International Journal of Finance & Managerial Accounting

International Journal of Finance & Managerial Accounting

Designing Key Performance and Risk Indicators (KPI/KRI) for a Five-Layer Framework of International Financial Transfers and Proposing an Automatable Management Monitoring Model

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Mehdi GHasemian Oji Talary 1
Fraydoon Rahnamay Roodpooshti 2
Hamidreza Kordlouie 3
Shadi Shahverdiani 4
1 PhD Candidate, Department of Finance, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Professor, Department of Finance, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Department of Finance, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Shahre Qods Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
10.22034/ijfma.2026.79145.2363
Abstract
This study designs Key Performance and Risk Indicators (KPI/KRI) for a five-layer framework of international financial transfers and proposes an automatable management monitoring model to control performance, operational risk, and compliance risk across the transfer lifecycle. The study addresses how a five-layer architecture can be operationalized into a measurable and managerially monitorable model in banking operations.
An applied, mixed-methods (predominantly qualitative) approach was used. First, initial KPI/KRI candidates were derived from qualitative evidence (expert interviews and coding). Next, a multi-round fuzzy Delphi process refined and validated the indicators and established expert consensus. Experts assessed each indicator on both “importance” and “operational implementability” to strengthen content validity and practical deployability. Indicator weights were then computed via normalization of expert scores, and the final indicators were organized by layer.
The results produced a finalized KPI/KRI set across the five layers—30 indicators in total (3 KPIs and 3 KRIs per layer): (1) inter-institutional financial exchanges, (2) social/decentralized FX network, (3) digital wallet, (4) stable-value digital currency (conversion and settlement), and (5) connectivity and operations management. Additionally, 12 priority indicators were selected for first-page dashboard monitoring and alert-driven managerial attention. The proposed monitoring model specifies calculation logic, monitoring frequency, control thresholds, and reporting/escalation pathways, enabling dashboard deployment and monitoring automation.
Layered KPI/KRI design combined with an automatable monitoring model upgrades the framework from a conceptual architecture to a measurable and controllable system, supporting operational decision-making through improved efficiency, transparency, traceability, and operational/compliance risk management.
Keywords: International financial transfers; KPI/KRI; Five-layer model; Automatable management monitoring
Keywords
International financial transfers
Key performance and risk indicators
KPI/KRI
Five-layer model
Automatablemanagement monitoring model
Risk management
1.      Allen, F., McAndrews, J., & Strahan, P. (2002). E-Finance: An introduction. Journal of Financial Services Research, 22(1), 5–27.
2.      Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. (2011). Principles for the sound management of operational risk. Bank for International Settlements.
3.      Boston Consulting Group. (2023). Global payments report 2023: Investor scrutiny provokes a moment of truth. Boston Consulting Group. https://www.bcg.com/publications/2023/bcg-global-payments-report-2023 (Accessed 07.02.26).
4.      Böhme, R., Christin, N., Edelman, B., & Moore, T. (2015). Bitcoin: Economics, technology, and governance. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(2), 213–238.
5.      Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
6.      Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures. (2020). Enhancing cross-border payments: Building blocks of a global roadmap. Bank for International Settlements.
7.      Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.
8.      Financial Action Task Force. (2023). Virtual assets: Targeted update on implementation of the FATF standards on virtual assets and VASPs. FATF.
9.      Friedlmaier, M., Tumasjan, A., & Welpe, I. M. (2018). Disrupting industries with blockchain: The industry, venture capital funding, and regional distribution of blockchain ventures (SSRN Working Paper No. 2854756). SSRN. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2854756 (Accessed 07.02.26).
10.  Gama, J., Žliobaitė, I., Bifet, A., Pechenizkiy, M., & Bouchachia, A. (2014). A survey on concept drift adaptation. ACM Computing Surveys, 46(4), Article 44.
11.  Hsu, C.-C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(10), 1–8.
12.  International Monetary Fund. (2024). Digital money, cross-border payments, international reserves, and the global financial safety net—Preliminary considerations (IMF Note 2024/001). International Monetary Fund. https://www.imf.org/en/publications/imf-notes/issues/2024/01/04/digital-money-cross-border-payments-international-reserves-and-the-global-financial-safety-538733 (Accessed 07.02.26).
13.  PYMNTS. (2023). SWIFT’s headway on faster cross-border payments is just the beginning. PYMNTS.com. https://www.pymnts.com/news/faster-payments/2023/swifts-headway-on-faster-cross-border-payments-is-just-the-beginning/ (Accessed 07.02.26).
14.  Rowe, G., & Wright, G. (1999). The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: Issues and analysis. International Journal of Forecasting, 15(4), 353–375.
15.  Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill.
16.  Zohar, A. (2015). Bitcoin: Under the hood. Communications of the ACM, 58(9), 104–113.
17.  Žliobaitė, I. (2010). Learning under concept drift: An overview (arXiv:1010.4784). arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1010.4784 (Accessed 07.02.26).