Cited by 1,120Information and Cyber SecurityInformation Technology Governance and StrategyInformation Systems Education and Curriculum Development

Coping With Systems Risk: Security Planning Models for Management Decision Making1

Straub, Detmar W., Welke, Richard J.·1998·MIS Quarterly

Abstract

The likelihood that the firm’s information systems are insufficiently protected against certain kinds of damage or loss is known as “systems risk.” Risk can be managed or reduced when managers are aware of the full range of controls available and implement the most effective controls. Unfortunately, they often lack this knowledge, and their subsequent actions to cope with systems risk are less effective than they might otherwise be. This is one viable explanation for why losses from computer abuse and computer disasters today are uncomfortably large and still so potentially devastating after many years of attempting to deal with the problem. Results of comparative qualitative studies in two information services Fortune 500 firms identify an approach that can effectively deal with the problem. This theory-based security program includes (1) use of a security risk planning model, (2) education/training in security awareness, and (3) Countermeasure Matrix analysis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/249551

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Straub and Welke's research on information security deterrence supports this framing: perceived certainty of sanctions combined with perceived difficulty of undetected action significantly influences the decision calculus of potential offenders.

    “Straub and Welke's research on information security deterrence supports this framing: perceived certainty of sanctions combined with perceived difficulty of undetected action significantly influences the decision calculus of potential offenders [48].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Straub, D. W., & Welke, R. J.
Affiliations
Georgia State University (US)
Venue
MIS Quarterly
Publisher
MIS Quarterly
Published
1998-12-01
Volume
22
Issue
4
Pages
441-469
ISSN
  • 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-9730
OpenAlex
W2119587968
Cited by
1,120
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 70 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 65 · 2014: 66 · 2013: 55 · 2012: 77
FWCI
26.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • MIS Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of the Association for Information Systems (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Technology Governance and Strategy
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Systems Education and Curriculum Development
Keywords
information systems security, risk management, management decision-making, security countermeasures, security awareness training, computer abuse

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review