Risk Management in Banking
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTHAMPTON
Faculty of Business and Law
MODULE NAME: Risk Management in Banking
|Module Code||Level||Credit Value||Module Leader|
|Risk Management Practice in Banks|
|15 January 2021 (11:59 PM UK time)|
Feedback and Grades due:
|12 February 2021 (11:59 PM UK time)|
|26 March 2021 (11:59 PM UK time)|
Please read this assessment brief in its entirety before attempting your assignment.
The Assignment Task
What it is? (Title or theme)
This assignment is about taking stock of risk management practice in banks with a special focus on credit and liquidity risks.
What you are expected to deliver? (Background and requirement)
You are expected to undertake a literature review on the topic, conduct bank level analysis and critically discuss the key risk measurement and management framework that have and are currently affecting performance in the banking sector.
You are required to choose two banks from a developed country (use IMF descriptors) and analyse credit and liquidity risk management at institutional level.
The final output (your analyses) will be in the form of an essay which you will submit via module NILE site using Turnitin (further submission details are available in the following pages).
Suggested Structure of the Essay:
|Title page, cover sheet, tutor’s marking sheet, table of contents, etc.|
|Context and background of the topic. Starting with justification for choosing the banks, followed by motivation on the theme.|
|Highlighting the financial risks faced by those banks and discuss structure of risk management practices in local and global context.|
|Critical literature review of risk management practices (with special focus on risk measurement metrics) in banks. Use journal articles, books and other library resources.|
|Detailed discussion on credit and liquidity risk measurement and management in your chosen banks. Here you may present the model/technique using flowcharts, graphs, and tables. This should be followed by a critical discussion on the strengths and weaknesses of their risk management approaches/frameworks.|
|Conclusion and recommendations.|
|Bibliography, Appendix (if any)|
The learning outcomes that are being assessed in this assignment are:
- Identify and analyse different types of risk faced by banks.
- Critically evaluate various risk measurement metrics used by banks.
- Critique current practice of risk communication, control, monitoring and enhancement within the international financial system.
- f) Communicate information and present complex arguments, clearly and accurately, to a high standard of presentation in writing, in a manner suited to the audience.
Your grade will depend on the extent to which you meet these learning outcomes in the way relevant for this assignment. Please see the grading rubric at the end of this assignment brief for further details of the criteria against which you will be assessed.
Word Limits (where appropriate)
The maximum word limit for this assignment is 2,000 words.
In accordance with the Assessment and Feedback Policy, as stated in section 4.40 where a submission exceeds the stipulated word limit by more than 10%, the submission will only be marked up to and including the additional 10%. Anything over this will not be included in the final grade for the assessment item. Abstracts, bibliographies, reference lists, appendices and footnotes are excluded from any word limit requirements.
In line with section 4.41 of the same Policy, where a submission is notably under the word limit, the full submission will be marked on the extent to which the learning objectives have been met.
The essay should be double-spaced and typed using Times New Roman Font 12 or Verdana Font 11. Your submission must include:
- Accounting and Finance Front Sheet (available on NILE)
- Tutor Comments Sheet (available on NILE)
- Title page (including a title for the assignment, programme name, student name/number and the word count)
- Content page (with page numbers)
Two dedicated sessions on assignment support will be held. Both will be face-to-face and dates for those sessions will be confirmed soon.
Generic Grading Criteria
You will find the generic grading criteria for achievement at University Grading Criteria. Also explained here are the meanings of the various G grades at the bottom of the grading scale.
To submit your work, please go to the ‘Submit your work’ area on the NILE site and use the relevant submission point to upload your report. The deadline for this is 11.59pm (UK local time) on the date of submission.
Written work submitted to TURNITIN will be subject to anti-plagiarism detection software. Turnitin checks student work for possible textual matches against internet available resources and its own proprietary database.
When you upload your work correctly to TURNITIN you will receive a receipt which is your record and proof of submission.
If your assessment is not submitted to TURNITIN rather than a receipt you will see a green banner at the top of the screen that denotes successful submission.
N.B Work emailed directly to your tutor will not be marked. The only exception to this is when you are instructed to do so because TURNITIN is down.
Late submission of work
For first sits, if an item of assessment is submitted late and an extension has not been granted, the following will apply:
- Within one week of the original deadline – work will be marked and returned with full feedback, and awarded a maximum bare pass grade.
- More than one week from original deadline – maximum grade achievable LG (L indicating late).
The University of Northampton’s general policy with regard to extensions is to be supportive of students who have genuine difficulties, but not against pressures of work that could have reasonably been anticipated.
For full details please refer to the Extensions Policy. The module leader can, where appropriate, authorise a short extension of up to two weeks from the original submission date for first sits only.
For guidance on Mitigating circumstances please go to Mitigating Circumstances where you will find detailed guidance on the policy as well as guidance and the form for making an application.
Please note, however, that an application to defer an assessment on the grounds of mitigating circumstances should normally be made in advance of the submission deadline or examination date.
Plagiarism and Academic Integrity
Unless this is a group assessment, the work you produce must be your own with work taken from any other source properly referenced and attributed. The University of Northampton policy will apply in all cases of copying, plagiarism or any other methods by which students have obtained (or attempted to obtain) an unfair advantage.
If you are in any doubt about what constitutes plagiarism or any other infringement of academic integrity, please read the University’s Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy. For help with understanding academic integrity go to UNPAC and follow the Top Tips for Good Academic Practice on the student hub.
Please note that the penalties for copying work from another source without proper referencing are severe and can include failing the assessment, failing the module and expulsion from the university.
Feedback and Grades
These can be accessed through clicking on the Feedback and Grades tab on NILE. Feedback will be provided by a rubric with summary comments. For work submitted to TURNITIN, please also click through for within text comments.
|Learning Outcomes||No Submission||Fail||Pass||Commended||Merit||Distinction|
|a) Identify and analyse different types of risk faced by banks (20%).||Work submitted is of no academic value / nothing submitted||Fails to demonstrate a basic understanding of different types of risks faced by banks.||Demonstrates a basic understanding of various risks faced by banks. The is limited discussion of risk-return trade-offs faced by banks.||Shows a good understanding of various risks faced by banks. Risk-return trade-offs are assessed with limited depth and partially justified with relevant risk management literature.||Shows a strong understanding of various risks faced by banks. Risk-return trade-offs are discussed in detail and justified with relevant risk management literature.||Shows an excellent understanding of various risks faced by banks. Risk-return trade-offs are critically discussed in detail and well-justified with relevant risk management literature.|
|b) Critically evaluate various risk measurement metrics used by banks
|Work submitted is of no academic value / nothing submitted||No evidence of critical discussion, or poor evaluation of various risk measurement metrics used by banks.||There is limited discussion of different risk management metrics used by banks. There is no evaluation on the strengths and limitations of the metrics used for credit and liquidity risk management. Limited credible literature is reviewed to evaluate the risk matrices used by banks||Developing discussion and evaluation of risk management metrics used by banks. The strengths and limitations of the metrics are partially evaluated. Limited credible literature is reviewed to evaluate the risk matrices used by banks||Good understanding of risk management matrices used by banks to manage credit and liquidity risk. The strengths and limitations of theses risk metrics are discussed in detail. The evaluation of risk metrics is supported with reliable academic literature.||Excellent and comprehensive understanding of risk management matrices used by banks to manage credit and liquidity risk.
The strengths and limitations of these risk metrics are critically discussed and well justified with credible literature. Remedial actions to improve the risk metrics are discussed with justification.
|d) Critique current practice of risk communication, control, monitoring and enhancement within the international financial system (30%).||Work submitted is of no academic value / nothing submitted||Poor or incomplete discussion of communication, control and monitoring of risks faced by banks. Limited evidence of reference to the international financial system.||Limited or developing discussion around communication, control and monitoring of risks faced by banks. Lacks in terms of critical content and clear reference to the international financial system.||Developing critique of communication, control and monitoring of risks faced by banks. Good attempt to explore links with the international financial system.||Good critical account of communication, control and monitoring of risks faced by banks while making clear reference to the international financial system.||Strong evidence of critical and robust discussion around communication, control and monitoring of risks faced by banks in general and in regard to the international financial system.|
|f) Communicate information and present complex arguments, clearly and accurately, to a high standard of presentation in writing, in a manner suited to the audience (10%).||Work submitted is of no academic value / nothing submitted||Poor attempt made in developing and handling arguments. Lack of clarity and accuracy in writing and fails to respond to the needs of different types of audience involved in managing, supervising and investing in the banks.||Limited attempt made to develop and present complex arguments. More clarity and accuracy in writing is required to fully respond to the needs of different types of audience involved in managing, supervising and investing in the banks.||Attempt made to develop and present complex arguments. But more strength, clarity and accuracy in writing is required to fully respond to the needs of different types of audience involved in managing, supervising and investing in the banks.||Good attempt made to develop and present complex arguments. There is some evidence of skills to clearly and accurately respond to fully respond to the needs of different types of audience involved in managing, supervising and investing in the banks.||Evidence of strong understanding and use of skills to present complex arguments. Clear evidence of skills to clearly and accurately respond to fully respond to the needs of different types of audience involved in managing, supervising and investing in the banks.|
|Professional / academic quality (10 %)||Presentation and referencing not of an acceptable standard.||Deficiencies in presentation, Incorrect referencing, grammar, spelling and citation. Dependency on material provided by the tutor, websites and non-academic sources.||Deficiencies in presentation; standard spelling, grammar and formatting. Incomprehensive citations, poor referencing and reference list. Harvard referencing is good in some parts.||A simple basic style but with significant deficiencies in expression or presentation that pose obstacles to the reader. Some up-to-date and/or appropriate literature used. Citations and referencing are clear throughout.||Competently presented, with minor lapses from standard spelling and grammar, with acceptable format. Uses a variety of literature that includes some recent literature. Competent use of source material. Citations and Harvard referencing are well presented.||Well written, with standard spelling and grammar, in a readable style with acceptable formatting, use of English, tables and diagrams. Comprehensive citations, correct referencing and reference list. Excellent use of Harvard referencing.|