Risk Assessment Report: Evaluating Property Millionaires for MBA402

This report presents a comprehensive risk assessment of Property Millionaires, a real estate company, as per the assignment brief for the MBA402 course. It meticulously evaluates the company's challenges across three key areas: pressure points due to growth, organizational culture, and information management. The analysis utilizes the Risk Exposure Calculator established by Simons (1999) to quantify the risks and provides a detailed evaluation of each factor, including pressure for performance, expansion rate, employee inexperience, rewards for risk-taking, internal competition, transaction complexity, and gaps in diagnostic performance. The report concludes with a risk assessment matrix and provides actionable recommendations to mitigate the identified risks, focusing on avoidance, reduction, sharing, and retention strategies. The report aims to aid the company in stabilizing its operations and achieving sustainable growth. The student has submitted this report to Desklib to help other students.

Running Head: GES 0
[Governance, Ethics, and sustainability]
Property Millionaires
Student Name:
Student University:

GES 1
Introduction
Property Millionaires Company offers normal individuals a variety of real estate on-going
mentoring services and investment sessions started by real estate developer George Kirzner
three years ago as a medium-sized business with 100 employees approximately in Adelaide,
Melbourne, Brisbane, and Sydney. The company’s philosophy is that anyone can become a
property millionaire with the correct livelihood, mind-set, and education. They increased their
sales one year before with expansion of its operations. The purpose of this report is to
evaluate the case of Property Millionaires for identifying various problems management is
facing in the company affecting its processes. In this assessing, the risk valuation calculator is
used for scoring multiple challenges faced by the company which was established by
(Simons, 1999). The calculator is to give the score on the scale to the company from 1 to 5
where 5 is the top score. The collection of appropriate data, suggestions for the company is
made with the objectives to report the issues and growth sustainability in the market. The
risks faced by the company are going to be followed in this report for assessing them in
Property Millionaires.
Risk due to Growth
The analyses of factors affecting the company’s operations as an outcome of its growth are
going to be discussed. Therefore, in the company, there are many appropriate factors that are
essential to be measured for regulating the influence of the growth for minimizing the
pressure on employees (Ren & Zhang, 2015). The established companies nowadays have
highly competitive business operations globally facing massive pressure linking with their
performance (Yang, et al., 2016). In the company, this pressure affects operations in various
ways for achieving the targets within the time given (Colan, 2013). The management sets the
aims and targets for sustaining the market expansion to their employees with increase in
expectations where the load also increases for attaining an outcome (Zenger, 2016).
The company expands its operations by sustaining the growth in the market and making
competitive advantage. Further, both the positive and negative consequences are present in
strategies for increasing revenue streams of the company and imposing the time load on the
employees substantially, and keep up the changes (Yadav, et al., 2017). The company tries to
meet the targets on time where employees slacked off the timings and minimize the quality of

GES 2
delivering more outcomes (Munro, 2015). They can never work without trained and skilled
employees; it is not easy to sustain the growth and expansion rate in the market. Qualified
and experienced employees require companies to ensure to be active to change to meet the
needs of opposing market concerns (Moser & Kelley, 2016).
Pressure of performance
Property Millionaires face pressure issues on employees at work as its management has
executed aims for the employees without consulting with them about it which made the
workload on them. George thought of it as a huge problem where the employees are
accountable for delivering continuous strong financial performance. It was difficult for
employees to release their requirements because of deciding the high targets and making a
restricted deadline for achievement. The company faced the problem of hiring and investing
new staff with the expansion of its operations and were working on it as it was spoiling the
living of the employees. The company scored this issue with 3 out of 5 points.
Expansion Rate
The company is not hiring new staff with the growth of its operations for reaching the
requirements through its expansion strategy as mentioned by George. To earn expensive gifts
and commission for each other, they started competing which enforced the load on the
employees currently and not the increment of load; score of the company is 5 out of 5 points.
Inexperience of workforce
As per the understanding of George, the uppermost problem of the company was not to hire a
new workforce with experience and skills as needed, and working on it. The consultants were
there to ensure bringing clients in the corporation which unfavourably affect the connection
concerning the customers and management of the company as they were not hiring workforce
for continuous services by the company. Hence, the scored to the company because of lack of
capability for hiring skilled and experienced employees was given as 5.
Risks due to Organizational Culture
The company’s operations are affected by the cultural aspects which are important for
management to be concerned about achieving high outcomes (Paparoidamis, et al., 2019).
The companies cannot stay in the market without estimating risks at the time of unfavourable
conditions (Oven & Lamm, 2018). The challenges faced by the company are due to lack of

GES 3
innovation and approach to take risk (Felipe, et al., 2017). It is significant to allow to take
risks needs for growth in the company to improve products and services as the clients
demand expansion in business. It helps in looking for reliable opportunities for operational
conduct alternatively to ensure to minimize cost of operations and quality increment of
company’s products and services (Hock, et al., 2016). It is the responsibility of supervisors to
identify the factors adversely affects the company to ensure their ability to execute future
strategies for allowing them to stay in unfavourable market concerns (Brettel, et al., 2015).
The competition policies internally help the company for productivity promotion enabling
employees to ensure achieving the goals within the time decided instead of depending on the
competition for making a negative working environment (Hobfoll, et al., 2018).
Reward for risk-taking
Property Millionaires never promoted business risk to take while managing the operations
where the company did not execute policies for promoting innovation. The company uses
traditional approach for managing the operations based on the supervisors not to collect
inputs from the consultants who deal with the customers directly. They do not have enough
data due to lack of commitment in between. The supervisors did not have much data
availability after the awareness of change in market where they scored the company 5 point
in relation to negative affect on growth due to organizational culture of the company.
Executive struggle to bad news
The main problem which affects Property Millionaires where the local managers never
inspire employees after telling them the bad news of the company as they have gathered them
with “yes” men and women. The employees only agree to the decisions of managers and not
make any negative culture evaluation for accurate information which does not help them to
reach the top of the management. The score given to the company due to negative culture is 4
points.
Internal Competition
Property Millionaires execute multiple policies for ensuring the promotion of internal
competition in the culture. Further, leading to promote conflict between employees for
making a negative working environment the policies do not play an effective role. The
employees find it tough to build a relationship with others who are new in the company. This
shows hindrance in their working affecting their relationship with customers where the
company is scored by 5 points.

GES 4
Information Handling Risks
In the company, information handled with appropriate conduct to ensure top management
level having the contact to accuracy and relevancy to establish effective business strategies ad
essential in the company (Pappas, 2016). The companies are able to ensure after effective
execution of appropriate information about business transactions with managers allowing
them to handle the information effectively (Gerlach, et al., 2015).
It is essential to make policies for detecting gaps in the performance of the company to ensure
the stay of relevant as targeted even in the unfavourable market situations (Orna, 2016). The
company wants to enhance the effectiveness of process to make decisions and have the option
of their made decision to reorganize (Layton, 2016). They can depend on the managers' and
employees' insights for forming business policies effectively allowing preparing the fast
changes (Kaplan & Mikes, 2012).
Transactions’ complexity
Property Millionaires have a number of complications in operational transactions due to high
rapidity where it is important to have qualified employees capable enough for building strong
relationships with customers to use for workshop of customers in future. The correct details
are not taken by the officials of the company because of difficulty and rapidity of transactions
that are not controlled with actual conduct. The company is scored by 4 points due to
deficiency of operational information systems.
Gaps in investigating performance
The company did not execute any policies allowing the management to collect correct
information related to consumers and their demands for making it difficult to identify gaps in
the process in Property Millionaire. The specific departments are performing better than
others and management did not have the clue regarding it. Hence, the score of the company is
3 due to an increase in pressure on the employees.
Decentralized decision-making
Property Millionaires never executed the policies supporting the decentralization of decision-
making in the company as the administrators did not allow consultants and managers for
contributing to the process of making decisions. Individuals being in contact with customers
as described by the management where the company is scored at 5 points as the challenges
increment in the company.

GES 5
Risk Management
The management of practices to control and direct the company according to the risk is risk
management. Its structure gives the base for executing, designing, reviewing, monitoring and
continuing risk management improvement within the company (Waxman, 2016). The
categories of risk management to identify and assess techniques to manage these risks are
mentioned in the recommendations.
Risk Assessment Matrix
It is based on the Risk Disclosure Calculator:
Negligible Marginal Serious Critical
Certain
Likely Rewards for
risk-taking
Inexperience of
workforce
Pressure of
Performance
Possible Internal
Competition
Expansion Rate Decentralized
decision making
Unlikely Gaps in
investigating
performance
Transactions’
Complexity
Rare Executive
struggle to bad
news

GES 6
Conclusion
Risk Exposure Calculator
(Source: By Author)
Property Millionaires acknowledged 39 scores in total showing that the company is in danger
zone as per the calculator. The company receiving a score above 35 considering being in
danger in this model of operations; between 21 and 34 shows call for help and to take
corrective actions; between 9 and 20 shows the company safe. It is important for the
company’s management to take corrective measures for facing challenges to stay in the
market as changes in policies are essential to ensure the company’s stability to attain the
growth to stand in the market.
Recommendations
Following are the recommendations for the challenges faced by Property Millionaire based
on four categories of Risk Management
 Avoidance: In order to avoid the risk of centralized decision-making, the management
should delegate responsibilities and authorities to lower-level management.

GES 7
 Reduction: A fixed salary should be given to employees who are enough for them to
live a decent life which will reduce their stress level.
 Sharing: It is essential to provide training to the employees working in lower-level
management to transfer/promote them to higher level in achieving better customer
satisfaction for the company.
 Retention: Property Millionaires should accept internal competition since it helps
employees in achieving the goals by keeping them motivated.
Bibliography

GES 8
Brettel, M., Chomik, C. & Flatten, T. C., 2015. How organizational culture influences
innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk‐taking: Fostering entrepreneurial orientation in SMEs.
Journal of Small Business Management, 53(4), pp. 868-885.
Colan, L., 2013. 5 Risks for a Growing Business, and How to Manage Them. [Online]
Available at: https://www.inc.com/lee-colan/5-risks-for-growing-business.html
[Accessed 10 September 2019].
Felipe, C., Roldán, J. & Leal-Rodríguez, A., 2017. Impact of organizational culture values on
organizational agility. Sustainability, 9(12), p. 2354.
Gerlach, J., Widjaja, T. & Buxmann, P., 2015. Handle with care: How online social network
providers’ privacy policies impact users’ information sharing behavior. The Journal of
Strategic Information Systems, 24(1), pp. 33-43.
Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J.-P. & Westman, M., 2018. Conservation of
resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences.
Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 5, pp.
103-128.
Hock, M., Clauss, T. & Schulz, E., 2016. The impact of organizational culture on a firm's
capability to innovate the business model. R&d Management, 46(3), pp. 433-450.
Kaplan, R. S. & Mikes, A., 2012. Managing Risks: A New Framework. [Online]
Available at: https://hbr.org/2012/06/managing-risks-a-new-framework
[Accessed 10 September 2019].
Layton, T. P., 2016. INFORMATION SECURITY Design, Implementation, Measurement, and
Compliance. New York: Auerbach Publications.
Moser, H. & Kelley, M., 2016. Companies reshore to achieve higher quality: a dramatically
increased rate of reshoring will require a much larger and better trained skilled workforce and
more automation. Quality, 55(10), pp. 35-40.
Munro, C., 2015. COMPANY GROWTH: BUSINESS EXPANSION RISKS & CHALLENGES.
[Online]
Available at: http://www.cavendishmunro.com/company-growth-business-expansion-risks-

GES 9
challenges/
[Accessed 10 September 2019].
Orna, E., 2016. Information strategy in practice. New York: Routledge.
Oven, C. & Lamm, B., 2018. Corporate Culture Risk and the Board. [Online]
Available at: https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/04/20/corporate-culture-risk-and-the-
board/
[Accessed 10 September 2019].
Paparoidamis, N. G., Tran, H. T. T. & Leonidou, C. N., 2019. Building Customer Loyalty in
Intercultural Service Encounters: The Role of Service Employees’ Cultural Intelligence.
Journal of International Marketing, 27(2), pp. 56-75.
Pappas, N., 2016. Marketing strategies, perceived risks, and consumer trust in online buying
behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Volume 29, pp. 92-103.
Ren, F. & Zhang, J., 2015. Job stressors, organizational innovation climate, and employees’
innovative behavior. Creativity Research Journal, 27(1), pp. 16-23.
Simons, R., 1999. How Risky Is Your Company?. [Online]
Available at: https://hbr.org/1999/05/how-risky-is-your-company
[Accessed 10 September 2019].
Waxman, I., 2016. Corporate Culture and its Impact on Risk Management. [Online]
Available at: https://www.navigatecorp.com/corporate-culture-and-its-impact-on-risk-
management/
[Accessed 10 September 2019].
Yadav, P. L., Han, S. H. & Kim, H., 2017. Sustaining competitive advantage through
corporate environmental performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(3), pp.
345-357.
Yang, Y., Lee, P. K. & Cheng, T. C. E., 2016. Continuous improvement competence,
employee creativity, and new service development performance: A frontline employee
perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, Volume 171, pp. 275-288.
Zenger, T., 2016. Beyond Competitive Advantage: How to Solve the Puzzle of Sustaining
Growth While Creating Value. Brighton: Harvard Business Review Press.

GES 10