## 3 Results  
The selected group of experts according to the Section 2.1 of the proposal are shown in Table 1. The analyses and values for the development of the assessments are based on the judgment of these experts. Many interviews were held with these experts in the chosen company to elicit solid information on the processes and identified risks. The logistic process under study was conformed (Section 2.2). As an example, Figure 5 shows the source process. Traceability of activities with their inputs and outputs enables decision-makers to identify risk events and their relationships. Then, in accordance with Section 2.3, eight strategic and balanced objectives were derived according to the BSC perspectives: Clients (1), Financial (2), Processes (3), and Potentials (2). Table 2 shows the identified risk agents associated with the achievement of the derived strategic objectives (Section 2.4). Decision-makers have identified 18 sources of risk, which are translated into 26 risk agents (\(A_{jl}\)) based on the particular objective analysis. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Nr.** & **Responsibility** & **Work Experience (Years)** \\ \hline
1 & Manager of logistic group & \(>\)10 \\
2 & Quality supervisor & \(>\)12 \\
3 & Supply manager & \(>\)5 \\
4 & Logistic specialist & \(>\)10 \\
5 & Warehouse manager & \(>\)10 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Selected experts to research application. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Perspective** & **Objective** & **Risk Agents** & \(A_{jl}\) \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Clients} & \multirow{4}{*}{1} & Deficient identification of customer requirements & \(A_{11}\) \\  & & Non-compliance with methodologies and procedures & \(A_{21}\) \\  & & Lack of availability of material resources and goods & \(A_{31}\) \\  & & needed to meet a requirement. & \(A_{41}\) \\  & & Lack of process orientation to the client & \(A_{41}\) \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Financial} & \multirow{4}{*}{2} & Conflicts between plans, programs and objectives & \(A_{52}\) \\  & & Deficient integration of the SC & \(A_{62}\) \\  & & Inadequate control mechanisms. & \(A_{72}\) \\ \cline{2-3}  & & Non-compliance with methodologies and procedures & \(A_{23}\) \\  & & Inadequate control mechanisms & \(A_{73}\) \\  & & Interruption of IT systems & \(A_{83}\) \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Process} & \multirow{4}{*}{5} & \multirow{4}{*}{4} & Non-compliance with methodologies and procedures & \(A_{24}\) \\  & & Non-compliance with methodologies and procedures & \(A_{25}\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Deficient integration of the SC & \(A_{65}\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Supplies do not arrive as scheduled & \(A_{95}\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Occurrence of urgent requests. & \(A_{10:5}\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Decreased supply capacity & \(A_{11:5}\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Dependence on a single supplier & \(A_{12:5}\) \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Process} & \multirow{4}{*}{6} & Inadequate control mechanisms & \(A_{76}\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Lack of availability of elements, goods or money & \(A_{36}\) \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-3}  & & needed to meet a requirement & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Risk agent by strategic objective. Figure 5: Source process detail level. As a result of Section 2.5, 54 risk events were identified in the process. The risk event categories are Plan and Control (P), Source (S), Deliver (D), Return (R), and Enable (E). Table 3 shows the events corresponding to the Source process. After the main risk agents and associated events are identified, the interactions between (\(R_{jk}\)) and within (\(r_{nk}\)) can be determined (Section 2.6). The event tree tool was used for each agent and fuzzy logic was used to add value to the ambiguities involved in the linguistic-data assessment process. Fuzzy numbers reflect the relative strength of each pair of network elements. The network structure corresponding to Objective 1 is shown in Figure 6 where P, S, D, and R represent the process type of the events.