Please provide more information/context/clarification to help us answer this question. You can post your response in this answer text by clicking "Edit."
There are a number of ways to look at this. Those who are high risk takers could be looking at short-term gains, where low risk takers may be more concerned about long-term goals and objectives that increase an organizations longevity, stability, and survivability. Again, high risk takers can often be looking at personal interests rather than organizational interests. In other words, at times you have individuals who are new to an organization, or new to a particular position within the organization. Therefore, they may feel compelled to take a high risk to show they are making a positive difference and to leave their mark (so to speak). However, many times what pops up from this type of thinking is the law of unintended circumstances, and negative results arise where the organization is hurt as well as the employees. I'm am not saying this always occurs, and not fostering the notion that a high risk taker is a bad risk taker. Still, this is why organizations need to consider skilled project management personnel, and those who are good critical thinkers as well as skilled in the area of risk management. There are always risks if you want to gain and keep the competitive edge. The question is, is it a reasonable risk?
Yes VP is higher than director
Yes CEO is higher than the president
Absolutly, A larger organization needs a more experienced manager and the manager will most likely have a larger salary than one of a smaller organization
A flat organization is better than a tall one because there is an easier flow of communication laterally rather than vertically. Also if it is flat there is less bureaucracy to go through.
Anyone, boy or girl is able to get a concussion. However, girls have a higher risk than boys.
a higher cost of funds than its competitors
motor macanhices
Yes, but with much higher risk.
Tissue: a collection of cells.
In my opinion, A cumulitive risk is very simply a risk that can add to and does build upon other similar risk to produce a risk factor that is substantially higher than if the one risk factor is presented on its own.
Because they are a higher risk, because they have a higher percentage of accidents than more experienced drivers.
Jumbo mortgage rates are generally 0.25-0.50% higher than conventional mortgage rates. Jumbo loans are a higher risk for lenders and therefore are charged higher interest rates to offset that risk, in the event of default.
They will require a higher rate of return for the investment that has greater risk
Loans, in general, are based on risk. The higher the risk, the higher the interest rate. You'll be able to get a loan, but the rate will be higher than if you had better credit.
Dominant Portfolio is part of the efficient frontier in modern porfolio theory. If a portfolio has a higher expected return than another portfolio with the same level of risk, a lower level of expected risk than another portfolio with equal expected return or a higher expected return and lower expected risk than the the portfolio is dominant.
Yes but they do pose a slightly higher cancer risk than the sun.