Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Procedia Manufacturing00 (2019)000–000
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
Procedia Manufacturing00 (2019)000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia Manufacturing 46 (2020) 256–262

13th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering (INTER-ENG 2019)

13th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering (INTER-ENG 2019)
Development of a Risk Management Technique in Strategic
Development
Planning of a Risk Case
of Universities. Management
study of Technique in Strategic
a Polytechnical Institute
Planning of Universities. Case study of a Polytechnical Institute
Nelli V. Syreyshchikova , Danil Yu. Pimenov *,Tadeusz Mikolajczyk , Liviu Moldovanc
a a, b
0F

a a, b c
Nelli V.
b
Syreyshchikova
a
Department , Danil
of Automated Mechanical Yu. Pimenov
Engineering, *,Tadeusz
South Ural State University, 76, Mikolajczyk
0F , Liviu
Lenin prosp.,Chelyabinsk, Russia,Moldovan
454080
Department of Production Engineering, UTP University of Science and Technology, Al. prof. S. Kaliskiego 7, Bydgoszcz 85-796, Poland
c
“George
a
Department of Automated
Emil Palade” Mechanical
University Engineering,
of Medicine, Pharmacy,South Ural
Science andState University,
Technology 76, Lenin
of Targu prosp.,Chelyabinsk,
Mures, Russia,street,
38 Gherghe Marinescu 454080 540139
b
Department of Production Engineering, UTP UniversityTargu
of Science andRomania
Mures, Technology, Al. prof. S. Kaliskiego 7, Bydgoszcz 85-796, Poland
c
“George Emil Palade” University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Targu Mures, 38 Gherghe Marinescu street, 540139
Targu Mures, Romania

Abstract

Abstract
In this paper the results of developing risk management system in a higher education institution are presented. Specifics of
developing a corporate and local risk registers are discussed. A methodology and step-by-step plan of implementing risk
In this paper into
management the the
results of developing
strategic risk management
activity planning system
are presented usingin the
a higher education
example institution institute
of a polytechnical are presented.
which Specifics of
reveals also
developing a corporate
the need of education for and local risk
sustainable registers are discussed. A methodology and step-by-step plan of implementing risk
manufacturing.
management into the strategic activity planning are presented using the example of a polytechnical institute which reveals also
the need ofThe
© 2019 education for Published
Authors. sustainable by
manufacturing.
Elsevier B.V.. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
© 2020
© 2019The
Peer-reviewTheAuthors. Published
Authors.
under
by Elsevier
Published
responsibility
B.V. B.V.. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
by Elsevier
This is an open access article under of
the the scientific
CC BY-NC-ND committee of the 13th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Engineering
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 13th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 13th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in
Engineering
Keywords: innovations; management; planning; methodology; risk management.

Keywords: innovations; management; planning; methodology; risk management.

1. Introduction
1. Introduction
Modernizing the higher education system in a climate of globalization and internalization introduced the risk of
Russian universities failing to fulfill their mission, which is to provide quality education services. The real need for
Modernizing
active innovationtheinhigher education
the higher systemsystem
education in a climate
leads of
to globalization andofinternalization
the anticipation implementingintroduced the risk of
a risk management
Russian universities failing to
system in Russian universities. fulfill their mission, which is to provide quality education services. The real need for
active innovation in the higher education system leads to the anticipation of implementing a risk management
system in Russian universities.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +7-351-267-9267.

E-mail address: danil_u@rambler.ru
* Corresponding
2351-9789 © 2019 author. Tel.: +7-351-267-9267.
The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
E-mail address: danil_u@rambler.ru
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
2351-9789
Peer-review©under
2019responsibility
The Authors. ofPublished by Elsevier
the scientific B.V..ofThis
committee the is an International
13th open access article under Interdisciplinarity
Conference the CC BY-NC-ND in license
Engineering.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 13th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering.

2351-9789 © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 13th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering.
10.1016/j.promfg.2020.03.038
 Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 46 (2020) 256–262 257
2 Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

Russian universities need to introduce risk management due to such factors as economic instability, limited
resources to systematically perform the university's mission, the wide gap between the rich and the poor,
disinclination of some academic staff members to be involved into the innovation activity, insufficient preparation
of education management bodies to solve new problems in a complex way [1]. Integrating risk management into the
university’s organizational management system is therefore a relevant task, becoming increasingly more relevant
now that risk management requirements have been made compulsory in the quality management system (QMS)
according to the new version of ISO 9001 [2, 3]. It is also relevant for the South Ural State National Research
University (SUSU) in Chelyabinsk, an institution of higher education the management system of which is being
actively improved on the basis of Project 5-100, a special program to improve the competitiveness of SUSU among
the world’s major scientific and academic centers, which introduces the need for a risk management system at
SUSU.
The article aims to explore the specifics of developing a university risk management system using the example of
SUSU.

2. Methods

To achieve this aim, a set of methods was used, which involved, in particular, analysis, comparison, classification
and review of literature, legislative base as well as the content of Russian and foreign universities’ websites in the
field of risk management.
Early studies of education were carried out in the US and Europe in connection with the development of the
education market. Most research in this field is devoted to the study of possibilities to apply risk assessment
techniques in colleges’ and universities’ activity. There are noteworthy studies of such researchers [4–6].
Although the issue of risk management in education was first addressed in Russia not long ago, V.Yu.
Krichevsky, N.F. Rodionova, A.P. Tryapitsyna et al. made attempts to study the methods of predicting threats to the
development of national institutions of higher education. In the 1990s and early 2000s, the main aspects of risk
analysis in universities’ activity were the risks associated with a discrepancy between educational programs and the
principles of state education policy (political risks), needs of the society, which is the main consumer of education
services (market risks), as well as a decline in the quality of education due to a shortage of qualified teachers and the
university’s imperfect management system (organizational risks) [7–9].
In Russia, university risks have been actively studied since 2005, when most educational institutions were
declared self-sufficient. Public funding cutbacks and tightening of licensing standards resulted in a revision of
educational courses and curricula. Modern studies of risk management in education place high emphasis on
innovative projects, since these projects are considered the most promising and are in line with the state program for
the development of the education system. In [10–13] proposed models for assessing risks under modern conditions.
The literature review indicated that Russian national science currently has no commonly accepted theoretical
approach to the issues of risk management in the system of Russian higher education. Therefore, the analysis of
trends in the development of risk management in higher education becomes extremely important. The specifics of
the innovative experience of introducing risk management to Russian universities, namely the theoretical and
practical foundations of risk management in higher education, were studied by [8, 14]. S. Belousova and A. Orel
proposed a concept of modernization risks in the field of education. T. Udovitskaya analyzed risks in the activities
of the higher education system that are connected with the graduates’ achievement level. The foreign theory of
higher education has a much wider range of studies devoted to risk management in higher education. These include
the research of M. Huber, K. Huber, K. Raban and L. Turner who made an attempt to study the process of
identifying university risks including the academic ones [6, 11–17].

3. Results an discussion

The following business processes were identified as the objects of risk management:
• provision of education services;
• research and innovation activities;
• human resources management;
258 Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 46 (2020) 256–262
Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing00 (2019) 000–000 3

• resource management;
• procurement;
• maintenance, repair, and disposal.
The following factors need to be considered in risk management at a university:
• systematic approach;
• continuous improvement;
• process approach;
• the contribution of efficient use of assets and resources;
• lowering the degree of uncertainty in the less critical aspects of the university’s activities;
• protection of property interest and the creation and improvement of the university image;
• staff development and the creation of the institutional management knowledge database;
• optimization of business processes.
Development of university risk management involves the following steps.
Step 1: Risk management planning. A plan, including general approaches to risk management, is made [18]. The
inputs of the risk management process are operational goals, results of external and internal audits, analyses of
trends in the development of external and internal environment, operational plans and reports of the structural units
of the university, results of scientific studies, management reports. The outputs of the risk management process are a
risk register, a risk management plan, and a risk report that provide information of the operational risks in the main
business processes.
Step 2: Identification of risks. At this stage, risks are identified and their characteristics are recorded.
Identification of risks involves identification of the risk source, i.e. determination of the situations or events that may
have negative consequences for the university’s activity. When identification has been completed, the identified
risks are carefully recorded, i.e. risk registers are compiled.
In order to facilitate the introduction of risk management, an indicative register was developed, which includes
eight groups of risks (reputation, interaction with students, human resource, property and infrastructure, finance,
commerce, organization, information and IT risks) and determines the co-factors and actions aimed at reducing the
consequences of risk effects and mechanisms of early risk prevention as corresponding to the function of risk
management mechanism.
Following the studies by the leading British and Russian universities [19–21], two types of registers were
developed, the corporate one and the local one. High priority risks, which influence the achievement of the
university’s strategic goals and mission, are included in the Corporate Risk Register. Such a register can potentially
consist of 10 to 20 priority risks [19–21].
The corporate register of South Ural University that was compiled has seventeen groups of risks:
• research funding;
• financial stability;
• regulatory compliance;
• coordination between the university and colleges, lyceums, and schools;
• staffing;
• preservation and development of real estate;
• admission policy;
• competition;
• health and safety;
• corporate management;
• level of the students’ knowledge and quality assurance;
• associated and dependent units (the university publishing house);
• administrative systems;
• investment management.
Moreover, the compiled register should contain a detailed analysis of each risk, the name of the risk owner, a
description of possible risk scenarios and their consequences, determination of basic parameters or risk indicators:
 Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 46 (2020) 256–262 259
4 Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

the probability of occurrence, the degree of exposure and significance of the risk, its interaction with other risks;
further risk treatment activities [18].
The Local Risk Register should be compiled and maintained by the university’s structural units (institutes,
faculties, departments, branches, etc.). An example of a local risk register for the Polytechnical Insitute of South
Ural State University is presented in Table 1. All risk registers should be revised once or twice a year and new risks
should be added to them as they arise in the course of the university's activity.

Table 1. Risks of an higher technical educational institution.

Risk Classification Factors
Being listed as “ineffective” in the results of the effectiveness monitoring Organizational Human
Not fulfilling the accreditation and licensing requirements of the Organizational Human, infrastructure
FederalEducational Standard
Failure to create favorable conditions for scientific, public, cultural, and sport Organizational Human, political
activities of the students
Low base level of the prospective students Social Human
Insufficient government funding of the educational and scientific activities of Financial Political, economical
the university
Insufficient operating assets Financial Economical,human
Insufficient (low) quality of educational services Organizational Human
Shortage of qualified teaching staff Social Human
Losing consumers of the university services (students) Organizational Human, financial, political
Not providing sustainable education in technical field, especially manufacturing Educational Human

As a remark classification in table 1 contents along organizational, financial and social classification of risks also
educational factors regarding provision of sustainable education in technical field, especially for sustainable
manufacturing [22, 23].
Once the risks have been identified, the risk owner – the official responsible for managing the risks and
supervising the sites to reduce the risk level – has to be determined. The rector and the first vice rector, i.e. managers
of the highest administrative level, were appointed the owners of strategic risks. The rector bears full responsibility
for the entire process of the university risk management as well as for the effectiveness of financial and strategic
management. He must ensure that the university fulfills the financial requirements of the Ministry of Education and
Science and uses the state funds for the purposes for which such funds have been provided. Directors of institutes,
deans of faculties, and heads of departments are responsible for risk assessment and management within their
competence.
Step 3: Analysis and prioritization of risks. The identified risk is analyzed to determine its potential influence on
various directions of the university’s activity. For each risk, the probability of occurrence and its possible
consequences are assessed. Differences between the inherent risk (the risk that is inherent in the university) and the
residual risk (the risk that threatens the university’s activity after all appropriate measures of risk management have
been taken) are also determined.
Specific risks of universities as educational institutions are those of insufficient theoretical basis, insufficient
practical experience, and insufficient teacher qualification. The primary risk for the society in this context is the risk
of the lack of qualified professionals. The primary risk for the state connected with the educational institutions is
that of inefficient use of funding provided for professional training for economic growth.
The Bowtie method useful for risks connected with human factors was chosen for risk assessment. An example
of using the Bowtie methods for one of the risks is presented in Fig. 1.
Step 4: Planning of the response. For each risk, the steps necessary to reduce the risk probability and its
consequences are determined, i.e. decisions are made about which method of responding to risks is the most
acceptable for the university (risk avoidance, risk transfer, risk acceptance, risk reduction, use of opportunities, etc.).
260 Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 46 (2020) 256–262
Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing00 (2019) 000–000 5

Step 5: Determination of the risk level. The risk level (that is, the risk that the university is ready to take) is
determined and assessed by the university’s administration when determining the strategy and mission and
developing risk management mechanisms.

Inconformity of Not qualifying for

facilities and resources the license

The risk of not Not passing the

Inconformity of the fulfilling the certification
electronic information and accreditation and
learning environment licensing requirements
of the Federal University closing
Education Standard
Staff unfit to implement the
education program Inconformity of the teaching
and learning materials

Fig. 1. The Bowtie risk assessment for not fulfilling the accreditation and licensing requirements of the Federal Educational Standard.

Step 6: Risk monitoring involves evaluating the effectiveness of risk management, controlling the identified risks
and residual risks, and identifying new risks.
Step 7: The effectiveness and efficiency of risk management largely depends on the interaction, information
exchange, and counseling among the participants at each stage of the process.
The following indicators of effectiveness and efficiency of risk management have been identified:
• an increase in the number of objectives fulfilled and projects implemented;
• a decrease in the number of emergencies;
• a higher customer satisfaction index.
Figure 2 shows a chart of the developed model of risk management for SUSU’s QMS [13] (see Figure 2).

Problem identification

Risk analysis

Environment factors Internal factors Analysis of the university operations

Identification of sources and types of risks Considering the alternative solutions

Choosing risk response methods Decision making

Method 1 Method 2 Method N

Control and implementation of the results

Fig. 2. Modelof SUSU’s QMS Risk Management.

 Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 46 (2020) 256–262 261
6 Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

4. Conclusion

It has been demonstrated that the innovative activity of a modern university is associated with different kinds of
uncertainties and risks. Under such circumstances, the management of a higher education institution should make a
decision to develop a risk management infrastructure and a detailed risk register, taking into account the actions
aimed at reducing the probability of risks and their consequences.
The analysis of the university’s activities and the devised methodology for developing a risk management system
for SUSU lead us to the conclusion that a risk management system can become an integral part of the university’s
organizational management. The model of risk management and the detailed risk registers identifying the factors
associated with the risks, the planned actions aimed at reducing the consequences of risks and early prevention
mechanisms have been developed, and therefore the aim of the study has been achieved and a risk management
system for SUSU has been developed.
The results of this research provide a basis for effective risk management, which contributes to:
• enhancing the reputation and image of the university;
• ensuring financial sustainability;
• improving the efficiency of planning, developing, and making management decisions;
• developing the organizational management system;
• improving the efficiency of scientific and educational activities;
• improving the efficiency of the university’s innovative activity;
• develop a curricula by including sustainable education in manufacturing.

Acknowledgements

The work was supported by Act 211 Government of the Russian Federation, contract № 02.A03.21.0011.

References

[1] D.M. Khodursky, Assessment of risks in universities’ activity: Thes is abstract, Ufa, (2016) 13.
[2] GOST R ISO 9001-2015. Quality management systems. Requirements. Moscow: Standartinform, (2015) 32.
[3] L. Moldovan, Integration of Strategic Management and Quality Assurance in the Romanian Higher Education. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences58 (2012) 1458-1465. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1132
[4] N.V. Syrejshchikova, and O.J. Khudyakov, Risk-management of process of an estimation of satisfaction of internal consumers of structural
division of high school. Letters IX, Chelyabinck, SUSMU, (2018) 99–105.
[5] N.V. Syreischikova, Risk management of the university’s QMS management process, Science of South Ural State University Chelyabinsk,
SUSU, (2018) 81-87.
[6] T.I. Klochkova, Innovations in the management of British universities: management of academic risks, Sumy, (2014) 40.
[7] N.V. Syreischikova, O.Yu. Khudyakova, E.V. Lopatka, and M.N. Eremkina, Risk management in assessing the satisfaction of internal
consumers at a university’s structural unit, Proceedings of the IV scientific-practical university conference. “Optimization of higher medical
and pharmaceutical education: quality management and innovation”, Chelyabinsk, SUSMU, (2018) 119-124.
[8] I.I. Novikova, Risk management in the activity of higher educational institutions of the Russian Federation, Moscow, (2008) 24.
[9] Yu.A. Antokhin, and A.G. Varzhapetyanetal, Risks of educational activity undercurrent market conditions, Economics and Management
8(82) (2012) 43-49.
[10] M.S. Motyshina, and O.G. Sharip, Specifics of the risks in universities’ innovative activity, Education and Science 1(4) (2017) 1-4.
[11] S. Floricel, and M. Ibanescu, Using R&D portfolio management to deal with dynamic risk, R and D Management 38(5) (2008) 452-467.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2008.00535.x
[12] T.K. Das, B.-S. Teng, Managing risks in strategic alliances,Academy of Management Executive 13(4) (1999) 50-62.
[13] Т.P. Kostyukova, I.A. and Lysenko, The risk management model of an educational institution, Information-control systems 2(51) (2011) 73-
76.
[14] A.A. Sbruyeva, Management of innovative development of higher education: monograph, Sumi: Publisher of SSPU named after. A.S.
Makarenko, (2012) 255-282.
[15] M. Huber, The Risk University: Risk identification at higher education institutions in England, School of Economics and Political Science,
London, (2011) 21.
[16] M. Huber, and H. Rothstein, The risk organisation: Or how organisations reconcile themselves to failure, Journal of Risk Research 16(6)
(2013) 651-675. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2012.761276
262 Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 46 (2020) 256–262
Nelli V. Syreyshchikova et al. / Procedia Manufacturing00 (2019) 000–000 7

[17] C. Raban, L.C. Turner, Quality risk management. Modernising the architecture of quality assurance, Perspectives: Policy and Practice in
Higher Education 10(2) (2006) 39-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603100600644522
[18] GOST R ISO / IEC 31010-2011. Risk Management. Methods of risk assessment, Moscow: Standartinform, 2015 (74).
[19] HEFCE. Risk management: A briefing for governors and senior managers. HEFCE, (2001) 24 [Online]
http://hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2001/01_24.htm
[20] The National Strategy for development of education in Ukraine for 2012-2021, [Online] www.mon.gov.ua/images/files//4455.pdf
[21] Risk Management: Guidelines and Best Practices, Office of Administration [Online], (2012) , URL:
http://oa.mo.gov/itsd/cio/projectmgmt/PDF/risk_manual.pdf
[22] L. Moldovan, Sustainability Assessment Framework for VET Organizations, Sustainability 7(6) (2015) 7156-7174.
http://doi.org/10.3390/su7067156
[23] L. Moldovan, The Environmental Pillar Assessment in Vocational Education. Environmental Engineering and Management Journal,16(3)
(2017) 739-750.