Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024

E-ISSN: 2723-6692

P-ISSN: 2723-6595

http://jiss.publikasiindonesia.id/

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2338

KEYWORDS

ABSTRACT

Audit Fee; Enterprise Risk

Management Disclosure;

Intellectual Capital;

Ownership Concentration

This study explores the influence of financial literacy, attitudes

towards money, and financial pressures on the financial well-being

of non-profit workers in Indonesia, an issue that is relevant given the

high social activity but lack of attention to workers' financial well-

being, especially with the majority being low-income. Using the

purposive sampling method on 108 respondents from various

regions in Indonesia, the study revealed that financial literacy had a

significant positive influence on financial well-being, while attitudes

towards money had no significant effect. Conversely, financial stress

had a significant negative influence on the financial well-being of

non-profit workers. These findings underline the need for enhancing

financial literacy and addressing financial pressures to improve

workers' financial well-being. The study contributes both

theoretically and practically by offering insights into the financial

behavior of non-profit workers and highlighting the importance of

targeted financial education programs for this sector.

Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0)

Introduction

Every company certainly has long-term and short-term targets for the future. There are always

many risks and uncertainties that can impact the achievement of these goals (Boston, 2021; Dunn

Cavelty, 2020; Masri & Muslih, 2022). Corporate risk is defined as a potential obstacle to the

achievement of business objectives, including the possibility of bankruptcy. This encourages

organizations to establish effective risk management measures. In response to the challenges

provided by hazards, businesses are increasingly embracing risk management or enterprise risk

management to measure and control all organizational risks (Lahfah & Rahayu, 2023).

The current era of rapid globalization has made banking activities in Indonesia more complex,

increasing its risks. The quality of the implementation of appropriate risk management must

The Influence of Intellectual Capital, Audit Fee, and Ownership

Concentration on Enterprise Risk Management Disclosure

Inas Maritsa Alfan, Titik Aryati

Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia

Email: maritsainas@gmail.com, titik.aryati@trisakti.ac.id

Correspondence: titik.aryati@trisakti.ac.id

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2339

accompany the increase in risks that occur. Transparency is a factor that banks must consider when

managing the risks they face. Many hazards that affect the quality of corporate governance and

management emerge and are documented in the company's annual report, which must be made

public. Improving the quality of risk management implementation will contribute to the effectiveness

of the risk-based bank supervisory framework. Banks carry out good and effective risk management

to optimize the growth rate and ensure that all activities are carried out as expected. This condition

can significantly impact economic growth and banking revenue growth.

Implementing enterprise risk management can reduce company risk, and users want disclosure

of enterprise risk management in the annual report for decision-making purposes (Lahfah & Rahayu,

2023). The implementation of risk management aims to build mechanisms and systems that can

control risks that have adverse consequences for the company so that internal control is carried out

optimally to achieve company goals.

The banking sector is particularly vulnerable to a variety of financial and non-financial risks

that must be managed and disclosed with transparency. Effective risk management practices support

clear corporate risk disclosure, as outlined in (POJK No.18/POJK.03/2016; POJK

No.65/POJK.03/2016). Effective risk management practices support clear corporate risk disclosure,

as outlined in POJK No.18/POJK.03/2016 and POJK No.65/POJK.03/2016. Internal control systems

are equally vital to banking operations, using the COSO framework as a benchmark for best practices

in public companies. Banks have adopted internal control systems as part of continuous monitoring

set up by management, ensuring adherence to legal and internal regulations, and the availability of

accurate, timely, and relevant financial and managerial information. These systems are also designed

to enhance operational efficiency and effectiveness, while fostering a robust risk culture across the

organization. To achieve these goals, the internal control system is aligned with applicable

regulations, including the Financial Services Authority’s Circular Letter (SEOJK) No.

35/SEOJK.03/2017 (OJK, 2017), which has aligned standard internal control guidelines for

commercial banks with the Internal Control-Integrated Framework developed by the Committee of

Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

In this study, the risk management disclosure to be investigated is the risk management

disclosure published by COSO because the risk management disclosure framework published by

COSO has been applied by many companies globally. There are several cases in the banking industry

in risk management that have occurred in Indonesia, resulting in decreased stakeholder confidence,

including embezzlement by employees of PT Bank Rakyat Indonesia Persero Tbk related to alleged

corruption in the application and use of bank credit cards with a loss value of more than Rp. 5 billion

(Kurnia, 2023). Another case is the break-in of customer accounts of Bank Mandiri Bandung branch,

a case declared as a state loss for the provision of credit facilities by Bank Mandiri to PT Tirta Amarta

Bottling Company (TAB) amounting to Rp 1.83 trillion (Kompas.com, 2018). Another case at Bank

BNI regarding operational risk in 2021 is related to the embezzlement of funds committed by several

Bank BNI employees. The bank employees allegedly committed fraud by falsifying customer deposit

bills worth IDR 45 billion (Kompas.com, 2021).

According to the banking cases described above, the author contends that banks continue to

commit infractions that pose legal, reputational, and operational risks, which will set a bad precedent

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2340

regarding public trust in banks. People will feel unsafe to keep their money in the bank. The case

shows the company's internal supervision system (bank) weakness. An indicator of the weak

supervision system is the occurrence of management fraud carried out by the employees themselves.

To prevent the recurrence of risks, banks must implement risk management disclosures by applicable

policies. The disclosure of enterprise risk management can be affected by several factors, such as

intellectual capital, audit costs, and concentration of ownership.

Banking violations that pose legal, reputational, and operational risks can reduce public trust

in banks (Adeabah et al., 2023; Ahmed et al., 2020; Dupont & Karpoff, 2020). This shows the weakness

of the bank's internal supervision system. To prevent risks, banks must implement risk management

disclosure by applicable policies. A number of factors influence the disclosure of corporate risk

management. Intellectual capital is an intangible asset of knowledge and information that can raise

the worth of the organization. Intellectual capital positively affects the disclosure of enterprise risk

management (Andika & Dewi Astini, 2022; Noviani et al., 2022). According to Suzan and Zatayumni

(2023) research, intellectual capital improves enterprise risk management transparency. Audit Fees:

The auditor's payment amount varies depending on several criteria. Its impact on enterprise risk

management disclosure continues to be contested (Mauliana & Laksito, 2021; Pamungkas et al.,

2022). Ashuri et al. (2017) found that audit expenses have a beneficial effect on corporate risk

management disclosure. This contrasts with the findings Maulina and Nurbaiti (2018), who

discovered that audit expenses have no effect on enterprise risk management disclosures.

Concentration of ownership refers to the degree of distribution of shareholdings. Its influence on

enterprise risk management disclosure varies, with some research finding good results and others

unfavorable influences (Kamul & Riswandari, 2021; Ramos & Cahyonowati, 2022). Setiyowati et al.

(2023) and Herlambang and Hapsari (2024), found that ownership concentration has a beneficial

effect on enterprise risk management disclosure. Meanwhile, research by Fayola and Nurbaiti (2020)

and Ramadhea Jr et al. (2023) demonstrates that ownership concentration has a detrimental impact

on business risk disclosure.

This study focused on Setiyowati et al.'s (2023) findings on the impact of the board of directors,

risk management committee, ownership concentration, and profitability on enterprise risk

management disclosures. This research differs from earlier research, namely referring to the research

conducted Suzan and Zatayumni, (2023) and research (Maulina and Nurbaiti, 2018), where there are

variables of intellectual capital and audit costs that differentiate this research. Research related to the

disclosure of enterprise risk management by adding the influence of intellectual capital and audit costs

can be said to be still not widely researched, for this reason the author is interested in exploring the

factors that affect the disclosure of enterprise risk management by looking at the influence of

intellectual capital, audit costs, and concentration of ownership as independent variables.

Furthermore, the study included the size of the company as a control variable. Furthermore, this

study uses the research object, namely banking sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock

Exchange (IDX), for the 2020-2022 timeframe.

This study seeks to determine whether intellectual capital, audit fees, and ownership

concentration influence enterprise risk management disclosure in banking sector companies listed

on the IDX from 2020 to 2022. This study also includes a control variable in the form of company size.

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2341

Although past research has looked at the subject, the outcomes have differed. Therefore, researchers

are encouraged to re-examine and prove the influence of the variables that will be researched.

Materials and Methods

The quantitative data utilized in this study is obtained from the annual reports or financial

statements of banking sector companies, which are accessible via the IDX website (www.idx.co.id) or

the official website of each respective company. The sampling method employed in this study is

purposive sampling, whereby samples are selected based on specific criteria from 2020 to 2022. The

data collected will be processed and tested using the SPSS application. The results of this processing

and testing will serve as the basis for analyzing the influence of intellectual capital, audit costs, and

concentration of ownership on enterprise risk management disclosure, with the size of the company

serving as the control variable.

Result and Discussion

Data Description

From the results of data selection and collection, companies were obtained based on certain

criteria in Table 1 as follows:

Table 1

Research Sample Criteria

Description

Total

Banking sector companies listed on the Indonesia

Stock Exchange (IDX) in 2020-2022.

Banking companies that did not publish annual

reports in the 2020-2022.

Banking companies that do not include audit fees in

the 2020-2022 period.

(12)

Total of research sample companies

Research year period (2020-2022)

Total of all research data samples

105

From the results of selecting research objects based on the sample criteria above, 35 companies

met the research criteria in three years. So, the total research sample is 105 companies.

Data Analysis

1. Descriptive Statistical Test

Table 2

Descriptive Statistical Test Results

Variable

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Std.

Deviation

ERMD

105

0,5000

0,6574

0,579455

0,0330088

105

-1,5544

11,0633

6,090855

3,3333839

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2342

FEE

105

19,0085

23,9639

21,560533

1,1034729

105

0,2247

0,9871

0,633402

0,2094526

SIZE

105

28,4103

35,2282

31,751089

1,7229403

Source: Data Processed (SPSS)

Based on the table above, it can be seen that the number of observations (N) is 105 items. This

table can help identify each variable that affects the other. The results of descriptive statistical

analysis based on the table above are:

a) Intellectual Capital

Based on descriptive analysis, intellectual capital has a minimum value of -1.5544, a maximum

of 11.0633, an average of 6.090853, and a standard deviation of 3.3333806. This data is

homogeneous because the average is greater than the standard deviation. Bank Mayapada

Internasional Tbk. recorded the highest intellectual capital of 11.0633 in 2021, while Bank Neo

Commerce Tbk. recorded the lowest of -1.5544 in the same year.

b) Audit Fee

Based on descriptive statistical analysis, audit fees have a minimum value of 19.0085, a

maximum of 23.9639, an average of 21.560536, and a standard deviation of 1.1034659,

indicating homogeneous data because the average is greater than the standard deviation. Bank

Negara Indonesia (Persero) Tbk. recorded the highest audit fee of 23.9639 in 2022, while Bank

Jago Tbk. recorded the lowest of 19.0085 in 2020.

c) Ownership Concentration

Based on descriptive statistical analysis, ownership concentration has a minimum value of

0.2247, a maximum of 0.9977, an average of 0.647276, and a standard deviation of 0.2195805,

indicating homogeneous data because the average is greater than the standard deviation. Bank

Permata Tbk. has the highest ownership concentration of 0.9871 in 2020-2022, while Bank Ina

Perdana Tbk. has the lowest of 0.2247 in the same period.

d) Disclosure of Enterprise Risk Management

Based on descriptive statistical analysis, the disclosure of enterprise risk management has a

minimum value of 0.5000, a maximum of 0.6574, an average of 0.579455, and a standard

deviation of 0.0330088, indicating homogeneous data because the average is greater than the

standard deviation. Bank Raya Indonesia Tbk. and Bank Danamon Indonesia Tbk. have the

highest disclosure of 0.6574 in 2022, while Bank Mestika Dharma Tbk. has the lowest of 0.5000

in 2020.

e) Company Size

Based on descriptive statistical analysis, company size has a minimum value of 28.4103, a

maximum of 35.2282, an average of 31.751091, and a standard deviation of 1.7229392,

indicating homogeneous data because the average is greater than the standard deviation. Bank

Mandiri (Persero) Tbk. recorded the highest size of 35.2282 in 2022, while Bank Jago Tbk.

recorded the lowest of 28.4103 in 2020.

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2343

2. Classical Assumption Test

1) Normality Test

Table 3 Normality Test Result

Normality test

Sig.

Conclusion

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)

0,200

Normal distributed data

Source: Data Processed (SPSS)

Based on Table 3 above, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test shows that the data is distributed

normally. The results showed a sigs value of 0.200 > 0.05, so it was concluded that the data was

distributed normally.

2) Multicollinearity Test

Table 4

Multicollinearity Test

Model

Collinearity Statistics

Description

Tolerance

VIF

0,906

1,103

No Multicollinearity

FEE

0,291

3,442

No Multicollinearity

0,983

1,017

No Multicollinearity

SIZE

0,282

3,551

No Multicollinearity

Source: Data Processed (SPSS)

Based on the test findings of Table 4, the four variables' VIF values < 10, and the tolerance

value > 0.10. It may be inferred that the four variables used in this investigation are devoid of

multicollinearity symptoms.

3) Heteroscedasticity Test

Table 5

Heteroscedasticity test result

Model

Sig.

Description

0,079

No Heteroscedasticity

FEE

0,325

No Heteroscedasticity

0,575

No Heteroscedasticity

SIZE

0,111

No Heteroscedasticity

Source: Data Processed (SPSS)

According to the test results in Table 5 from the Glejser test analysis tool, the significance

level for each variable in this study is greater than 0.05 (5%). As a result, the regression model

does not encounter heteroscedasticity difficulties.

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2344

4) Autocorrelation Test

Table 6

Autocorrelation Test Results

Value

Durbin

Watson

Value

4-dU

Value

4-dL

Conclusion

1,6038

1,7617

1,790

2,2383

2,3962

No autocorrelation symptoms

Source: Data Processed (SPSS)

With four independent variables (k) investigated, a total sample (n) of 105 data, a 5%

significance level, a dL value of 1.6038, and a dU value of 1.7617 were achieved. In this study,

Durbin-Watson is 1.790, which is greater than dU. The requirements of dU (1.7617) < DW (1.790)

< 4-dU (2.2383) were met, indicating that no autocorrelation symptoms were present in this

investigation.

3. Hypothesis Test

1) Determination Coefficient Test (R

)

Table 7

Determination Coefficient Test Results

R Square

Adjusted R Square

0,382

0,358

Source: Data Processed (SPSS)

Based on the test results in Table 7, the adjusted R2 value model is 0.358 or 35.8%, which

suggests that the ability of independent factors to describe the dependent variable is 35.8%, and

the remaining 64.2% is explained by other dependent variables that are not included in this

research model.

2) Simultaneous Significance Test (F Statistical Test)

Table 8

F Statistical Test Results

Fstat

Sig. Fstat

Decision

15,471

0,000

Ha Accepted

Source: Data Processed (SPSS)

According to the test results in Table 8, the value of Fstat is 15.471, and the value of sig.

Fstat is 0.000 less than 0.05, thus Ho is rejected and Ha is approved, indicating that the

independent factors affect the dependent variable simultaneously.

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2345

3) Individual Parameter Significance Test (T Statistical Test)

Table 9

T Statistical Test Result

Model

Predictions

Beta

Sig. 1-

tailed

Conclusion

(Constant)

0,486

9,187

0,000

0,006

7,209

0,000

H1 accepted

FEE

0,004

0,816

0,209

H2 rejected

-0,006

-0,517

0,303

H3 rejected

SIZE

0,000

-0,170

0,433

Source: Data Processed (SPSS)

Based on the data processing results presented in Table 9, the regression analysis

conducted allows for the formulation of the following regression equation:

ERMD = 0,486 + 0,006IC + 0,004FEE - 0,006KK

The above-mentioned T statistical test findings can be interpreted as follows:

a) Effect of Intellectual Capital on Enterprise Risk Management Disclosure

Statistical testing supports the hypothesis that intellectual capital positively impacts

corporate risk management disclosure, with a significance value of 0.000 <0.05 (significant).

Based on the decision-making criteria, it may be determined that H1 is accepted, which implies

that intellectual capital has a favorable effect on the disclosure of corporate risk management.

b) The Effect of Audit Costs on Enterprise Risk Management Disclosure

The statistical testing findings show that the beta value supports the presented hypothesis,

which states that audit fees have a favorable effect on the disclosure of enterprise risk

management information. However, the significance level of 0.209 is more than 0.05, indicating

that this is not a significant finding. Therefore, based on the decision-making criteria, it may be

concluded that H2 is rejected, implying that audit fees do not affect the disclosure of corporate

risk management.

c) Effect of Ownership Concentration on Enterprise Risk Management Disclosure

The findings of statistical testing demonstrate that the sign of the beta value does not

correspond to the provided hypothesis, where ownership concentration causes a negative

coefficient direction on the disclosure of enterprise risk management, with a significance value

of 0.303> 0.05 (insignificant). Based on the decision-making criteria, it may be determined that

H3 is rejected, indicating that ownership concentration does not alter the disclosure of enterprise

risk management.

d) The Effect of Company Size on Enterprise Risk Management Disclosure

The statistical test findings show that the company size control variable has a coefficient

value of 0.000 and a significance value of 0.433>0.05, indicating that it has no influence. The

result is that firm size does not alter the disclosure of enterprise risk management.

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2346

Discussion of Research Results

Effect of Intellectual Capital on Enterprise Risk Management Disclosure

The study's findings show that there is a favorable relationship between intellectual capital and

enterprise risk management disclosures. Suzan & Zatayumni's (2023) past research was analyzed to

produce these findings. Risk management disclosure is the distribution of information about a

company's plans and processes for detecting, assessing, monitoring, and reducing the risks that it

encounters. Consequently, a company's capacity to recognize and assess risks is largely contingent

upon its intellectual capital, particularly its repository of knowledge and expertise.

Intellectual capital strongly influences risk management reporting by facilitating better risk

recognition, development of countermeasures, decision-making, openness to scrutiny, and

competitive advantage. Companies can provide more in-depth and actionable insights into their risk

management procedures to stakeholders if they highlight the role of intellectual capital. High

intellectual capital increases the company's ability and becomes a competitive advantage in managing

and disclosing risks. This can be interpreted as the higher the company's intellectual capital, the more

disclosure of enterprise risk management.

Companies that can manage and improve intellectual capital mean making improvements in

the field of human resources, improving relationships with stakeholders and improving company

systems properly. The increase in intellectual capital elements will create added value that the market

appreciates, so investors can consider the VAIC value when choosing a company. This concept is in

line with resource theory, which states that companies must be able to manage intangible assets to

have effective and efficient performance, create added value for investors, and increase good

perceptions of the company.

The Effect of Audit Fees on Enterprise Risk Management Disclosure

The results revealed that audit fees had no effect on corporate risk management disclosure,

hence the study's findings contradicted the initial hypothesis. These findings suggest that the quantity

of risk management disclosure is unaffected by whether banking organizations pay high or modest

audit fees. This study's findings are consistent with earlier research by Maulina and Nurbaiti (2018),

who found that audit fees do not affect risk management disclosure.

These findings are thought to be due to the complexity of the business's operations and the

number of subsidiaries and branches of the company make it more difficult for auditors to conduct

audits, requiring numerous auditors and a long audit period so that audit costs are high. The higher

the audit fee does not cause the more comprehensive and detailed the ERM disclosure, this can be

seen in several banks whose audit fees from 2020 to 2022 have increased but the percentage of ERM

disclosure has not increased.

It can be concluded that high audit fees are caused by the duration and breadth of audit

assignments and the number of auditors assigned. The more subsidiaries and branch offices a firm

owns, the greater the audit fees that must be incurred because the assignments to be completed

become more difficult. Consolidated financial statements contain complex and more complicated

transactions, requiring auditors to devote more time and resources. As a result, audit fees have no

impact on the disclosure of enterprise risk management.

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2347

Effect of Ownership Concentration on Enterprise Risk Management Disclosure

The results show that ownership concentration has a beneficial effect on enterprise risk

management disclosure, which is consistent with Herlambang and Hapsari's (2024) findings. Their

findings show that ownership concentration has a favorable influence on the disclosure of enterprise

risk management. However, the test results in this study show that the significance value does not

satisfy the statistical significance level, resulting in the rejection of the presented hypothesis. This

result is similar with the findings of Ramadhea Jr et al. (2023), who found that ownership

concentration has no affect on enterprise risk management disclosure. As a result, it is possible to

conclude that a higher level of ownership concentration does not always lead to an increase in risk

management disclosure.

The study found no significant association between ownership concentration and risk

management disclosure, which is consistent with agency theory. In this theoretical framework,

shareholders with majority ownership have effectively delegated authority and responsibility to the

company's management, which is subject to the oversight of commissioners, particularly independent

commissioners. This system is designed to prevent any divergence of interest between shareholders

and management about the information provided by corporate management, especially information

relevant to risk management disclosures.

The company's management understands that they are running the business for their own

advantage and can add value to their shareholders. To sustain connections with shareholders, the

management team discloses risk management information without coercion or demands from

shareholders. As a result, the impact of ownership concentration on risk management disclosure has

no effect in this study.

Conclusion

This study looks at how intellectual capital, audit fees, and ownership concentration affect the

disclosure of enterprise risk management in banking sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock

Exchange between 2020 and 2022. Using multiple linear regression analysis using SPSS software, the

findings show that intellectual capital has a beneficial impact on corporate risk management

disclosures. However, audit fees and ownership concentration have no substantial influence. The

company's size, used as a control variable, also has no influence. Practical recommendations suggest

that banking companies enhance intellectual capital through knowledge management and staff

development to improve risk management disclosure. Although audit fees and ownership

concentration do not directly affect disclosure, monitoring these factors is still crucial for overall

governance. Future research could explore the influence of corporate governance practices and

regulatory compliance on risk management disclosure and extend the study to non-banking sectors

or cross-country comparisons. Further investigation into the indirect effects of audit quality and

ownership structure on disclosure transparency could provide valuable insights for improving

corporate reporting.

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2348

References

Adeabah, D., Andoh, C., Asongu, S., & Gemegah, A. (2023). Reputational risks in banks: A review of

research themes, frameworks, methods, and future research directions. Journal of Economic

Surveys, 37(2), 321–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12506

Ahmed, S., Bangassa, K., & Akbar, S. (2020). A study on trust restoration efforts in the UK retail banking

industry. The British Accounting Review, 52(1), 100871.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.100871

Andika, S., & Dewi Astini. (2022). Pengaruh Intellectual Capital Terhadap Profitabilitas Dalam

Perspektif Syariah. JAS (Jurnal Akuntansi Syariah), 6(2), 228–244.

https://doi.org/10.46367/jas.v6i2.849

Ashuri, N., Taleb, G., & Asadpour, A. A. (2017). The Impact of Board Composition, Audit Fees, and

Ownership Concentraton on Risk Management of Listed Companies in Tehran Stock Exchange.

Academic Journal of Accounting and Economic Researches, 3, 1–9.

Boston, J. (2021). Assessing the options for combatting democratic myopia and safeguarding long-

term interests. Futures, 125, 102668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2020.102668

Dunn Cavelty, M. (2020). From Predicting to Forecasting: Uncertainties, Scenarios, and their (Un-)

Intended Side Effects. In The Politics and Science of Prevision: Governing and Probing the Future

(pp. 89–103). Routledge.

Dupont, Q., & Karpoff, J. M. (2020). The Trust Triangle: Laws, Reputation, and Culture in Empirical

Finance Research. Journal of Business Ethics, 163(2), 217–238.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04229-1

Fayola, D. N. W. B., & Nurbaiti, A. (2020). Pengaruh ukuran perusahaan, konsentrasi kepemilikan,

reputasi auditor dan risk management committee terhadap pengungkapan enterprise risk

management. Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi, 5(1), 1–24.

Hapsari, D. W., Yadiati, W., Suharman, H., & Rosdini, D. (2021). Intellectual Capital and Environmental

Uncertainty on Firm Performance: The mediating role of the value chain. Quality - Access to

Success, 22(185). https://doi.org/10.47750/QAS/22.185.23

Herlambang, D. P., & Hapsari, D. P. (2024). Concentrated Ownership and Firm Value: The Mediation

Role Of Risk Management Disclosure. Owner: Riset Dan Jurnal Akuntansi, 8(1), 606–616.

Kamul, I., & Riswandari, E. (2021). Pengaruh Gender Diversity Dewan, Ukuran Dewan Komisaris,

Komisaris Independen, Komite Audit dan Konsentrasi Kepemilikan terhadap Agresivitas Pajak.

Jurnal Akuntansi Berkelanjutan Indonesia , 4(2), 218–238.

Kompas.com. (2018, May 21). Begini Asal Mula Kasus PT TAB yang Bobol Bank Mandiri Rp. 1,83 Triliun.

Kompas.Com. https://ekonomi.kompas.com/read/2018/05/21/225520926/begini-asal-mula-

kasus-pt-tab-yang-bobol-bank-mandiri-rp-183-triliun

Kompas.com. (2021, September 19). Bareskrim Polri Tangkap Pegawai BNI yang Hilangkan Deposito

Nasabah Rp 45 Miliar. Kompas.Com.

https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2021/09/12/14503321/bareskrim-polri-tangkap-

pegawai-bni-yang-hilangkan-deposito-nasabah-rp-45?page=all

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2349

Kurnia, E. (2023, October 29). OJK Pantau Kasus Karyawati BRI Kuras Dana Rp 5,1 Miliar. Kompas.Id.

https://www.kompas.id/baca/ekonomi/2023/10/29/karyawati-bri-kuras-rp-51-miliar-

dengan-pembukaan-kartu-kredit-tak-berizin

Lahfah, A. A., & Rahayu, S. (2023). Pengaruh Komite Manajemen Risiko, Leverage, dan Umur

Perusahaan Terhadap Pengungkapan Enterprise Risk Management (Studi pada Perusahaan

Subsektor Perbankan yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2018-2021). Ekonomis:

Journal of Economics and Business, 7(2), 1086. https://doi.org/10.33087/ekonomis.v7i2.1338

Masri, H. K., & Muslih, M. (2022). Pengaruh Dewan Direksi, Risk Management Committee dan

Konsentrasi Kepemilikan terhadap Enterprise Risk Management. Jurnal Ilmiah Edunomika, 6(1),

181. https://doi.org/10.29040/jie.v6i1.3278

Mauliana, E., & Laksito, H. (2021). Pengaruh Fee Audit, Audit Tenure, Rotasi Audit Dan Reputasi

Auditor Terhadap Kualitas Audit Audit (Studi Empiris Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang

Terdaftar di Bei Tahun 2017-2019). Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 10(4).

https://ejournal3.undip.ac.id/index.php/accounting/article/view/32977

Maulina, T. (2018). Pengaruh Komite Manajemen Risiko, Biaya Audit, Rapat Komite Audit, dan

Reputasi Auditor Terhadap Risk Management Disclosure. JAF (Journal of Accounting and

Finance), 2(1), 20–30.

Noviani, N., Norisanti, N., & Sunarya, E. (2022). Pengaruh Intellectual Capital Terhadap Financial

Distress. Journal of Economic, Bussines and Accounting (COSTING), 5(2), 1458–1467.

https://doi.org/10.31539/costing.v5i2.2583

OJK. (2017, July 7). Surat Edaran Otoritas Jasa Keuangan No.35/SEOJK.03/2017 tentang Pedoman

Standar Sistem Pengendalian Internal bagi Bank Umum. Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Indonesian.

https://ojk.go.id/id/kanal/perbankan/regulasi/surat-edaran-ojk/Pages/Surat-Edaran-

Otoritas-Jasa-Keuangan-Nomor-35-SEOJK.03-2017.aspx

Pamungkas, S. A., Purnamasari, D. I., & Windyastuti, W. (2022). Pengaruh Audit Tenure, Fee Audit,

Komite Audit, dan Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Kualitas Audit. CURRENT: Jurnal Kajian

Akuntansi Dan Bisnis Terkini, 3(2), 166–175.

Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan No.18/POJK.03/2016 Tentang Penerapan Manajemen Risiko Bagi

Bank Umum, Pub. L. No. 18/POJK.03/2016, Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Indonesia (2016).

Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan No.65/POJK.03/2016 Tentang Penerapan Manajemen Risiko Bagi

Bank Umum Syariah Dan Unit Usaha Syariah, Pub. L. No. 65/POJK.03/2016, Otoritas Jasa

Keuangan Indonesia (2016).

Ramadhea Jr, S., Rissi, D. M., Angriani, R., Elvaretta, D., & Hafizah, D. (2023). Pengaruh Konsentrasi

Kepemilikan, Struktur Dewan Komisaris, dan Leverage Terhadap Risk Management Disclosure.

Ekonomi, Keuangan, Investasi Dan Syariah (EKUITAS), 5(2), 484–492.

Ramos, J., & Cahyonowati, N. (2022). Analisis Pengaruh Karakteristik Dewan Komisaris dan Komite

terhadap Pengungkapan Risiko (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di

Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2018 dan 2019). Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 11(11).

Setiyowati, S. W., Diah, D. K., & Sari, A. R. (2023). The Influence of the Board of Directors, Risk

Management Committee, Ownership Concentration and Profitability on Enterprise Risk

Management. Assets: Jurnal Ekonomi, Manajemen Dan Akuntansi, 13(2), 315–327.

e-ISSN: 2723-6692 🕮 p-ISSN: 2723-6595

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 2350

Suzan, L., & Zatayumni, J. F. (2023). Pengungkapan Manajemen Risiko: Good Corporate Governance,

Dan Intellectual Capital Disclosure. Jurnal E-Bis, 7(2), 610–621. https://doi.org/10.37339/e-

bis.v7i2.1351