What’s Wrong with Enterprise Risk Management?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper seems as a book chapter. Please check the Intsructions for author section of the journal (https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jrfm/instructions). It has no literature and methodology, so it can not be said it is a scientific study. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

A more detailed literature review is expected to make this work robust.

You can also choose to make it empirical by collecting primary or secondary data on the issues, analyze them and come up with a better empirical finding.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I think the basic requirements of a research paper i.e. about the research - introduction, what the researcher wants to find out – research objectives, why he wants to find out – research gap, how he wants to find out – methodology and what he found out – results,  should be in a clear, sequential and logical flow which is missing in the paper. The opinion and conclusion should be substantiated by data analysis and obtained results. There should be a clear-cut analysis with proof of why organizations fail to implement ERM successfully and come out with some suggestions with proof and examples as to what needs to be done to make it successful. Give examples of some organizations which have implemented it successfully and state how they did it.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a highly practical article. Based on their own practical experience and long-term theoretical research results, the author proposes specific solutions to the problems in the process of enterprise wind direction management, and uses examples to demonstrate. The conclusions drawn have certain promotion and application value.

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Author(s), it was a mistake was that I did not take the article type into consideration. With this, with the corrections made by the authors, it is a sufficient and beautiful work for its genre. Besides, I also sincerely share your pain due to the pass away of Dear John Fraser, my prayers are with him. My condolences.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Your responses are noted.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

For the communication type of article, the paper looks good and much improved.