Risk Research & Analysis

Risk Research & Analysis

We are often asked why we started such a comprehensive Risk research and analysis, and the answer is actually quite basic. We saw the confusion in the market around the subject and especially the need. For example, all the various Risk frameworks, methods, approaches and or concepts have their own vocabulary. Each of these vocabularies have their own definition of terms, like what is Risk, objects related to risk or even how does compliance and rules apply to risk.

The lack of standard Risk terms, definitions, and concepts was the starting point of the Global University Alliance (GUA) interest around the topic. We in the GUA, which is an international consortium of universities, professors, lecturers and researchers whose aim it is to provide a collaborative platform for academic research, analysis and development and to explore leading practices, best practices as well as to develop missing practices, believed that Risk was worthy of further investigation.

With currently over 450+ lecturers and researchers from across the world the risk analysis was coordinated with a research team, chosen by the GUA Board. The first analysis and research in 2004, identified that the lack of repeatable standards around risk in the concepts of enterprise modelling, engineering and architecture concepts, results in unnecessary threats, danger, jeopardy, vulnerabilities, endangerment and safety issues. The need to identify relevant aspects, reusable/replicable pattern and develop models that can be used by any organization, both large and small, regardless of its products/services, activities or industry, became apparent.

In September 2004, the research and analysis on how organizations apply risk within various enterprise modelling, engineering and architecture concepts was initiated. Throughout this process of analyzing and identifying the de-facto way of modelling, engineering and architecting risk in various concepts was the basis of specifying which objects are involved with risk.

The underlying research questions where among others:

  • What is risk?
  • How is risk being modelled, engineered and architected?
  • What are the most common risk meta objects?
  • What are the most common risk object classes?
  • What are the most common risk object stereo types?
  • What are the most common risk object subtypes?
  • Whatre are the most common Risk terms used?
  • Which semantic relationships do the objects have between each other?
  • Which is the most common Risk Models?
  • Where do the objects and the specific relations appear in various models?
  • Which objects are involved in the ‘possible risk’ modelling, engineering and architecture?
  • Which objects are involved in the ‘actual risk’ modelling, engineering and architecture?

The Global University Alliance used the concept of ontology as both a shared vocabulary and the very definition of its objects and concepts. In order to go the next steps and fully use the potential of developing the risk ontology. The Risk Ontology, includes all the above mentioned research findings and developed based on them the following:

  • Define a Risk Object overview
  • Develop a Risk categorization and classification
  • Specify a Risk Taxonomy
  • Describe a Risk Model with specific representation of the real world objects.
  • Develop a Risk Meta Model describing the objects within the Models.
  • Create a Risk Meta-Metamodel that defines and describes the various Risk Metamodel and their relations.

The main body of research and analysis was structured in the following ways:

  • Research and analyse what works around risk modelling, engineering and architecture, again and again (best practice), and what are unique practices applied by leading organizations (leading practices).
  • Identify common and repeatable patterns which provide the basis for the Risk Ontology.
  • Develop “Reference Content” in terms of risk objects, risk semantic relations, risk taxonomy, risk models, risk meta model etc., that increase the level of re-usability and replication within the field of risk modelling, risk engineering and risk architecture.
  • Extended with accelerators that adopt and reproduce the identified risk best practices and leading practices.

Frameworks and Concepts Studied

Surrounded by multiple different risk frameworks, methods, approaches, concepts and even more publications on the subject, did we do an intensive research on the existing body of knowledge. Among the many relevant, here are the 27 framework/concepts we used most, followed by the 114 publications we quoted or used most from. The list does not reflect importance of subject or that other framework or publications are not relevant, they were chosen as these having the information we used (in addition to the market research). Simply stating that due to space limit we could not list the hundreds of framework, methods, approaches, concepts and publications on the subject. We therefore only mention the most used framework/concepts and publications and believe they cover the subject discussed from various angles:

Framework/Concept Organization
Risk Management Working Group International Council on System Engineering (INCOSE)
Project Management Institute (PMI) Risk Management Specific Interest Group (RiskSIG) Risk Management Specific Interest Group (RiskSIG)
Environmental Risk Management Authority ERMA
Institute of Risk Management IRM
ISO 31000 – standards relating to risk management ISO-International Organization for Standardization
RiskAoA – Risk Analysis of Alternatives United States Department of Defense (USDoD)
Risk Management Agency (RMA) U.S. Department of Agriculture
US Farm Policy and Risk Assistance ICTSD Programme on Agricultural Trade and Sustainable Development
Standard Risk Taxonomy The Open Group
ISO/IEC Guide 73:2009. Risk management – Vocabulary ISO-International Organization for Standardization
Guide for Applying the Risk Management Framework to Federal Information Systems NIST-National Institute of Standards and Technology
Federal Emergency Management Risk concepts Federal Emergency Management Agency
Information Systems Security Risk concepts Information Systems Security Association – Risk concepts
Risk Governance International Risk Governance Council
Risk concepts Global Risk Forum
The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction UNISDR
Supply Chain and Transport Risk Concepts World Economic Forum Supply Chain and Transport Risk Initiative
Risk Governance International Risk Governance Council
ISO/PAS 28000:2007 – Specification for security management systems for the supply chain ISO-International Organization for Standardization
Risk Management Risk Management Authority
Integrated risk Government of Canada
Corporate risk profiles Government of Canada
Risk statements Government of Canada
Risk taxonomies Government of Canada
Risk management capability model Government of Canada
A Taxonomy of Threats for Complex Risk Management Cambridge Centre for Risk Studies
Cambridge Risk Framework Cambridge Centre for Risk Studies

Table 1: Overview of the key Risk Framework and Concept analyzed.


Title Author(s) Year
Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, Chicago Knight, F. H. 1921
Man and Society in Calamity: The Effects of War, Revolution, Famine, Pestilence upon Human Mind, Behavior, Social Organization and Cultural Life Pitirim Sorokin 1942
The environment as hazard Ian Burton, Robert Kates, and Gilbert F. White 1978
Judged frequency of lethal events. Lichtenstein, Sarah; Slovic, Paul; Fischhoff, Baruch; Layman, Mark; Combs, Barbara 1978
Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic, and Amos Tversky 1982
Risk and culture: An essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers Mary Douglas, and Aaron Wildavsky 1982
A Philosophical Introduction to the Theory of Risk Evaluation and Measurement Rescher, Nicholas 1983
Acceptable risk Baruch Fischhoff, Sarah Lichtenstein, Paul Slovic, Steven L. Derby, and Ralph Keeney 1984
Normal accidents. Living with high-risk technologies Charles Perrow 1984
Lateral Asymmetry of Risky Recommendations Drake, R. A. 1985
Cognitive risk-taking after frontal or temporal lobectomy—I. The synthesis of fragmented visual information Miller, L. 1985
(1985). “Cognitive risk taking after frontal or temporal lobectomy II. The synthesis of phonemic and semantic information.” Neuropsychologia, 23, 371–379. Miller, L., & Milner, B. 1985
Human System Response to Disaster: An Inventory of Sociological Findings Thomas E. Drabek 1986
An Introduction to Risk Management (2 ed.). Crockford, Neil 1986
An introduction to risk management Crockford, Neil 1986
Perception of Risk https://www.uns.ethz.ch/edu/teach/0.pdf Paul Slovic 1987
Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication. Covello, Vincent T.; Allen., Frederick H. 1988
Planning for earthquakes: Risks, politics, and policy Philip R. Berke, and Timothy Beatley 1992
Earth shock: Hurricanes, volcanoes, earthquakes, tornadoes and other forces of nature W. Andrew Robinson 1993
Taxonomy-based risk identification in software industry. https://resources.sei.cmu.edu/library/asset-view.cfm?assetid=11847 Marvin Carr , Suresh Konda , Ira Monarch , Clay F. Walker , F. Carol Ulrich 1993
At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters Piers Blaikie, Terry Cannon, Ian Davis, and Ben Wisner 1994
RISK John Adams 1995
Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk Peter L. Bernstein 1996
Reduction and predictability of natural disasters John B. Rundle, William Klein, Don L. Turcotte 1996
Evolutionary hypotheses of risk-sensitive choice: Age differences and perspective change X. T. Wang 1996
Modern Society Shocked by Its Risks Niklas Luhmann 1996
Regions of risk: A geographical introduction to disasters Kenneth Hewitt 1997
The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture and Deviance at NASA Diane Vaughan 1997
Who takes risks? Daring and caution in foreign policy making. Kowert, P.A., & Hermann, M.G. 1997
Dangerous earth: An introduction to geologic hazards Barbara W. Murck, Brian J. Skinner, Stephen C. Porter 1998
Paying the price: The status and role of insurance against natural disasters in the United States Howard Kunreuther, and Richard J. Roth 1998
Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk Peter L. Bernstein 1998
The Onset of the East Asian Financial Crisis Radelet, Steven; Sachs, Jeffrey 1998
Disasters and democracy Rutherford H. Platt 1999
Natural hazard mitigation: Recasting disaster policy and planning David Godschalk, Timothy Beatley, Philip Berke, David Brower, and Edward J. Kaiser 1999
Probabilistic Risk Assessment: What Is It And Why Is It Worth Performing It? Dr. Michael Stamatelatos 2000
Behaviour Research and Therapy, An International Multi-Disciplinary Journal Joseph I. Constans 2001
Acceptable Risk Processes: Lifelines and Natural Hazards. Craig Taylor and Erik VanMarcke 2002
“Environmental Risk Analysis: Problems and Perspectives in Different Countries” Gurjar, Bhola Ram; Mohan, Manju 2002
Risk, Uncertainty and Profit Frank Hyneman Knight 2002
The social amplification of risk Nick Pidgeon, Roger E. Kasperson, and Paul Slovic 2003
Megaprojects and Risk: An Anatomy of Ambition Flyvbjerg, Bent 2003
Enterprise Risk Management: From Incentives to Controls Lam, James 2003
Social Risk Management: The World Bank Approach to Social Protection in a Globalizing World Holzmann, Robert; Lynne Sherburne-Benz and Emil Tesliuc 2003
Targeted Transfers in Poor Countries:Revisiting the Trade-Offs and Policy Options Ravallion, Martin 2003
Mapping vulnerability: disasters, development, and people Greg Bankoff, Georg Frerks, and Dorothea Hilhorst 2004
Dread Risk, September 11, and Fatal Traffic Accidents Gerd Gigerenzer 2004
When All Else Fails: Government as the Ultimate Risk Manager David A. Moss 2004
Defining Risk, Financial Analysts Journal, 60 (6), 19–25. A paper exploring the foundations of risk. (PDF file). Holton, Glyn A. 2004
Risk and Financial Management: Mathematical and Computational Methods Charles, Tapiero 2004
Advanced Financial Risk Management: Tools and Techniques for Integrated Credit Risk and Interest Rate Risk Management van Deventer, Donald R., Kenji Imai and Mark Mesler 2004
Mitigation of hazardous comets and asteroids Michael J.S. Belton, Thomas H. Morgan, Nalin H. Samarasinha, Donald K. Yeomans 2005
Natural disaster hotspots: a global risk analysis Maxx Dilley 2005
What is a disaster? New answers to old questions Ronald W. Perry, and Enrico Quarantelli 2005
Personality and domain specific risk taking”. Journal of Risk Research 8 (2) Nicholson, N., Soane, E., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., & Willman, P. 2005
Trust Us and Be Scared: The Changing Nature of Risk John Handmer and Paul James 2005
Economic Capital and Financial Risk Management for Financial Services Firms and Conglomerates (Finance and Capital Markets) Bruce Porteous, Pradip Tapadar 2005
Project Manager’s Spotlight on Risk Management Kim Heldman 2005
Quantitative Risk Management. Concepts, Techniques and Tools, Princeton Series in Finance, Princeton, NJ McNeil, Alexander J.; Frey, Rüdiger; Embrechts, Paul 2005
Global Risk Governance Ortwin Renn 2005
Quantitative risk management: concepts, techniques and tools McNeil, Alexander J.; Frey, Rüdiger; Embrechts, Paul 2005
Essentials of financial risk management. John Wiley and Sons Horcher, Karen A. 2005
Natural hazards: Earth’s processes as hazards, disasters, and catastrophes Edward A. Keller, and Robert H. Blodgett 2006
Socially Responsible Engineering: Justice in Risk Management (ISBN 978-0-471-78707-5) Daniel A. Vallero, and P. Aarne Vesilind 2006
“An Introduction to Factor Analysis of Information Risk (FAIR)” Jack A. Jones, CISSP, CISM, CISA 2006
The Role of Risk Avoidance in Anxiety Jon K. Maner, Norman B. Schmidt, 2006
Introduction to Risk Management and Insurance (9 ed.) Dorfman, Mark S. 2007
Understanding and Managing Risk Attitude. David Hillson; Ruth Murray-Webster 2007
Dispositional anxiety and risk-avoidant decision-making, Personality and Individual Differences Jon K. Maner, J. Anthony Richey, Kiara Cromer, Mike Mallott, Carl W. Lejuez, Thomas E. Joiner, Norman B. Schmidt, 2007
Practical Project Risk Management: The Atom Methodology David Hillson, Peter Simon 2007
Towards the development of an evolutionarily valid domain-specific risk-taking scale Kruger, Daniel J.; Wang, Xiao-Tian; Wilke, Andreas 2007
“Risk is a combination of the likelihood of an occurrence of a hazardous event or exposure(s) and the severity of injury or ill health that can be caused by the event or exposure(s)” (OHSAS 18001:2007). EMC Europe 2007
Risk analysis: a quantitative guide David Vose 2008
Swimming with Crocodiles: The Culture of Extreme Drinking Marjana Martinic and Fiona Measham (eds.) 2008
Governance, Risk, and Compliance Handbook Anthony Tarantino 2008
The ABCs of Governance Risk and Compliance, SAP GRC For Dummies Denise Vu Broady, Holly A. Roland 2008
A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (4th Edition) Project Management Institute, , Inc. 2008
“Market Risk, Interest Rate Risk, and Interdependencies in Insurer Stock Returns: A System-GARCH Model”, The Journal of Risk and Insurance James M. Carson; Elyas Elyasiani; Iqbal Mansur 2008
Gender differences in financial risk aversion and career choices are affected by testosterone Sapienza P., Zingales L. and Maestripieri D. 2008
Testosterone and financial risk preferences Coren L. Apicellaa, Anna Dreberb, Benjamin Campbelld, Peter B. Graye, Moshe Hoffmanf, Anthony C. Littleg 2008
Catalogue of Risks, Natural, Technical, Social and Health Risks Dirk Proske 2008
Risk and Safety Aaron Wildavsky and Adam Wildavsky 2008
ICFAI Journal of Financial Risk Management Conti, Cesare & Mauri, Arnaldo 2008
Building Safer Communities. Risk Governance, Spatial Planning and Responses to Natural Hazards Urbano Fra Paleo 2009
The Failure of Risk Management: Why It’s Broken and How to Fix It. Hubbard, Douglas 2009
Security Risk Management Body of Knowledge Julian Talbot and Miles Jakeman 2009
“The Failure of Risk Management: Why It’s Broken and How to Fix It Douglas Hubbard 2009
Identifying and Managing Project Risk: Essential Tools for Failure-Proofing Your Project Tom Kendrick 2009
Contradictory approaches? On realism and constructivism in the social sciences research on risk, technology and the environment Andreas Metzner-Szigeth 2009
Building Safer Communities. Risk Governance, Spatial Planning and Responses to Natural Hazards. Urbano Fra Paleo 2009
A frame of reference for research of integrated Governance Risk and Compliance Racz, N., Weippl, E. & Seufert, A 2010
Leadership Risk: A Guide for Private Equity and Strategic Investors. David Cooper 2010
Combating Poverty and Inequality – Structural Change, Social Policy and Politics United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) 2010
Why Your IT Project May Be Riskier Than You Think Bent Flyvbjerg and Alexander Budzier 2011
Risk Types. OP Matters No 14 February 2012 Geoff Trickey 2011
A Practical Guide to Delivering Personalisation Jaimee Lewis, Helen Sanderson 2011
Beyond our imagination: Fukushima and the problem of assessing risk M. V. Ramana 2011
Fukushima: Consequences of Systemic Problems in Nuclear Plant Design Diaz Maurin, François 2011
Practical Project Risk Management: The ATOM Methodology David Hillson and Peter Simon 2012
Practical Risk Management: The ATOM Methodology Peter Simon and David Hillson 2012
Risk as Feelings in the Effect of Patient Outcomes on Physicians’ Subsequent Treatment Decisions: A Randomized Trial and Manipulation Validation Joshua A. Hemmerich, Arthur S. Elstein, Margaret L. Schwarze, Elizabeth Ghini Moliski, William Dale 2012
9/11, Act II: a fine-grained analysis of regional variations in traffic fatalities in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks. Gaissmaier W, Gigerenzer G. 2012
The Risks We Dread: A Social Circle Account Rocio Garcia-Retamero, Mirta Galesic 2012
Fundamentals of Risk Management, 2nd edition Hopkin, Pau 2012
Measuring risk literacy: The Berlin Numeracy Test. Judgment and Decision Making Cokely, E. T., Galesic, M., Schulz, E., Ghazal, S., & Garcia-Retamero, R. 2012
Dealing with supply chain risks: Linking risk management practices and strategies to performance Wieland, A., Wallenburg, C.M. 2012
Common Vulnerability and Exposures list. Cve.mitre.org. Retrieved on 2012-04-17. Mitre 2012
Floods: From Risk to Opportunity (IAHS Red Book Series) Ali Chavoshian, and Kuniyoshi Takeuchi 2013
Resisting hybridisation between modes of clinical risk management: Contradiction, contest, and the production of intractable conflict Fischer, Michael Daniel; Ferlie, Ewan 2013
Resisting hybridisation between modes of clinical riskmanagement: Contradiction, contest, and the production of intractable con?ict Fischer, Michael Daniel; Ferlie, Ewan 2013
When Dread Risks Are More Dreadful than Continuous Risks: Comparing Cumulative Population Losses over Time Nicolai Bodemer, Azzurra Ruggeri, Mirta Galesic 2013
The Risk Factor: Why Every Organization Needs Big Bets, Bold Characters, and the Occasional Spectacular Failure Deborah Perry Piscione 2014
“Risk” Hansson, Sven Ove; Edward N. Zalta, 2014
Introduction to Risk and Failures: Tools and Methodologies D. H. Stamatis 2014
Risk Oriented Process Modelling Koller, M. von Rosing, M., Elsevier Publication 2015

Table 2: Overview of the key Risk publications analyzed.

What the various threat and risk framework, method and approaches as well as all the great publications on the subject can’t tell you the same way, as a research and analysis does, is what works good and what doesn’t work so good around threat & risk concepts in the various organizations. Identifying the patterns of what the Outperformers and Underperformers do differently, reveals both worst practices, best practices and leading practices in the field.

Our threat and risk research actually proofed that certain concepts around risk initiatives indeed performed better than others. While some might be skeptical to such an approach, academic studies in such areas are very common. Already a decade ago did Professor Malone at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) prove that there is a connection to an organizations concepts of models in the business and the overall performance [1]. Our research clearly showed the difference of how organizations understood and worked with risk management concepts to potential threats and actual risk.

Risk Ontology Key Research Team

The Global University Alliance currently consists of over 450 universities, lecturers and researchers from across the world. The aim it is to provide a collaborative platform for academic research, analysis and development and to explore de-facto standards in terms of researching leading practices and best practices as well as to develop missing aspects/concepts. To manage the size of a complex research topic like Risk and better network across universities, lecturers and researchers, we have defined research responsibilities in key areas. It is the aim that the key research responsible provides the international platform where universities and thought leaders can interact to conduct research in the key aspect of the overall research. The Risk research and analysis started in 2004 and additional focus areas of identifying the risk objects, develop meta object where added in 2009. With the practical testing within organizations in 2011,2012 and 2013, the meta models ontology was updated in 2014. The following Risk Ontology was put together and peer reviewed by the following persons:

Key Global University Alliance Research Members of Risk Ontology

  • Risk Ontology research responsible: Professor Mark von Rosing, Global University Alliance, Chairman-Board of Directors
  • Ontology research responsible: Professor Wim Laurier, Saint-Louis University Brussels & Ghent University, Belgium
  • Semantic research responsible: Dr. Simon Polovina, Sheffield Hallam University, England
  • Enterprise Architecture research responsible: John A. Zachman, Inventor and Father of Enterprise Architecture, Zachman International
  • Business Process research responsible: Professor August W. Scheer, Inventor and Father of Business Process Management, Scheer Group
  • Information Systems research responsible: Professor Hans Scheruhn, Harz University, Germany
  • Role Oriented Modelling research responsible: Professor Maxim Arzumanyan, St. Petersburg University, Russia
  • Enterprise Agile research responsible: Professor Asif Gill, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
  • Business Model research responsible: Maria Hove, Global University Alliance, Researcher & Business Analyst
  • Enterprise Sustainability research responsible: David Coloma Guerrero, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Spain
  • System of Systems Dynamics research responsible: Adam D.M. Svendsen, PhD, Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies (CIFS)
  • Value Model research responsible: Ulrik Foldager, Global University Alliance, Researcher & Value Analyst
  • System Engineering research responsible: Jonnro Erasmus, Enterprise Engineer at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR)
  • Product Engineering research responsible: Jonnro Erasmus, Enterprise Engineer at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR)
  • Measurement & Reporting research responsible: Ulrik Foldager, Global University Alliance, Researcher & Business Innovation & Transformation Analyst
  • Social Media research responsible: Zakaria Maamar, Zayed University, United Arab Emirates
  • Social Machine research responsible: Vanilson Buregio, Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil
  • Insurance Industry research responsible: Michael Koller, Universitätsklinikum Regensburg, Germany, Prudential, UK
  • ERP & Analytics research responsible: Karin Gräslund, RheinMain University-Wiesbaden Business School, Germany
  • Meta Model responsible: Ulrik Foldager, LEADing Practice

Standard organizations

  • The Enterprise & Industry Standards body LEADing Practice: Georg Etzel, Co-CEO
  • Information Security Forum : Steve Durbin, CEO
  • Council for Scientific and Industrial Research: Rentia Barnard, Enterprise Architect Director
  • OMG – Software Standard Organization: Fred Cummins,  OMG, BMI, Chairman

 The following Key People from Government organizations were involved:

  • European Patent Office: Rod Peacock, Enterprise Architect
  • NATO Coordinator: Krzysztof Skurzak, NATO Architecture & Design
  • NASA: Fatima Senghore
  • Danish Defense: Jens Theodor Nielsen, Joint Chief Planning
  • French Ministry of Defense, NATO, ISO: Régis Dumond
  • US DoD: Ronald N. Batdorf, Joint Staff, Enterprise Engineer Lead
  • Government of Australia: John M. Rogers
  • German Federal Employment Agency: Klaus Vitt, Senior Director General
  • Northern Health: Bonnie Urquhart, Operations Performance Director

Key Industry People:

AstraZeneca Partha Chakravartti
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma Clemens Utschig-Utschig
Booz Allen Hamilton Tom Preston
Cardinal Health Jeff Greer
Carlsberg Group Anni Olsen
Casewise Nathan Fullington
Concordia Ashish Thomas
Electrolux Christopher K. Swierczynski
FLSchmidt Jacob Gammelgaard
Fujitsu Keith Swenson
General Motors Ekambareswaran Balasubramanian
IBM Corporation Mike A. Marin
IBM Corporation Stephen White
iGrafx Mark Stanford
Johnson & Johnson Alex Kokkonen
KLM, Air France Henk Kuil
LEGO Group Anette Falk Bøgebjerg
Maersk Group Mads Clausager
Nationale Nederlanden Vincent Snels
NedBank Antony Dicks
Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems Mai Phuong
NovoZymes BioTechnology Thomas Christian Olsen
NS Rail (Dutch Railway) Bas Bach
Office Depot Katia Bartels
Pfizer Pharmaceuticals Deb Boykin
Philips Michel van den Hoven
Prudential Insurance plc Michael Koller
Reserve Bank Callie Smit
SAP Tim Hoebeek
SaxoBank Mikael Munck
Shell Yr Gunnarsdottir
SKF Sven Vollbehr
Smart Architects Yury Orlov
TeliaSonera Maria Rybrink
Tommy Hilfiger Gert Meiling
Toyota Philippe Lebacq
Transnet Rail Kevin Govender
Verizon Richard N. Conzo
Westpac Andrew M Ross

[1] Thomas W. Malone, Do Some Business Models Perform Better than Others? A Study of the 1000 Largest US Firms, Sloan School of Management Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2004.