Chapter 11 Critical Discussion Question 3 a, b and cpages and
We have entered into an age of widespread investor skepticism over nearly all aspects of corporate governance. Scandals are sapping investor confidence. With the financial shenanigans at Enron, WorldCom, Global Crossing, Tyco, Adelphia, Lucent, Xerox, Qwest, Ahold NV, Peregrine and other public companies permeating the news, many are seeking ways to improve corporate governance and, in particular, Director accountability to Shareholders.
Solutions involving better disclosure and stiffer penalties miss the big picture. Tweaking rules and regulations at the margins will only minimally improve the quality of corporate governance. The powers-that-be will vigorously seek to maintain the status quo.
Almost everyone who has previously enjoyed an advantage and is suddenly forced onto a level playing field will feel cheated, treated unfairly, singled out for undeserved punishment.
Shareholders the true owners of Corporate America should have the legal right to nominate truly independent Director-candidates and cause the names of those candidates to appear on the Company's ballot.
Shareholders put their faith in and entrust their money to directors to manage the company and counter a chief executive if need be. But when things get tough, boards become captive of executives or bankers or they simply leave. The recent case of Dynegy illustrates this.
Rather than stay to fix the mess the directors created, the entire Dynegy board resigned when shareholders rejected its efforts to sell the company. The reasons are interrelated. Too often directors don't have enough skin in the game to push the company in a strong direction.
They do not own substantial stock in their companies and face no risk if things go wrong. Even if directors are given incentives to take strong action, the corporate board is not set up for this type of decision-making. Directors work part time to manage the company.
It's tough getting any group to agree on anything, let alone to challenge chief executives. Boards thus naturally tend to rely on the top executives and advisers.
Board collegiality and friendships among directors and with the chief executive often also mean that no director takes a disruptive stance. All these factors work to prevent directors from taking charge of a company or forging their own vision, a sobering thought for those who advocate greater board power.
Too often, in my experience, boardrooms are full of directors that still don't understand that they have a fiduciary duty to shareholders at large.
I think we have too much in boardrooms today a feeling that you have kind of a divine right to continue on the Board without anybody challenging that assumption.
They think they deserve their steep payouts even when their performance has been far from stellar. Yet, because CEOs have influence over who gets on the board -- the only board slate offered to shareholders is the one proposed by management -- directors are careful not to offend them.
Call it the fear factor: If directors knew they stood a good chance of losing their board seats -- and the prestige and valuable business connections these provide -- unless they aligned themselves with shareholders, they might stop forking over so much and narrow the gap between what CEOs and their managers and employees get.
To get there requires changing corporate laws and practices.The baby boomer generation Reread the Management Focus, “Evolution of Strategy at Procter & Gamble,” and then answer the following questions: What strategy was Procter & Gamble pursuing when it first entered foreign markets in the period up until .
Find the latest business news on Wall Street, jobs and the economy, the housing market, personal finance and money investments and much more on ABC News.
Chart and Diagram Slides for PowerPoint - Beautifully designed chart and diagram s for PowerPoint with visually stunning graphics and animation effects. Our new CrystalGraphics Chart and Diagram Slides for PowerPoint is a collection of over impressively designed data-driven chart and editable diagram s guaranteed to impress .
The workforce is changing as businesses become global and technology erodes geographical and physical iridis-photo-restoration.com organizations are critical to enabling this transition and can utilize next-generation tools and strategies to provide world-class support regardless of location, platform or device.
What strategy was Procter & Gamble pursuing when it first entered foreign markets in the period up until the s? Why do you think this strategy became less viable in the s?
Shareholders should be realistically allowed to directly select corporate director candidates via the SEC Shareholder Proposal procedure. The days of corporate paternalism should be ended. Corporate governance problems will only be cured when Shareholders can easily remove incompetent/corrupt Directors, i.e., vote them out of office.