S. Williams, K. Redhead and others. V. A. Borovkova, A. M. Omarova, V. M. Granaturova, E.V. Seregina, G.A. Taktarova, G.V. Chernov and others.

However, despite a significant amount of research in the field of risk analysis and an active search for ways to objectively assess the magnitude of risk, many methodological and methodological issues of this important problem have not yet been resolved. So, in particular, so far there is no consensus on the nature and content of the economic risk of enterprises, criteria and indicators (general and private) for assessing economic risk have not been substantiated, there is no evidence-based classification of factors that determine economic risks, in particular external risks. enterprise risks in market conditions functioning.

The need to improve the risk assessment of an enterprise and, in particular, a research and production enterprise in market conditions predetermined the relevance of the research topic.

Purpose and objectives of the study. Target term paper consists in improving the theoretical foundations and developing methodological provisions for the analysis of external risk and an expert method for assessing the risk of research and production enterprises in market conditions of functioning in order to increase the efficiency of their development.

To achieve this goal, the following tasks were set and solved in the course work:

Analysis of risk sources of research and production enterprises and their classification;

Identification of risk features at research and production enterprises and their assessment in modern conditions;

Development of a methodological approach to risk assessment at research and production enterprises using the expert method.

Subject of study is an external risk analysis. The analysis of external risk is understood as an assessment of the degree of influence of the external environment on the activities of a research and production enterprise.

The research and production enterprise Closed Joint-Stock Company "Samara Horizons" was chosen as the object of study.

The theoretical and methodological basis of the course work was the work of domestic and foreign researchers.

Information base of the study. The data of CJSC NPP "Samara Horizons" were used as initial information in the research.

1. Risk analysis and assessment

The problem of analysis, assessment and risk management in the implementation of enterprises production activities is one of the central problems in the Russian economy today. In a planned economy, when unprofitable enterprises received subsidies through the redistribution of funds from profitable enterprises, these problems were not so urgent. Currently, if the company does not make a profit, and even more so if there is no return on investment, then the company is on the verge of bankruptcy. Therefore, the rational use of funds and taking into account the risk factor is the most important moment in the activities of the enterprise.

In the context of the formation of market relations, the role and importance of individual elements has changed radically. management process consequently, the theoretical approaches to their analysis, evaluation and organization in the enterprise are also changing.

The number of unresolved problems in the field of managing economic and industrial risks at industrial enterprises has increased markedly at the present time with the advent of a competitive environment.

At the same time, it is important to take into account that any of the objects and subjects of production activity is exposed to the systemic impact of risks of various hierarchical levels: geopolitical, political, social, economic, financial, industrial, commercial, and man-made.

The risk can be reduced, first of all, by careful preliminary study, calculation of operations, choice of a rational, less dangerous course of action. Proper accounting of risk factors and rational risk management in the enterprise contributes to its success. market activity, while other enterprises, whose management does not pay due attention to risks, in a similar market situation, inevitably turn out to be unprofitable. Therefore, the issues of theory and practice of risk assessment and management have acquired particular relevance at the present time.

The purpose of risk analysis is to give potential partners the necessary data to make decisions on the advisability of participating in the project and provide for measures to protect against possible financial losses. Risk analysis is performed in the sequence shown in fig. one.

Figure 1. Sequence of risk analysis.

General principles of risk analysis. When talking about the need to take into account risk in project management, they usually mean its main participants: the customer, investor, performer (contractor) or seller, buyer, as well as insurance company. When analyzing the risk of any of the project participants, the following criteria are used, proposed by the famous American expert B. Berlimer:

Risk losses are independent of each other;

A loss in one direction from the “risk portfolio” does not necessarily increase the probability of a loss in another (except in force majeure circumstances);

The maximum possible damage should not exceed the financial capabilities of the participant.

Risk analysis can be divided into two complementary types: qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative analysis can be relatively simple, its the main task- identify risk factors, stages of work during which the risk arises, i.e., establish potential risk areas, and then identify all possible risks. Quantitative risk analysis, i.e., the numerical determination of the size of individual risks and the risk of the project as a whole, is a more complex problem. All factors, one way or another affecting the growth of the degree of risk in the project, can be conditionally divided into objective and subjective.

1.1. Risk zones and risk curve

An entrepreneur should always strive to take into account the possible risk and provide for measures to reduce its level and compensate for probable losses. This is the essence of risk management (risk management). The main goal of risk management (especially for the conditions of modern Russia) is to ensure that in the worst case we can talk about the lack of profit, but not about the bankruptcy of the organization. To assess the degree of acceptability of commercial risk, it is necessary to allocate risk zones depending on the expected amount of losses. The general scheme of risk zones is shown in fig. 2.

Figure 2. Risk zones.

The area in which losses are not expected, i.e. where the economic result economic activity positive is called the risk-free zone. The zone of acceptable risk is the area within which the amount of probable losses does not exceed the expected profit and, therefore, commercial activity has economic viability. The boundary of the acceptable risk zone corresponds to the level of losses equal to the calculated profit. Critical risk zone - the area of ​​possible losses exceeding the amount of expected profit up to the value of the total estimated revenue (the sum of costs and profit). Here, the entrepreneur runs the risk of not only not receiving any income, but also incurring direct losses in the amount of all costs incurred.

Catastrophic risk zone - the area of ​​probable losses that exceed the critical level and can reach a value equal to equity organizations. A catastrophic risk can lead an organization or entrepreneur to collapse and bankruptcy. In addition, the category of catastrophic risk (regardless of the amount of property damage) should include the risk associated with a threat to life or health of people and the occurrence of economic disasters. A visual representation of the level of commercial risk is given by a graphical representation of the dependence of the probability of losses on their magnitude - the risk curve (Fig. 3).

Figure 3. Risk curve.

The construction of such a curve is based on the hypothesis that profit as a random variable is subject to the normal distribution law and involves the following assumptions.

1. Most likely to receive a profit equal to the calculated value - Pr. The probability (Вр) of obtaining such a profit is maximum and the value of P can be considered the mathematical expectation of profit. The probability of making a profit, greater or less than the calculated one, decreases monotonically as deviations increase.

2. Losses are considered to be a decrease in profit (ΔP) in comparison with the calculated value. If real profit is P, then ΔP = Pr - P.

The assumptions made are controversial to a certain extent and not always valid for all types of risks, but on the whole they quite correctly reflect the most general patterns of changes in commercial risk and make it possible to construct a profit loss probability distribution curve, which is called the risk curve (Fig. 4).

Figure 4. Profit loss probability distribution curve.

The main thing in assessing commercial risk is the ability to build a risk curve and determine zones and indicators of acceptable, critical and catastrophic risks. Thus, the risk analysis process includes the following stages:

Creation of a predictive model;

Definition of risk variables;

Determining the probability distribution of the selected variables and determining the range of possible values ​​for each of them;

Establishing the presence or absence of correlations among risk variables;

Model runs;

Analysis of results.

risk variables. These are variables that are critical to the viability of the project, i.e. even small deviations from its expected value negatively affect the project. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis is used to select variables. Sensitivity analysis measures the response of project results to changes in a particular project variable.

Uncertainty analysis helps to highlight high-risk variables. The set of expected values ​​of the variable should be wide enough, but with boundaries: minimum and maximum values. Thus, a range of possible values ​​is set for each risk variable. Two main categories of probability distribution can be distinguished: 1) normal, uniform and triangular distributions (they spread the probability within the same range, but with different degrees of concentration relative to the average values). These types of distribution are called symmetric; 2) stepwise and discrete distributions. With a discrete distribution, range intervals are allocated, each of which is assigned a certain probability weight in a stepwise manner (Fig. 5).

Figure 5. Probability distribution.

correlated variables. Determination of risk variables and giving them an appropriate probability distribution - necessary condition conducting a risk analysis. With the successful completion of these two stages of analysis, with a reliable computer program, you can proceed to the modeling stage. At this stage, the computer generates a series of scenarios based on random numbers generated using specified probability distributions.

To analyze the available data, regression and correlation are usually used to make it easier to predict the dependent variable from the actual or hypothetical values ​​of the independent variable. As a result of such analyzes, a regression equation and a correlation coefficient are derived. For risk analysis, this is just the initial data, and the result is the information generated during the simulation. The task of correlation analysis in relation to risk analysis is to control the values ​​of the dependent variable, allowing you to keep the correspondence with the opposite values ​​of the independent variable.

Statistical;

Expert assessments;

Analytical;

Combined method.

1.2. Method of expert assessments

This method involves the collection and study of estimates made by various specialists ( this enterprise or external experts) regarding the likelihood of different levels of loss occurring. Estimates are based on taking into account all financial risk factors, as well as on statistical data. The implementation of the method of expert assessments is much more complicated if the number of assessment indicators is small.

The variant and probable nature of many project processes enhances the role of expert judgment in determining the economic and financial indicators. Such estimates are used quite regularly both in domestic and foreign practice. During the transition period, the role of expert opinions in determining the relevant indicators increases significantly, since the indicators used for calculation are not directive. Appropriate expert assessment can be obtained both after conducting special studies and using the accumulated experience of leading experts. The increase in risk in the implementation of the project requires a more thorough assessment of the critical moments of its implementation. Many initial indicators, often competing with each other, involve the use of expert assessments to construct a project quality criterion. Therefore, the investment assessment system in modern conditions, by necessity, becomes “human-algorithmic”, and the role of a human expert is decisive. Expert assessment is the opinion of experts on a specific issue identified by a special methodology. An expert assessment is necessary for making a decision at the stage of preparation of the PTES. But already in the feasibility study, the number of expert assessments should be minimal. Staged risk assessment is based on the fact that the risks are determined for each stage of the project separately, and then the total result for the entire project is found. Usually, in each project, the following stages are distinguished: preparatory (fulfillment of the entire range of works necessary to start the project); construction (construction of necessary buildings and structures, purchase and installation of equipment); functioning (bringing the project to full capacity and making a profit). The nature of an investment project as something done on an individual basis essentially leaves the only possibility for assessing risk values ​​- the use of expert opinions. Each expert, working separately, is presented with a list of primary risks for all stages of the project and is invited to assess the likelihood of risks occurring in accordance with the following rating system:

0 - the risk is considered insignificant;

25 - the risk is most likely not realized;

50 - nothing definite about the occurrence of the event

cannot be said;

75 - the risk is most likely to manifest itself;

100 - the risk is realized.

Expert evaluations are subjected to consistency analysis, which is performed according to certain rules. Firstly, the maximum allowable difference between the estimates of two experts for any factor should not exceed 50. Comparisons are made modulo (plus or minus sign is not taken into account), which allows eliminating unacceptable differences in experts' estimates of the likelihood of a particular risk. If the number of experts is more than three, then pairwise comparable opinions are evaluated. Secondly, to assess the consistency of expert opinions on the entire set of risks, a pair of experts is identified whose opinions differ most. For calculations, the assessment discrepancies are summed modulo and the result is divided by the number of simple risks. The quotient of division should not exceed 25. If contradictions are found between the opinions of experts (at least one of the above rules is not followed), they are discussed at meetings with experts. In the absence of contradictions, all expert estimates are reduced to the average (arithmetic mean), which is used in further calculations. A separate problem is the justification and evaluation of priorities. Its essence lies in the need to free experts who assess the probability of risk from assessing the importance of each individual event for the entire project. This work should be carried out by the project developers, namely the team that prepares the list of risks to be assessed. The task of the experts is to give an assessment of the risks. After determining the probabilities for simple risks (obtaining an average expert assessment), it is necessary to obtain integral assessment the risk of the entire project. To do this, the risks of each sub-stage or composition of the stages are first calculated: functioning, financial and economic, technological, social and environmental. Then the risks of each stage are calculated - preparatory, construction, functioning.

Another important method of risk research is modeling the choice problem using a "decision tree". This method involves a graphical construction of options for decisions that can be made. The branches of the "tree" correlate subjective and objective assessments of possible events. Following along the constructed branches and using special methods for calculating probabilities, each path is evaluated and then the less risky one is chosen.

2. Analysis of external risk at the research and production enterprise "Samara Horizons"

Under the analysis of external risk is understood as an assessment of the degree of influence of the external environment on the activities of the enterprise. For this, a mathematical model and a method for calculating the integral indicator of the impact of the external environment have been developed. Rou, and also shows the relationship this indicator with the choice of the optimal strategy for the development of the organization.

1. Expertly, from the entire set of external risk factors, a set of basic factors that are most significant for the enterprise are distinguished: political, economic, social, scientific and technical, environmental. Other factors are added according to the scope of the business.

2. Compose the basic equation for calculating the integral indicator of the impact of the external environment R out :

, (1)

where w i- specific weight (significance) of the indicator (); x i- an indicator characterizing the degree of risk (basic factor); M– number of considered risk-forming components macroeconomic environment, i.e. underlying risk factors.

In paragraph 1, five basic factors are identified, therefore, M = 5.

3. Based on the methods for assessing the importance of the criterion (simple ranking method, pairwise comparison method, etc.), the weights (significance) of each basic factor are determined. If all factors are of equal importance (equally preferred or there is no preference system), then

w i = 1/ M =1/5 = 0.2.(2)

4. For each basic factor, a subset of constituent factors (C-factors) is distinguished by expert means. For example, for the basic factor "Environmental" three C-factors have been identified (Table 1).

5. On the basis of expert methods and methods for assessing the importance of the criterion, the level (expectancy of manifestation) of each C-factor and its weight relative to the base factor are determined (see Table 1).

6. Based on the matrix aggregation scheme, an aggregated indicator is calculated for each basic factor. In order to use the matrix aggregation scheme, the linguistic variable "Factor level" is introduced with the term-set of values T 1 = "Very Low, Low, Acceptable, High, Very High" or T 2 = "Low, Acceptable, High". As a carrier x linguistic variable is a segment of the real axis - 01-carrier .

Table 1 - Weights and expected C-factors for basic

factor "Environmental"

We also introduce a system of five (three) corresponding membership functions m i ( x) of a trapezoid type (analytical representation (Table 2)) and a set nodal points a j = (0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9) for T 1 or a j = (0.1, 0.5, 0.9) for T 2 , which are the abscissas of the maxima of the corresponding membership functions on the 01-support, are uniformly separated from each other on the 01-support and are symmetrical with respect to node 0.5.

Then the linguistic variable "Level of the factor", defined on the 01-carrier, together with the set of nodal points is called standard five-level (three-level) fuzzy 01-classifier .

The quantitative value of the aggregated base factor is determined by the double convolution formula:

, (3)

where a j are the nodal points of the standard five-level classifier, pi- the weight i - th factor in the convolution, m ij (x i) is the value of the membership function j - th quality level relative to the current value i - th factor.

Level recognition by (4.1–4.5) or (5.1–5.3) shows that From 1 is clearly an average level; From 2- with a degree of confidence of 0.5 is medium, and with the same confidence - high. Level recognition From 3 gives an unambiguous recognition of this level as low (Table 3).

Table 2 - Analytical representation of functions

accessories for T 1 and T 2

T 1	T 2
. (4.1) . (4.2) . (4.3) . (4.4) . (4.5)	. (5.1) . (5.2) . (5.3)

Table 3 - Recognition of the level of C-factors on a standard

five-level 01 classifier

Factors	Significance (weight)	Membership functions (probability) for levels of C-factors
		Very low ( m1)	Short	Average	Tall	Highly tall ( m5)
From 1	0.2	0	0	1	0	0
From 2	0.5	0	0	0.5	0.5	0
From 3	0.3	0	1	0	0	0
Nodal points		0.1	0.3	0.5	0.7	0.9

During the calculation by the matrix from Table 3, the following result was obtained:

0.2*1*0.5+0.5*(0.5*0.5+0.5*0.7)+0.3*1*0.3 = 0.1+0.3+0.09 = 0.49.

Similarly, a matrix convolution is carried out for all basic risk-forming factors, as a result, aggregated indicators characterizing the degree of risk are obtained to calculate the integral indicator of the impact of the external environment R out .

7. Let's calculate the integral indicator of the degree of influence of the external environment R out according to a slightly modified formula (1):

, (6)

where is the aggregate indicator for i - mu basic factor.

8. Based on a five-level or three-level classifier, a recognition procedure is performed R out(table 4).

The external environment changes its state over time. Its high dynamism and the uncertainty of influencing factors require huge resources to build the capacity to counter threats. In this regard, the enterprise, in order to maintain the main parameters of its activities, create prerequisites for development and increase efficiency, can to forecast the impact of the macroeconomic environment based on the calculation of the integral indicator.

Table 4 - Classification of the level of the integral indicator
environmental impact based on fuzzy 01-classifiers

Type classify Kator	Interval values R out	Parameter level classification	Estimated degree confidence (membership function)
five-level	0 £ R out£0.15	Very low	1
	0 .15 < R out < 0.25	Very low	m 1 = 10 ´ (0.25 - R out)
		Short	1- m 1 \u003d m 2
	£0.25 R out£0.35	Short	1
	0.35 < R out < 0.45	Short	m 2 = 10 ´ (0.45 - R out)
		Acceptable	1- m 2 \u003d m 3
	0.45 £ R out£0.55	Acceptable	1
	0.55< R out < 0.65	Acceptable	m 3 = 10 ´ (0.65 - R out)
		Tall	1- m 3 \u003d m 4
	£0.65 R out£0.75	Tall	1
	0.75 < R out < 0.85	Tall	m4 = 10 ´ (0.85 - R out)
		Very tall	1-m4 = m5
	£0.85 R out£1.0	Very tall	1
three-level	0 £ R out£0.2	Short	1
	0.2 < R out < 0.4	Short	m 1 = 5 ´ (0.4 - R out)
		Acceptable	1- m 1 \u003d m 2
	0.4£ R out£0.6	Acceptable	1
	0.6 < R out < 0.8	Acceptable	m 2 = 10 ´ (0.8 - R out)
		Tall	1- m 2 \u003d m 3
	0.8£ R out£1.0	Tall	1

This makes it possible to adapt to new conditions in time and, accordingly, plan and carry out their activities according to one of the pre-developed scenarios. Table 5 presents the possible values ​​of the indicator of trends in the change in the macroeconomic environment on the scale [-1;+1] - TPmax, as well as the corresponding scenarios.

Table 5 - Indicators of trends in the macroeconomic environment

The dependence of the development scenario on the integral indicator of the impact of the external environment is shown in the figure. The abscissa axis is the value of the indicator R outн, the y-axis is the indicator TPmax н[–1;+1].

dependency graph R out and TPmax

For example, R out Î corresponds to an acceptable level (see Table 4). On this interval, in turn, TPmax takes values ​​from the range [–0.3; +0.3], which corresponds to the stabilization scenario (see Table 5). R out Î positions the high level of the indicator (see Table 4), which is responsible for the moderately pessimistic scenario: the closer R out to one, the more pessimism. On the contrary, more optimistic scenarios correspond to a lower integral indicator of the impact of the external environment.

2.1. Approbation of the developed model

Experience number 1. Stages of modeling according to the method

1. The division of external risk-forming factors into: political, scientific and technical, socio-economic and environmental factors is taken as a basis (Table 6). Expert estimates and weights are calculated as of 2009. Additional studies have not been conducted.

Table 6 - Factors of economic risk in activities

production enterprise (source: R.M. Kachalov)

1	2	3	4	5
	Factor name	Weighting factor (VC)	Peer Review (EA) (from 0 to 10)	Notes
1. POLITICAL FACTORS
110.01	Domestic and foreign political situation (0 - stable, 10 - unstable)	0,05	4
110.02		0,05	5
110.03		0,1	4
110.04		0,3	4
1	2	3	4	5
110.05	Nationalization (deprivatization (or expropriation for non-residents) without adequate commercial pensions (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,3	2
110.06	The introduction of restrictions on the conversion of the ruble	0,1	5
110.07		0,05	3
110.08		0,05	3
S VK i = 1
2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS
120.01	Possibility of radical adjustment of the rules for conducting foreign economic activity (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,05	2
120.02		0,05	2
120.03		0,1	5
120.04		0,1	4
120.05		0,2	7
120.06	Fluctuations in the ruble exchange rate beyond the predicted corridor or devaluation of the ruble (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,1	3
1	2	3	4	5
120.07		0,1	3
120.08		0,1	8
120.09		0,2	4
S VK i = 1
3. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
130.01		0,02	4
130.02		0,5	5
130.03		0,3	3
S VK i = 1

4. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL FACTORS 140.01

at lower cost

(0 - impossible, 10 - very real)

0,2 3 140.02 0,2 2 140.03

Mastering the production of a replacement product by competitors

(0 - impossible, 10 - very real)

0,1 6 140.04 0,3 5 1 2 3 4 5 140.05 0,15 3 140.06 0,05 4 S VK i = 1

R out :

Table 7 gives the decoding of the designations from formula (7).

Table 7 - Names of basic factors x i and the weights of the factors w i for formula (7)

3. The weights (significance) of each basic factor are presented in Table 7. The factors are equivalent, the calculation is made according to the formula (2).

4. The contributory factors (C-factors) for each base factor are presented in Table 6.

5. Expert assessments, weights and probabilities of C-factors are shown in Table 6.

6. Table 8 shows the results of calculating the aggregated indicator for each basic factor.

Table 8 - The results of the calculation of the aggregated indicator

for each underlying factor x i

R out :

– for a five-level classifier

– for a three-level classifier 8. Table 9 shows the recognition results R out based on three-level and five-level classifiers.

Table 9 - Recognition results R out based

classifier type	three-level	five-level
Result procedures recognition	100% Acceptable	Low 50% Acceptable at 50%
TPmax value	0,11	0,29
Trend changes macroeconomic environment given level R out	Lack of dynamics of change. It is recommended to choose a stabilization scenario (prerequisites for development and increase in efficiency) of the organization's development.

Additionally, the TPmax indicator was calculated, which characterizes the general trend in the change in the macroeconomic environment for the selected risk factors. The result of its evaluation at a given level R out is also presented in Table 9. In both cases, the trend of change in the macroeconomic environment is characterized by a lack of dynamics of change, it is recommended to choose a stabilization (prerequisites for development and increase in efficiency) scenario for the development of the organization.

2. Stages of modeling according to the method

1. The division of external risk-forming factors into: political, scientific, technical and environmental factors is taken as a basis (see table 6). Socio-economic factors are divided into two groups: social and economic. Expert estimates and weights are calculated as of November 2009 (Table 10). Specialists of CJSC NPP Samara Horizons, Samara, Samara Region, Russian Federation, took part in the examination.

Table 10 - Expert assessments and weights of risky

factors

1	2	3	4
№	Factor name	Weighting factor (VC)	Peer Review (EA) (from 0 to 10)
1. POLITICAL FACTORS
1		0,05	1
2	Government stability (0 - high, 10 - in danger of change)	0,05	2
3	Separatist tendencies in the regions (0 - absent, 10 - dominated)	0,1	2
4	The possibility of local ethno-political conflicts and civil unrest (score of social instability in the region: 0 - stable, 10 - extremely tense)	0,3	5
5		0,3	2
6		0,1	3
7	Termination of the contract due to actions of the authorities of the country of the counterparty company that are not provided for by the terms of force majeure (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,05	6
8	Government breach of contract (0=impossible, 10=very likely)	0,05	3
S VK i = 1
2. SOCIAL FACTORS
1	Personnel error tax services(0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,1	5
2	Decrease in effective demand in the geographical sector of the market for traditional products (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,2	7
3	Deterioration of the standard of living of employees through no fault of the employer (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,1	4
4	Staff turnover (0 - insignificant, 10 - very significant)	0,1	3
5	The outflow of highly qualified specialists to the "city" and competing firms (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,2	5
6	Tighter rules/requirements for housing subsidies/benefits (0=impossible, 10=very feasible)	0,3	4
S VK i = 1
3. ECONOMIC FACTORS
1		0,05	3
2	Introduction of official restrictions on the movement of capital (1 - free movement, 10 - movement is prohibited)	0,05	2
3	Unmotivated violation of the terms of the contract (change in the price of raw materials, materials, components, semi-finished products, etc. after the conclusion of the contract) (0 - impossible, 10 - very realistic)	0,15	5
4		0,1	2
5	Emergence of new economic entities-competitors (in the same market sector) (0 - insignificant competitor, 10 - very significant competitor)	0,2	4
6	Exposure to hostile takeover (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,1	6
7	Termination of the service bank: bankruptcy or revocation of the license (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,25	2
8	Decreased investment attractiveness of the region, industry, etc. (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,05	2
9	Tightening the rules and requirements for obtaining government subsidies, concessional lending, etc., aimed at developing business, industry (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,05	2
S VK i = 1
4. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
1	Changing the regional environmental situation (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,2	4
2	Tightening of environmental requirements in the region where the enterprise operates (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,5	5
3	Introduction of restrictions on the use of local natural resources (0 - impossible, 10 - very realistic)	0,3	3
S VK i = 1
5. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL FACTORS
1	Appearance of competitors new technology production with lower costs (0 - impossible, 10 - very realistic)	0,2	3
2	The emergence of a new producer of goods or services in the sector of the enterprise's traditional products (0 - an insignificant competitor, 10 - a very significant competitor)	0,3	4
3		0,1	5
4	Accelerated copying of enterprise innovations by competitors through the use of industrial espionage (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,1	3
5	Sudden destabilization of the industry: a technological breakthrough in other industries that devalued ready-made developments and recipes and innovative actions of the enterprise (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,1	3
6	Violation of communication links between enterprises as business entities: unforeseen changes in the environment or physical conditions for the movement of commodity, financial, labor, etc. resources (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,2	6
S VK i = 1

2. Basic equation for calculating the integral indicator of environmental impact R out :

Table 11 gives the decoding of the designations from formula (8).

Table 11 - Names of basic factors x i and the weights of the factors w i for formula (8)

3. The weights (significance) of each basic factor are presented in Table 11. The column "Factor weight" is divided into three parts: the left one - all factors are equivalent, the calculation is made according to the formula (2); medium - the factors are strictly ranked, the weights are calculated by the Fishburn method (formula (9)); right - the weights of the factors are set manually with an explicit indication of preference:

. (9)

4. The contributory factors (C-factors) for each base factor are presented in Table 10.

5. Expert assessments and weights of C-factors are shown in Table 10.

6. Table 12 shows the results of calculating the aggregated indicator for each basic factor, depending on the selected type of 01-classifier.

Table 12 - The results of calculating the aggregated indicator for each basic factor x i

7. Results of calculating the integral indicator of the degree of influence of the external environment R out depending on the choice of method for calculating the weights and the type of classifier are presented in Table 13.

Table 13 - Calculation results R out

8. Tables 14 and 15 show the recognition results R out R out also presented in tables 14 and 15.

Table 14 - Recognition results R out based

three-level classifier

Weight calculation method	Equivalent	Fishburne	Manually
	The three-level 01-classifier defines the calculated indicator of environmental impact as 100% Acceptable	The three-level 01-classifier defines the calculated indicator of environmental impact as Low by 15% Acceptable at 85%	The three-level 01-classifier defines the calculated indicator of environmental impact as Low by 10% 90% Acceptable
TPmax value	0,26	0,37	0,34
R out	It is characterized by the lack of dynamics of changes. It is recommended to choose a stabilization scenario (prerequisites for development and increase in efficiency) of the organization's development.		It is characterized by positive dynamics or stability. It is recommended to choose a moderately optimistic scenario for the development of the organization.

Table 15 - Recognition results R out based

five-level classifier

Weight calculation method	Equivalent	Fishburne	Manually
The result of the recognition procedure	The five-level 01-classifier defines the calculated indicator of environmental impact as Low at 60% Acceptable at 40%	The five-level 01-classifier defines the calculated indicator of environmental impact as Low 80% Acceptable at 20%	The five-level 01-classifier defines the calculated indicator of environmental impact as Low at 70% 30% Acceptable
TPmax value	0,31	0,37	0,34
The trend in the macroeconomic environment at a given level R out	It is characterized by positive dynamics or stability. It is recommended to choose a moderately optimistic scenario for the development of the organization.	It is characterized by positive dynamics or stability. It is recommended to choose a moderately optimistic scenario for the development of the organization.	It is characterized by positive dynamics or stability. It is recommended to choose a moderately optimistic scenario for the development of the organization.

Analysis of the results allows us to conclude that, depending on the choice of the type of the 01-classifier, the indicator of environmental impact is defined as low or acceptable. The trend in the macroeconomic environment is characterized by positive dynamics or stability. It is recommended to choose a moderately optimistic scenario for the development of the enterprise. For reinsurance, you can choose a stabilization scenario of development. The final choice depends on the decision maker.

Experience number 3. retrospective

1. The division of external risk-forming factors into: political, scientific and technical, socio-economic and environmental factors is taken as a basis (see table 6). Expert estimates and weights are calculated as of 2009 (Table 16). Specialists of CJSC NPP "Samara Horizons" took part in the examination.

Table 16 - Expert assessments and weights of risky

factors

1	2	3	4
№	Factor name	Weighting factor (VC)	Peer Review (EA) (from 0 to 10)
1. POLITICAL FACTORS
1	Domestic and foreign political situation (0 - stable, 10 - unstable)	0,2	8
2	Government stability (0 - high, 10 - in danger of change)	0,2	7
3	Separatist tendencies in the regions (0 - absent, 10 - dominated)	0,1	8
4	The possibility of local ethno-political conflicts and civil unrest (score of social instability in the region: 0 - stable, 10 - extremely tense)	0,25	8
5	Nationalization (deprivatization (or expropriation for non-residents) without adequate compensation (0 - not possible, 10 - very real)	0,05	4
6	The introduction of restrictions on the conversion of the ruble (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,1	6
7	Termination of the contract due to actions of the authorities of the country of the counterparty company that are not provided for by the terms of force majeure (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,05	3
1	2	3	4
8	Government breach of contract (0=impossible, 10=very likely)	0,05	5
S VK i = 1
2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS
1	Possibility of radical adjustment of the rules for conducting foreign economic activity (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,1	8
2	Introduction of official restrictions on the movement of capital (1 - free movement, 10 - movement is prohibited)	0,1	7
3	Tax personnel errors (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,05	5
4	Unmotivated violation of the terms of the contract (change in the price of raw materials, materials, components, semi-finished products, etc. after the conclusion of the contract) (0 - impossible, 10 - very realistic)	0,05	4
5	Decrease in effective demand in the geographical sector of the market for traditional products (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,25	7
6	Fluctuations in the ruble exchange rate beyond the predicted corridor or devaluation of the ruble (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,1	6
7	Emergence of new economic entities-competitors (in the same market sector) (0 - insignificant competitor, 10 - very significant competitor)	0,05	3
8	Exposure to hostile takeover (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,1	8
9	Termination of the service bank: bankruptcy or revocation of the license (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,2	6
S VK i = 1
3. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
1	Changing the regional environmental situation (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,2	4
2	Tightening of environmental requirements in the region where the enterprise operates (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,5	5
3	Introduction of restrictions on the use of local natural resources (0 - impossible, 10 - very realistic)	0,3	3
S VK i = 1
14. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL FACTORS
1	The emergence of competitors of a new production technology with lower costs (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,2	2
2	The emergence of a new producer of goods or services in the sector of the enterprise's traditional products (0 - an insignificant competitor, 10 - a very significant competitor)	0,2	5
3	Mastering the production of a replacement product by competitors (0 - impossible, 10 - very realistic)	0,1	5
4	Accelerated copying of enterprise innovations by competitors through the use of industrial espionage (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,3	5
1	2	3	4
5	Sudden destabilization of the industry: a technological breakthrough in other industries that devalued ready-made developments and recipes and innovative actions of the enterprise (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,15	3
6	Violation of communication links between enterprises as business entities: unforeseen changes in the environment or physical conditions for the movement of commodity, financial, labor, etc. resources (0 - impossible, 10 - very real)	0,05	7
S VK i = 1

2. The basic equation for calculating the integral indicator of the environmental impact is formula (7).

Table 17 gives the decoding of the symbols from formula (7).

Table 17 - Names of basic factors x i and the weights of the factors w i for formula (7)

3. The weights (significance) of each basic factor are presented in Table 17. The factors were strictly ranked, the calculation was made according to the Fishburn method (formula (9)).

4. The contributory factors (C-factors) for each base factor are presented in Table 16.

5. Expert assessments, weights and probabilities of C-factors are shown in Table 16.

6. Table 18 shows the results of calculating the aggregated indicator for each basic factor x i .

Table 18 - The results of calculating the aggregated indicator for each basic factor x i

7. The result of calculating the integral indicator of the degree of influence of the external environment R out :

– for a three-level classifier;

– for a five-level classifier.

8. Table 19 shows the recognition results R out based on three-level and five-level classifiers. Additionally, the TPmax indicator was calculated, which characterizes the general trend in the change in the macroeconomic environment for the selected risk factors. The result of its evaluation at a given level R out is also presented in Table 19. In both cases, the trend in macroeconomic environment change is characterized as negative for some environmental factors. It is recommended to choose a moderately pessimistic scenario for the development of the organization. On the whole, this does not contradict historical data - the political and economic situation in the country is extremely tense.

Table 19 - Recognition results R out based

three-level and five-level classifiers

classifier type	three-level	five-level
Result procedures recognition	The three-level 01-classifier defines the calculated indicator of environmental impact as 90% Acceptable 10% high	The five-level 01-classifier defines the calculated indicator of environmental impact as Acceptable at 40% 60% high
TPmax value	-0,34	-0,31
The trend in the macroeconomic environment at a given level R out	It is characterized as negative by some environmental factors. It is recommended to choose a moderately pessimistic scenario for the development of the organization.

Approbation of the developed model for calculating the integral indicator of environmental impact for historical conditions(experiment No. 1 and No. 3) allows us to conclude that the obtained simulation results are consistent and, therefore, that the model itself is adequate.

Conclusion

In general, the use of the expert method of risk assessment makes it possible to visually trace the influence of individual initial factors on the final result of the project, identify the most significant risk factors at the preliminary stage, and take actions to minimize them.

Most management decisions are made under conditions of risk, which is due to a number of factors: the lack of complete information, the presence of opposing tendencies, elements of chance, and many others. In the conditions of Russian instability, the problem of risk is of great importance in substantiating managerial decisions not only of a strategic nature, but also at the stage of short-term planning. In this regard, the problem of assessing the risks of financial and economic activities of enterprises acquires independent theoretical and applied significance as an important one. component theory and practice of management. Risk should be understood as a consequence of an action or inaction, as a result of which there is a real possibility of obtaining uncertain results of a different nature, both positively and negatively affecting the financial and economic activities of the enterprise. Most researchers note that enterprises should not avoid risk at the decision-making stage, but should be able to competently and professionally manage it. For this, a risk analysis is carried out. The purpose of risk analysis is to provide potential partners with the necessary data to make decisions about the appropriateness of participating in the project and provide for measures to protect against possible financial losses.

Currently, the following methods of risk analysis are the most common:

Statistical;

Expert assessments;

Analytical;

Ratings financial stability and solvency;

Cost feasibility assessments;

Analysis of the consequences of risk accumulation;

Method of using analogues;

Combined method.

The peer review method differs in the way information is collected to build the risk curve. This method involves the collection and study of estimates made by various experts (in the enterprise or external experts) regarding the probability of occurrence of various levels of losses. Estimates are based on taking into account all financial risk factors, as well as on statistical data.

In the process of work, an analysis of the external risk was carried out. Under the analysis of external risk is understood as an assessment of the degree of influence of the external environment on the activities of the enterprise. For this, a mathematical model and a method for calculating the integral indicator of the impact of the external environment have been developed. Rou, and also shows the relationship of this indicator with the choice of the optimal strategy for the development of the organization. The external environment changes its state over time. Its high dynamism and the uncertainty of influencing factors require huge resources to build the capacity to counter threats. In this regard, in order to preserve the main parameters of its activities, create prerequisites for development and increase efficiency, an enterprise can forecast the impact of the macroeconomic environment based on the calculation of an integral indicator.

Bibliography

1. Algin A.P. Risk and its role in public life. - M.: Thought, 2004.

2. Algin A.M. Facets of economic risk. - M.: Knowledge, 2005.

3. Balabanov I. T. Risk management. - M.: Finance and statistics, 2006.

4. Blank I.A. Investment management: Training course. - K .: Elga-N, Nika-Center, 2005.

5. Grabovy P.G., Petrova S.I. Risks in modern business. - M.: ALANS, 2004.

6. Granaturov V. M. Economic risk. Essence, methods of measurement, ways of reduction. Business and Service, 2005.

7. Granaturov V.M. economic risk. - M.: Business and service, 2008.

8. Degtyareva O.I., Kandinsky O.A. Exchange business. - M.: UNITI, 2009.

16. Reisberg BA. Entrepreneurship and risk. - M.: INFRA-M, 2006.

17. Redhead K, Hughes S. Management of financial markets. - M.: INFRA-M, 2006.

18. Risks in modern business / P.G. Grabovoi and others - M .: Alans Publishing House, 2004.

19. Risks in the foreign economic activity of enterprises. /V.P. Bocharnikov, S.M. Repetsky and DR. - Kyiv: "INEKS", 2007.

20. Roik V.D. Occupational risks: assessment; control; insurance. M., 2004.

21. Tepman L.N. Risks in the economy. Moscow: Unity-Dana, 2005.

22. Ustenko O.L. Theory of economic risk: Monograph. – K.: MAUP, 2007.

23. Fishburne P. Theory of utility for decision making. – M.: Nauka, 2008.

24. Khokhlov N.V. Risk management. - M.: Publishing house of UNITI, 2004.

25. Shapiro V.D. etc. Project management. - St. Petersburg: "TwoThree", 2005.

26. Shapkin A.S. Economic and financial risks. Evaluation, management, investment portfolio. Moscow: Dashkov i Ko, 2004.