Strategic Management

Strategy is an action that managers take to attain one or more of the organizations goals. Strategy can also be defined as A general direction set for the company and its various components to achieve a desired state in the future. Strategy results from the detailed strategic planning process. A strategy is all about integrating organizational activities and utilizing and allocating the scarce resources within the organizational environment so as to meet the present objectives. While planning a strategy it is essential to consider that decisions are not taken in a vaccum and that any act taken by a firm is likely to be met by a reaction from those affected, competitors, customers, employees or suppliers. Strategy can also be defined as knowledge of the goals, the uncertainty of events and the need to take into consideration the likely or actual behavior of others. Strategy is the blueprint of decisions in an organization that shows its objectives and goals, reduces the key policies, and plans for achieving these goals, and defines the business the company is to carry on, the type of economic and human organization it wants to be, and the contribution it plans to make to its shareholders, customers and society at large.
Features of Strategy

1. Strategy is Significant because it is not possible to foresee the future. Without a perfect foresight, the firms must be ready to deal with the uncertain events which constitute the business environment. 2. Strategy deals with long term developments rather than routine operations, i.e. it deals with probability of innovations or new products, new methods of productions, or new markets to be developed in future. 3. Strategy is created to take into account the probable behavior of customers and competitors. Strategies dealing with employees will predict the employee behavior. Strategy is a well defined roadmap of an organization. It defines the overall mission, vision and direction of an organization. The objective of a strategy is to maximize an organizations strengths and to minimize the strengths of the competitors. Strategy, in short, bridges the gap between where we are and where we want to be.

The strategy statement of a firm sets the firms long-term strategic direction and broad policy directions. It gives the firm a clear sense of direction and a blueprint for the firms activities for the upcoming years. The main constituents of a strategic statement are as follows:
1. Strategic Intent

An organizations strategic intent is the purpose that it exists and why it will continue to exist, providing it maintains a competitive advantage. Strategic intent gives a picture about what an organization must get into immediately in order to achieve the companys vision. It motivates the people. It clarifies the vision of the vision of the company. Strategic intent helps management to emphasize and concentrate on the

priorities. Strategic intent is, nothing but, the influencing of an organizations resource potential and core competencies to achieve what at first may seem to be unachievable goals in the competitive environment. A well expressed strategic intent should guide/steer the development of strategic intent or the setting of goals and objectives that require that all of organizations competencies be controlled to maximum value. Strategic intent includes directing organizations attention on the need of winning; inspiring people by telling them that the targets are valuable; encouraging individual and team participation as well as contribution; and utilizing intent to direct allocation of resources. Strategic intent differs from strategic fit in a way that while strategic fit deals with harmonizing available resources and potentials to the external environment, strategic intent emphasizes on building new resources and potentials so as to create and exploit future opportunities.
2. Mission Statement

Mission statement is the statement of the role by which an organization intends to serve its stakeholders. It describes why an organization is operating and thus provides a framework within which strategies are formulated. It describes what the organization does (i.e., present capabilities), who all it serves (i.e., stakeholders) and what makes an organization unique (i.e., reason for existence). A mission statement differentiates an organization from others by explaining its broad scope of activities, its products, and technologies it uses to achieve its goals and objectives. It talks about an organizations present (i.e., about where we are). For instance, Microsofts mission is to help people and businesses throughout the world to realize their full potential. Wal-Marts mission is To give ordinary folk the chance to buy the same thing as rich people. Mission statements always exist at top level of an organization, but may also be made for various organizational levels. Chief executive plays a significant role in formulation of mission statement. Once the mission statement is formulated, it serves the organization in long run, but it may become ambiguous with organizational growth and innovations. In todays dynamic and competitive environment, mission may need to be redefined. However, care must be taken that the redefined mission statement should have original fundamentals/components. Mission statement has three main components-a statement of mission or vision of the company, a statement of the core values that shape the acts and behaviour of the employees, and a statement of the goals and objectives.
Features of a Mission

a. b. c. d. e. f.

Mission must be feasible and attainable. It should be possible to achieve it. Mission should be clear enough so that any action can be taken. It should be inspiring for the management, staff and society at large. It should be precise enough, i.e., it should be neither too broad nor too narrow. It should be unique and distinctive to leave an impact in everyones mind. It should be analytical,i.e., it should analyze the key components of the strategy. g. It should be credible, i.e., all stakeholders should be able to believe it.
3. Vision

A vision statement identifies where the organization wants or intends to be in future or where it should be to best meet the needs of the stakeholders. It describes dreams and aspirations for future. For instance, Microsofts vision is to empower people through great software, any time, any place, or any device. Wal-Marts vision is to become worldwide leader in retailing. A vision is the potential to view things ahead of themselves. It answers the question where we want to be. It gives us a reminder about what we attempt to develop. A vision statement is for the organization and its members, unlike the mission statement which is for the customers/clients. It contributes in effective decision making as well as effective business planning. It incorporates a shared understanding about the nature and aim of the organization and utilizes this understanding to direct and guide the organization towards a better purpose. It describes that on achieving the mission, how the organizational future would appear to be. An effective vision statement must have following featuresa. b. c. d. e. It must be unambiguous. It must be clear. It must harmonize with organizations culture and values. The dreams and aspirations must be rational/realistic. Vision statements should be shorter so that they are easier to memorize.

In order to realize the vision, it must be deeply instilled in the organization, being owned and shared by everyone involved in the organization.
4. Goals and objectives

A goal is a desired future state or objective that an organization tries to achieve. Goals specify in particular what must be done if an organization is to attain mission or vision. Goals make mission more prominent and concrete. They co-ordinate and integrate various functional and departmental areas in an organization. Well made goals have following featuresa. b. c. d. e. These are precise and measurable. These look after critical and significant issues. These are realistic and challenging. These must be achieved within a specific time frame. These include both financial as well as non-financial components.

Objectives are defined as goals that organization wants to achieve over a period of time. These are the foundation of planning. Policies are developed in an organization so as to achieve these objectives. Formulation of objectives is the task of top level management. Effective objectives have following featuresf. These are not single for an organization, but multiple. g. Objectives should be both short-term as well as long-term. h. Objectives must respond and react to changes in environment, i.e., they must be flexible.

i. These must be feasible, realistic and operational. 5. The strategic management process means defining the organizations strategy. It is also defined as the process by which managers make a choice of a set of strategies for the organization that will enable it to achieve better performance. Strategic management is a continuous process that appraises the business and industries in which the organization is involved; appraises its competitors; and fixes goals to meet all the present and future competitors and then reassesses each strategy. 6. Strategic management process has following four steps: 1. Environmental Scanning- Environmental scanning refers to a process of collecting, scrutinizing and providing information for strategic purposes. It helps in analyzing the internal and external factors influencing an organization. After executing the environmental analysis process, management should evaluate it on a continuous basis and strive to improve it. 2. Strategy Formulation- Strategy formulation is the process of deciding best course of action for accomplishing organizational objectives and hence achieving organizational purpose. After conducting environment scanning, managers formulate corporate, business and functional strategies. 3. Strategy Implementation- Strategy implementation implies making the strategy work as intended or putting the organizations chosen strategy into action. Strategy implementation includes designing the organizations structure, distributing resources, developing decision making process, and managing human resources. 4. Strategy Evaluation- Strategy evaluation is the final step of strategy management process. The key strategy evaluation activities are: appraising internal and external factors that are the root of present strategies, measuring performance, and taking remedial / corrective actions. Evaluation makes sure that the organizational strategy as well as its implementation meets the organizational objectives. 7. These components are steps that are carried, in chronological order, when creating a new strategic management plan. Present businesses that have already created a strategic management plan will revert to these steps as per the situations requirement, so as to make essential changes.

8. Components of Strategic Management Process 9. Strategic management is an ongoing process. Therefore, it must be realized that each component interacts with the other components and that this interaction often happens in chorus. 10. The strategic management process means defining the organizations strategy. It is also defined as the process by which managers make a choice of a set of strategies for the organization that will enable it to achieve better performance. Strategic management is a continuous process that appraises the business and industries in

which the organization is involved; appraises its competitors; and fixes goals to meet all the present and future competitors and then reassesses each strategy. 11. Strategic management process has following four steps: 1. Environmental Scanning- Environmental scanning refers to a process of collecting, scrutinizing and providing information for strategic purposes. It helps in analyzing the internal and external factors influencing an organization. After executing the environmental analysis process, management should evaluate it on a continuous basis and strive to improve it. 2. Strategy Formulation- Strategy formulation is the process of deciding best course of action for accomplishing organizational objectives and hence achieving organizational purpose. After conducting environment scanning, managers formulate corporate, business and functional strategies. 3. Strategy Implementation- Strategy implementation implies making the strategy work as intended or putting the organizations chosen strategy into action. Strategy implementation includes designing the organizations structure, distributing resources, developing decision making process, and managing human resources. 4. Strategy Evaluation- Strategy evaluation is the final step of strategy management process. The key strategy evaluation activities are: appraising internal and external factors that are the root of present strategies, measuring performance, and taking remedial / corrective actions. Evaluation makes sure that the organizational strategy as well as its implementation meets the organizational objectives. 12. These components are steps that are carried, in chronological order, when creating a new strategic management plan. Present businesses that have already created a strategic management plan will revert to these steps as per the situations requirement, so as to make essential changes.

13. Components of Strategic Management Process 14. Strategic management is an ongoing process. Therefore, it must be realized that each component interacts with the other components and that this interaction often happens in chorus. Strategy formulation refers to the process of choosing the most appropriate course of action for the realization of organizational goals and objectives and thereby achieving the organizational vision. The process of strategy formulation basically involves six main steps. Though these steps do not follow a rigid chronological order, however they are very rational and can be easily followed in this order. 1. Setting Organizations objectives - The key component of any strategy statement is to set the long-term objectives of the organization. It is known that strategy is

generally a medium for realization of organizational objectives. Objectives stress the state of being there whereas Strategy stresses upon the process of reaching there. Strategy includes both the fixation of objectives as well the medium to be used to realize those objectives. Thus, strategy is a wider term which believes in the manner of deployment of resources so as to achieve the objectives.

While fixing the organizational objectives, it is essential that the factors which influence the selection of objectives must be analyzed before the selection of objectives. Once the objectives and the factors influencing strategic decisions have been determined, it is easy to take strategic decisions. 2. Evaluating the Organizational Environment - The next step is to evaluate the general economic and industrial environment in which the organization operates. This includes a review of the organizations competitive position. It is essential to conduct a qualitative and quantitative review of an organizations existing product line. The purpose of such a review is to make sure that the factors important for competitive success in the market can be discovered so that the management can identify their own strengths and weaknesses as well as their competitors strengths and weaknesses. After identifying its strengths and weaknesses, an organization must keep a track of competitors moves and actions so as to discover probable opportunities of threats to its market or supply sources. 3. Setting Quantitative Targets - In this step, an organization must practically fix the quantitative target values for some of the organizational objectives. The idea behind this is to compare with long term customers, so as to evaluate the contribution that might be made by various product zones or operating departments. 4. Aiming in context with the divisional plans - In this step, the contributions made by each department or division or product category within the organization is identified and accordingly strategic planning is done for each sub-unit. This requires a careful analysis of macroeconomic trends. 5. Performance Analysis - Performance analysis includes discovering and analyzing the gap between the planned or desired performance. A critical evaluation of the organizations past performance, present condition and the desired future conditions must be done by the organization. This critical evaluation identifies the degree of gap that persists between the actual reality and the long-term aspirations of the organization. An attempt is made by the organization to estimate its probable future condition if the current trends persist. 6. Choice of Strategy - This is the ultimate step in Strategy Formulation. The best course of action is actually chosen after considering organizational goals, organizational strengths, potential and limitations as well as the external opportunities. 7. Strategy implementation is the translation of chosen strategy into organizational action so as to achieve strategic goals and objectives. Strategy implementation is also defined as the manner in which an organization should develop, utilize, and amalgamate organizational structure, control systems, and culture to follow strategies that lead to competitive advantage and a better performance. Organizational structure

allocates special value developing tasks and roles to the employees and states how these tasks and roles can be correlated so as maximize efficiency, quality, and customer satisfaction-the pillars of competitive advantage. But, organizational structure is not sufficient in itself to motivate the employees. 8. An organizational control system is also required. This control system equips managers with motivational incentives for employees as well as feedback on employees and organizational performance. Organizational culture refers to the specialized collection of values, attitudes, norms and beliefs shared by organizational members and groups.

Follwoing are the main steps in implementing a strategy: Developing an organization having potential of carrying out strategy successfully. Disbursement of abundant resources to strategy-essential activities. Creating strategy-encouraging policies. Employing best policies and programs for constant improvement. Linking reward structure to accomplishment of results. Making use of strategic leadership. Excellently formulated strategies will fail if they are not properly implemented. Also, it is essential to note that strategy implementation is not possible unless there is stability between strategy and each organizational dimension such as organizational structure, reward structure, resource-allocation process, etc. Strategy implementation poses a threat to many managers and employees in an organization. New power relationships are predicted and achieved. New groups (formal as well as informal) are formed whose values, attitudes, beliefs and concerns may not be known. With the change in power and status roles, the managers and employees may employ confrontation behaviour. Following are the main differences between Strategy Formulation and Strategy ImplementationStrategy Formulation Strategy Formulation includes planning and decision-making involved in developing organizations strategic goals and plans. In short, Strategy Formulation is placing the Forces before the action. Strategy Formulation is an Entrepreneurial Activity based on strategic decision-making. Strategy Formulation emphasizes on effectiveness. Strategy Implementation Strategy Implementation involves all those means related to executing the strategic plans. In short, Strategy Implementation is managing forces during the action. Strategic Implementation is mainly an Administrative Task based on strategic and operational decisions. Strategy Implementation emphasizes on efficiency.

Strategy Formulation is a rational process. Strategy Formulation requires co-ordination among few individuals. Strategy Formulation requires a great deal of initiative and logical skills. Strategic Formulation precedes Strategy Implementation.

Strategy Implementation is basically an operational process. Strategy Implementation requires coordination among many individuals. Strategy Implementation requires specific motivational and leadership traits. STrategy Implementation follows Strategy Formulation.

Strategy Evaluation is as significant as strategy formulation because it throws light on the efficiency and effectiveness of the comprehensive plans in achieving the desired results. The managers can also assess the appropriateness of the current strategy in todays dynamic world with socio-economic, political and technological innovations. Strategic Evaluation is the final phase of strategic management. The significance of strategy evaluation lies in its capacity to co-ordinate the task performed by managers, groups, departments etc, through control of performance. Strategic Evaluation is significant because of various factors such as - developing inputs for new strategic planning, the urge for feedback, appraisal and reward, development of the strategic management process, judging the validity of strategic choice etc. The process of Strategy Evaluation consists of following steps1. Fixing benchmark of performance - While fixing the benchmark, strategists encounter questions such as - what benchmarks to set, how to set them and how to express them. In order to determine the benchmark performance to be set, it is essential to discover the special requirements for performing the main task. The performance indicator that best identify and express the special requirements might then be determined to be used for evaluation. The organization can use both quantitative and qualitative criteria for comprehensive assessment of performance. Quantitative criteria includes determination of net profit, ROI, earning per share, cost of production, rate of employee turnover etc. Among the Qualitative factors are subjective evaluation of factors such as - skills and competencies, risk taking potential, flexibility etc. 2. Measurement of performance - The standard performance is a bench mark with which the actual performance is to be compared. The reporting and communication system help in measuring the performance. If appropriate means are available for measuring the performance and if the standards are set in the right manner, strategy evaluation becomes easier. But various factors such as managers contribution are difficult to measure. Similarly divisional performance is sometimes difficult to measure as compared to individual performance. Thus, variable objectives must be created against which measurement of performance can be done. The measurement must be done at right time else evaluation will not meet its purpose. For measuring the performance, financial statements like - balance sheet, profit and loss account must be prepared on an annual basis.

3. Analyzing Variance - While measuring the actual performance and comparing it with standard performance there may be variances which must be analyzed. The strategists must mention the degree of tolerance limits between which the variance between actual and standard performance may be accepted. The positive deviation indicates a better performance but it is quite unusual exceeding the target always. The negative deviation is an issue of concern because it indicates a shortfall in performance. Thus in this case the strategists must discover the causes of deviation and must take corrective action to overcome it. 4. Taking Corrective Action - Once the deviation in performance is identified, it is essential to plan for a corrective action. If the performance is consistently less than the desired performance, the strategists must carry a detailed analysis of the factors responsible for such performance. If the strategists discover that the organizational potential does not match with the performance requirements, then the standards must be lowered. Another rare and drastic corrective action is reformulating the strategy which requires going back to the process of strategic management, reframing of plans according to new resource allocation trend and consequent means going to the beginning point of strategic management process. Strategic decisions are the decisions that are concerned with whole environment in which the firm operates, the entire resources and the people who form the company and the interface between the two.
Characteristics/Features of Strategic Decisions

a. Strategic decisions have major resource propositions for an organization. These decisions may be concerned with possessing new resources, organizing others or reallocating others. b. Strategic decisions deal with harmonizing organizational resource capabilities with the threats and opportunities. c. Strategic decisions deal with the range of organizational activities. It is all about what they want the organization to be like and to be about. d. Strategic decisions involve a change of major kind since an organization operates in ever-changing environment. e. Strategic decisions are complex in nature.

f. Strategic decisions are at the top most level, are uncertain as they deal with the future, and involve a lot of risk. g. Strategic decisions are different from administrative and operational decisions. Administrative decisions are routine decisions which help or rather facilitate strategic decisions or operational decisions. Operational decisions are technical decisions which help execution of strategic decisions. To reduce cost is a strategic decision which is achieved through operational decision of reducing the number of employees and how we carry out these reductions will be administrative decision. The differences between Strategic, Administrative and Operational decisions can be summarized as followsStrategic Decisions Administrative Decisions Operational Decisions

Strategic decisions are longterm decisions. These are considered where The future planning is concerned. Strategic decisions are taken in Accordance with organizational mission and vision. These are related to overall Counter planning of all Organization. These deal with organizational Growth.

Administrative decisions are taken daily. These are short-term based Decisions.

Operational decisions are not frequently taken. These are medium-period based decisions.

These are taken according to strategic and operational Decisions.

These are taken in accordance with strategic and administrative decision.

These are related to working of employees in an Organization. These are in welfare of employees working in an organization.

These are related to production.

These are related to production and factory growth.

Definition of Business Policy

Business Policy defines the scope or spheres within which decisions can be taken by the subordinates in an organization. It permits the lower level management to deal with the problems and issues without consulting top level management every time for decisions. Business policies are the guidelines developed by an organization to govern its actions. They define the limits within which decisions must be made. Business policy also deals with acquisition of resources with which organizational goals can be achieved. Business policy is the study of the roles and responsibilities of top level management, the significant issues affecting organizational success and the decisions affecting organization in long-run.

Features of Business Policy

An effective business policy must have following features1. Specific- Policy should be specific/definite. If it is uncertain, then the implementation will become difficult. 2. Clear- Policy must be unambiguous. It should avoid use of jargons and connotations. There should be no misunderstandings in following the policy. 3. Reliable/Uniform- Policy must be uniform enough so that it can be efficiently followed by the subordinates. 4. Appropriate- Policy should be appropriate to the present organizational goal. 5. Simple- A policy should be simple and easily understood by all in the organization.

6. Inclusive/Comprehensive- In order to have a wide scope, a policy must be comprehensive. 7. Flexible- Policy should be flexible in operation/application. This does not imply that a policy should be altered always, but it should be wide in scope so as to ensure that the line managers use them in repetitive/routine scenarios. 8. Stable- Policy should be stable else it will lead to indecisiveness and uncertainty in minds of those who look into it for guidance.
Difference between Policy and Strategy

The term policy should not be considered as synonymous to the term strategy. The difference between policy and strategy can be summarized as follows1. Policy is a blueprint of the organizational activities which are repetitive/routine in nature. While strategy is concerned with those organizational decisions which have not been dealt/faced before in same form. 2. Policy formulation is responsibility of top level management. While strategy formulation is basically done by middle level management. 3. Policy deals with routine/daily activities essential for effective and efficient running of an organization. While strategy deals with strategic decisions. 4. Policy is concerned with both thought and actions. While strategy is concerned mostly with action. 5. A policy is what is, or what is not done. While a strategy is the methodology used to achieve a target as prescribed by a policy.

Boston Consulting Group (BCG) Matrix is a four celled matrix (a 2 * 2 matrix) developed by BCG, USA. It is the most renowned corporate portfolio analysis tool. It provides a graphic representation for an organization to examine different businesses in its portfolio on the basis of their related market share and industry growth rates. It is a two dimensional analysis on management of SBUs (Strategic Business Units). In other words, it is a comparative analysis of business potential and the evaluation of environment. According to this matrix, business could be classified as high or low according to their industry growth rate and relative market share. Relative Market Share = SBU Sales this year leading competitors sales this year. Market Growth Rate = Industry sales this year - Industry Sales last year. The analysis requires that both measures be calculated for each SBU. The dimension of business strength, relative market share, will measure comparative advantage indicated by market dominance. The key theory underlying this is existence of an experience curve and that market share is achieved due to overall cost leadership. BCG matrix has four cells, with the horizontal axis representing relative market share and the vertical axis denoting market growth rate. The mid-point of relative market share is set at 1.0. if all the SBUs are in same industry, the average growth rate of the industry is used. While,

if all the SBUs are located in different industries, then the mid-point is set at the growth rate for the economy. Resources are allocated to the business units according to their situation on the grid. The four cells of this matrix have been called as stars, cash cows, question marks and dogs. Each of these cells represents a particular type of business.

10 x 1 x 0.1 x Figure: BCG Matrix 1. Stars- Stars represent business units having large market share in a fast growing industry. They may generate cash but because of fast growing market, stars require huge investments to maintain their lead. Net cash flow is usually modest. SBUs located in this cell are attractive as they are located in a robust industry and these business units are highly competitive in the industry. If successful, a star will become a cash cow when the industry matures. 2. Cash Cows- Cash Cows represents business units having a large market share in a mature, slow growing industry. Cash cows require little investment and generate cash that can be utilized for investment in other business units. These SBUs are the corporations key source of cash, and are specifically the core business. They are the base of an organization. These businesses usually follow stability strategies. When cash cows loose their appeal and move towards deterioration, then a retrenchment policy may be pursued. 3. Question Marks- Question marks represent business units having low relative market share and located in a high growth industry. They require huge amount of cash to maintain or gain market share. They require attention to determine if the venture can be viable. Question marks are generally new goods and services which have a good commercial prospective. There is no specific strategy which can be adopted. If the firm thinks it has dominant market share, then it can adopt expansion strategy, else retrenchment strategy can be adopted. Most businesses start as question marks as the company tries to enter a high growth market in which there is already a market-share. If ignored, then question marks may become dogs, while if huge investment is made, then they have potential of becoming stars. 4. Dogs- Dogs represent businesses having weak market shares in low-growth markets. They neither generate cash nor require huge amount of cash. Due to low market share, these business units face cost disadvantages. Generally retrenchment strategies are

adopted because these firms can gain market share only at the expense of competitors/rival firms. These business firms have weak market share because of high costs, poor quality, ineffective marketing, etc. Unless a dog has some other strategic aim, it should be liquidated if there is fewer prospects for it to gain market share. Number of dogs should be avoided and minimized in an organization.
Limitations of BCG Matrix

The BCG Matrix produces a framework for allocating resources among different business units and makes it possible to compare many business units at a glance. But BCG Matrix is not free from limitations, such as1. BCG matrix classifies businesses as low and high, but generally businesses can be medium also. Thus, the true nature of business may not be reflected. 2. Market is not clearly defined in this model. 3. High market share does not always leads to high profits. There are high costs also involved with high market share. 4. Growth rate and relative market share are not the only indicators of profitability. This model ignores and overlooks other indicators of profitability. 5. At times, dogs may help other businesses in gaining competitive advantage. They can earn even more than cash cows sometimes. 6. This four-celled approach is considered as to be too simplistic.

SWOT is an acronym for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats. By definition, Strengths (S) and Weaknesses (W) are considered to be internal factors over which you have some measure of control. Also, by definition, Opportunities (O) and Threats (T) are considered to be external factors over which you have essentially no control. SWOT Analysis is the most renowned tool for audit and analysis of the overall strategic position of the business and its environment. Its key purpose is to identify the strategies that will create a firm specific business model that will best align an organizations resources and capabilities to the requirements of the environment in which the firm operates. In other words, it is the foundation for evaluating the internal potential and limitations and the probable/likely opportunities and threats from the external environment. It views all positive and negative factors inside and outside the firm that affect the success. A consistent study of the environment in which the firm operates helps in forecasting/predicting the changing trends and also helps in including them in the decision-making process of the organization. An overview of the four factors (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) is given below1. Strengths- Strengths are the qualities that enable us to accomplish the organizations mission. These are the basis on which continued success can be made and continued/sustained. Strengths can be either tangible or intangible. These are what you are well-versed in or what you have expertise in, the traits and qualities your employees possess (individually and as a team) and the distinct features that give your organization its consistency. Strengths are the beneficial aspects of the organization or the capabilities of an organization, which includes human competencies, process

capabilities, financial resources, products and services, customer goodwill and brand loyalty. Examples of organizational strengths are huge financial resources, broad product line, no debt, committed employees, etc. 2. Weaknesses- Weaknesses are the qualities that prevent us from accomplishing our mission and achieving our full potential. These weaknesses deteriorate influences on the organizational success and growth. Weaknesses are the factors which do not meet the standards we feel they should meet. Weaknesses in an organization may be depreciating machinery, insufficient research and development facilities, narrow product range, poor decision-making, etc. Weaknesses are controllable. They must be minimized and eliminated. For instance - to overcome obsolete machinery, new machinery can be purchased. Other examples of organizational weaknesses are huge debts, high employee turnover, complex decision making process, narrow product range, large wastage of raw materials, etc. 3. Opportunities- Opportunities are presented by the environment within which our organization operates. These arise when an organization can take benefit of conditions in its environment to plan and execute strategies that enable it to become more profitable. Organizations can gain competitive advantage by making use of opportunities. Organization should be careful and recognize the opportunities and grasp them whenever they arise. Selecting the targets that will best serve the clients while getting desired results is a difficult task. Opportunities may arise from market, competition, industry/government and technology. Increasing demand for telecommunications accompanied by deregulation is a great opportunity for new firms to enter telecom sector and compete with existing firms for revenue. 4. Threats- Threats arise when conditions in external environment jeopardize the reliability and profitability of the organizations business. They compound the vulnerability when they relate to the weaknesses. Threats are uncontrollable. When a threat comes, the stability and survival can be at stake. Examples of threats are unrest among employees; ever changing technology; increasing competition leading to excess capacity, price wars and reducing industry profits; etc.
Advantages of SWOT Analysis

SWOT Analysis is instrumental in strategy formulation and selection. It is a strong tool, but it involves a great subjective element. It is best when used as a guide, and not as a prescription. Successful businesses build on their strengths, correct their weakness and protect against internal weaknesses and external threats. They also keep a watch on their overall business environment and recognize and exploit new opportunities faster than its competitors. SWOT Analysis helps in strategic planning in following mannera. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. It is a source of information for strategic planning. Builds organizations strengths. Reverse its weaknesses. Maximize its response to opportunities. Overcome organizations threats. It helps in identifying core competencies of the firm. It helps in setting of objectives for strategic planning. It helps in knowing past, present and future so that by using past and current data, future plans can be chalked out.

SWOT Analysis provide information that helps in synchronizing the firms resources and capabilities with the competitive environment in which the firm operates. SWOT ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK

Limitations of SWOT Analysis

SWOT Analysis is not free from its limitations. It may cause organizations to view circumstances as very simple because of which the organizations might overlook certain key strategic contact which may occur. Moreover, categorizing aspects as strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats might be very subjective as there is great degree of uncertainty in market. SWOT Analysis does stress upon the significance of these four aspects, but it does not tell how an organization can identify these aspects for itself. There are certain limitations of SWOT Analysis which are not in control of management. These includea. b. c. d. e. Price increase; Inputs/raw materials; Government legislation; Economic environment; Searching a new market for the product which is not having overseas market due to import restrictions; etc.

Internal limitations may includea. b. c. d. Insufficient research and development facilities; Faulty products due to poor quality control; Poor industrial relations; Lack of skilled and efficient labour; etc

Organizations must operate within a competitive industry environment. They do not exist in vacuum. Analyzing organizations competitors helps an organization to discover its weaknesses, to identify opportunities for and threats to the organization from the industrial environment. While formulating an organizations strategy, managers must consider the strategies of organizations competitors. Competitor analysis is a driver of an organizations strategy and effects on how firms act or react in their sectors. The organization does a

competitor analysis to measure / assess its standing amongst the competitors. Competitor analysis begins with identifying present as well as potential competitors. It portrays an essential appendage to conduct an industry analysis. An industry analysis gives information regarding probable sources of competition (including all the possible strategic actions and reactions and effects on profitability for all the organizations competing in the industry). However, a well-thought competitor analysis permits an organization to concentrate on those organizations with which it will be in direct competition, and it is especially important when an organization faces a few potential competitors. Michael Porter in Porters Five Forces Model has assumed that the competitive environment within an industry depends on five forces- Threat of new potential entrants, Threat of substitute product/services, bargaining power of suppliers, bargaining power of buyers, Rivalry among current competitors. These five forces should be used as a conceptual background for identifying an organizations competitive strengths and weaknesses and threats to and opportunities for the organization from its competitive environment. The main objectives of doing competitor analysis can be summarized as follows: To study the market; To predict and forecast organizations demand and supply; To formulate strategy; To increase the market share; To study the market trend and pattern; To develop strategy for organizational growth; When the organization is planning for the diversification and expansion plan; To study forthcoming trends in the industry; Understanding the current strategy strengths and weaknesses of a competitor can suggest opportunities and threats that will merit a response; Insight into future competitor strategies may help in predicting upcoming threats and opportunities. Competitors should be analyzed along various dimensions such as their size, growth and profitability, reputation, objectives, culture, cost structure, strengths and weaknesses, business strategies, exit barriers, etc.
Porters Five Forces Model of Competition

Michael Porter (Harvard Business School Management Researcher) designed various vital frameworks for developing an organizations strategy. One of the most renowned among managers making strategic decisions is the five competitive forces model that determines industry structure. According to Porter, the nature of competition in any industry is personified in the following five forces: i. ii. Threat of new potential entrants Threat of substitute product/services

iii. iv. v.

Bargaining power of suppliers Bargaining power of buyers Rivalry among current competitors

FIGURE: Porters Five Forces model The five forces mentioned above are very significant from point of view of strategy formulation. The potential of these forces differs from industry to industry. These forces jointly determine the profitability of industry because they shape the prices which can be charged, the costs which can be borne, and the investment required to compete in the industry. Before making strategic decisions, the managers should use the five forces framework to determine the competitive structure of industry. Lets discuss the five factors of Porters model in detail: 1. Risk of entry by potential competitors: Potential competitors refer to the firms which are not currently competing in the industry but have the potential to do so if given a choice. Entry of new players increases the industry capacity, begins a competition for market share and lowers the current costs. The threat of entry by potential competitors is partially a function of extent of barriers to entry. The various barriers to entry are Economies of scale Brand loyalty Government Regulation Customer Switching Costs Absolute Cost Advantage Ease in distribution Strong Capital base 2. Rivalry among current competitors: Rivalry refers to the competitive struggle for market share between firms in an industry. Extreme rivalry among established firms poses a strong threat to profitability. The strength of rivalry among established firms within an industry is a function of following factors: Extent of exit barriers

Amount of fixed cost Competitive structure of industry Presence of global customers Absence of switching costs Growth Rate of industry Demand conditions 3. Bargaining Power of Buyers: Buyers refer to the customers who finally consume the product or the firms who distribute the industrys product to the final consumers. Bargaining power of buyers refer to the potential of buyers to bargain down the prices charged by the firms in the industry or to increase the firms cost in the industry by demanding better quality and service of product. Strong buyers can extract profits out of an industry by lowering the prices and increasing the costs. They purchase in large quantities. They have full information about the product and the market. They emphasize upon quality products. They pose credible threat of backward integration. In this way, they are regarded as a threat. 4. Bargaining Power of Suppliers: Suppliers refer to the firms that provide inputs to the industry. Bargaining power of the suppliers refer to the potential of the suppliers to increase the prices of inputs( labour, raw materials, services, etc) or the costs of industry in other ways. Strong suppliers can extract profits out of an industry by increasing costs of firms in the industry. Suppliers products have a few substitutes. Strong suppliers products are unique. They have high switching cost. Their product is an important input to buyers product. They pose credible threat of forward integration. Buyers are not significant to strong suppliers. In this way, they are regarded as a threat. 5. Threat of Substitute products: Substitute products refer to the products having ability of satisfying customers needs effectively. Substitutes pose a ceiling (upper limit) on the potential returns of an industry by putting a setting a limit on the price that firms can charge for their product in an industry. Lesser the number of close substitutes a product has, greater is the opportunity for the firms in industry to raise their product prices and earn greater profits (other things being equal). The power of Porters five forces varies from industry to industry. Whatever be the industry, these five forces influence the profitability as they affect the prices, the costs, and the capital investment essential for survival and competition in industry. This five forces model also help in making strategic decisions as it is used by the managers to determine industrys competitive structure. Porter ignored, however, a sixth significant factor- complementaries. This term refers to the reliance that develops between the companies whose products work is in combination with each other. Strong complementors might have a strong positive effect on the industry. Also, the five forces model overlooks the role of innovation as well as the significance of individual firm differences. It presents a stagnant view of competition.
Strategic Leadership - Definition and Qualities of a Strategic Leader

Strategic leadership refers to a mangers potential to express a strategic vision for the organization, or a part of the organization, and to motivate and persuade others to acquire that vision. Strategic leadership can also be defined as utilizing strategy in the management of employees. It is the potential to influence organizational members and to execute organizational change. Strategic leaders create organizational structure, allocate

resources and express strategic vision. Strategic leaders work in an ambiguous environment on very difficult issues that influence and are influenced by occasions and organizations external to their own. The main objective of strategic leadership is strategic productivity. Another aim of strategic leadership is to develop an environment in which employees forecast the organizations needs in context of their own job. Strategic leaders encourage the employees in an organization to follow their own ideas. Strategic leaders make greater use of reward and incentive system for encouraging productive and quality employees to show much better performance for their organization. Functional strategic leadership is about inventiveness, perception, and planning to assist an individual in realizing his objectives and goals. Strategic leadership requires the potential to foresee and comprehend the work environment. It requires objectivity and potential to look at the broader picture. A few main traits / characteristics / features / qualities of effective strategic leaders that do lead to superior performance are as follows: Loyalty- Powerful and effective leaders demonstrate their loyalty to their vision by their words and actions. Keeping them updated- Efficient and effective leaders keep themselves updated about what is happening within their organization. They have various formal and informal sources of information in the organization. Judicious use of power- Strategic leaders makes a very wise use of their power. They must play the power game skillfully and try to develop consent for their ideas rather than forcing their ideas upon others. They must push their ideas gradually. Have wider perspective/outlook- Strategic leaders just dont have skills in their narrow specialty but they have a little knowledge about a lot of things. Motivation- Strategic leaders must have a zeal for work that goes beyond money and power and also they should have an inclination to achieve goals with energy and determination. Compassion- Strategic leaders must understand the views and feelings of their subordinates, and make decisions after considering them. Self-control- Strategic leaders must have the potential to control distracting/disturbing moods and desires, i.e., they must think before acting. Social skills- Strategic leaders must be friendly and social. Self-awareness- Strategic leaders must have the potential to understand their own moods and emotions, as well as their impact on others. Readiness to delegate and authorize- Effective leaders are proficient at delegation. They are well aware of the fact that delegation will avoid overloading of responsibilities on the leaders. They also recognize the fact that authorizing the subordinates to make decisions will motivate them a lot. Articulacy- Strong leaders are articulate enough to communicate the vision(vision of

where the organization should head) to the organizational members in terms that boost those members. Constancy/ Reliability- Strategic leaders constantly convey their vision until it becomes a component of organizational culture. To conclude, Strategic leaders can create vision, express vision, passionately possess vision and persistently drive it to accomplishment Corporate Governance - Definition, Scope and Benefits
What is Corporate Governance?

Corporate Governance refers to the way a corporation is governed. It is the technique by which companies are directed and managed. It means carrying the business as per the stakeholders desires. It is actually conducted by the board of Directors and the concerned committees for the companys stakeholders benefit. It is all about balancing individual and societal goals, as well as, economic and social goals. Corporate Governance is the interaction between various participants (shareholders, board of directors, and companys management) in shaping corporations performance and the way it is proceeding towards. The relationship between the owners and the managers in an organization must be healthy and there should be no conflict between the two. The owners must see that individuals actual performance is according to the standard performance. These dimensions of corporate governance should not be overlooked. Corporate Governance deals with the manner the providers of finance guarantee themselves of getting a fair return on their investment. Corporate Governance clearly distinguishes between the owners and the managers. The managers are the deciding authority. In modern corporations, the functions/ tasks of owners and managers should be clearly defined, rather, harmonizing. Corporate Governance deals with determining ways to take effective strategic decisions. It gives ultimate authority and complete responsibility to the Board of Directors. In todays market- oriented economy, the need for corporate governance arises. Also, efficiency as well as globalization are significant factors urging corporate governance. Corporate Governance is essential to develop added value to the stakeholders. Corporate Governance ensures transparency which ensures strong and balanced economic development. This also ensures that the interests of all shareholders (majority as well as minority shareholders) are safeguarded. It ensures that all shareholders fully exercise their rights and that the organization fully recognizes their rights. Corporate Governance has a broad scope. It includes both social and institutional aspects. Corporate Governance encourages a trustworthy, moral, as well as ethical environment.
Benefits of Corporate Governance

1. Good corporate governance ensures corporate success and economic growth.

2. Strong corporate governance maintains investors confidence, as a result of which, company can raise capital efficiently and effectively. 3. It lowers the capital cost. 4. There is a positive impact on the share price. 5. It provides proper inducement to the owners as well as managers to achieve objectives that are in interests of the shareholders and the organization. 6. Good corporate governance also minimizes wastages, corruption, risks and mismanagement. 7. It helps in brand formation and development. 8. It ensures organization in managed in a manner that fits the best interests of all.
Business Ethics - A Successful way of conducting business

Business Ethics refers to carrying business as per self-acknowledged moral standards. It is actually a structure of moral principles and code of conduct applicable to a business. Business ethics are applicable not only to the manner the business relates to a customer but also to the society at large. It is the worth of right and wrong things from business point of view. Business ethics not only talk about the code of conduct at workplace but also with the clients and associates. Companies which present factual information, respect everyone and thoroughly adhere to the rules and regulations are renowned for high ethical standards. Business ethics implies conducting business in a manner beneficial to the societal as well as business interests. Every strategic decision has a moral consequence. The main aim of business ethics is to provide people with the means for dealing with the moral complications. Ethical decisions in a business have implications such as satisfied work force, high sales, low regulation cost, more customers and high goodwill. Some of ethical issues for business are relation of employees and employers, interaction between organization and customers, interaction between organization and shareholders, work environment, environmental issues, bribes, employees rights protection, product safety etc. Below is a list of some significant ethical principles to be followed for a successful business1. Protect the basic rights of the employees/workers. 2. Follow health, safety and environmental standards. 3. Continuously improvise the products, operations and production facilities to optimize the resource consumption 4. Do not replicate the packaging style so as to mislead the consumers. 5. Indulge in truthful and reliable advertising. 6. Strictly adhere to the product safety standards. 7. Accept new ideas. Encourage feedback from both employees as well as customers. 8. Present factual information. Maintain accurate and true business records. 9. Treat everyone (employees, partners and customers) with respect and integrity. 10. The mission and vision of the company should be very clear to it. 11. Do not get engaged in business relationships that lead to conflicts of interest. Discourage black marketing, corruption and hoarding. 12. Meet all the commitments and obligations timely.

13. Encourage free and open competition. Do not ruin competitors image by fraudulent practices. 14. The policies and procedures of the Company should be updated regularly. 15. Maintain confidentiality of personal data and proprietary records held by the company. 16. Do not accept child labour, forced labour or any other human right abuses. Social responsibility is defined as the obligation and commitment of managers to take steps for protecting and improving societys welfare along with protecting their own interest. The managers must have social responsibility because of the following reasons: 1. Organizational Resources - An organization has a diverse pool of resources in form of men, money, competencies and functional expertise. When an organization has these resources in hand, it is in better position to work for societal goals. 2. Precautionary measure - if an organization lingers on dealing with the social issues now, it would land up putting out social fires so that no time is left for realizing its goal of producing goods and services. Practically, it is more cost-efficient to deal with the social issues before they turn into disaster consuming a large part if managements time. 3. Moral Obligation - The acceptance of managers social responsibility has been identified as a morally appropriate position. It is the moral responsibility of the organization to assist solving or removing the social problems 4. Efficient and Effective Employees - Recruiting employees becomes easier for socially responsible organization. Employees are attracted to contribute for more socially responsible organizations. For instance - Tobacco companies have difficulty recruiting employees with best skills and competencies. 5. Better Organizational Environment - The organization that is most responsive to the betterment of social quality of life will consequently have a better society in which it can perform its business operations. Employee hiring would be easier and employee would of a superior quality. There would be low rate of employee turnover and absenteeism. Because of all the social improvements, there will be low crime rate consequently less money would be spent in form of taxes and for protection of land. Thus, an improved society will create a better business environment. But, managers social responsibility is not free from some criticisms, such as 1. High Social Overhead Cost - The cost on social responsibility is a social cost which will not instantly benefit the organization. The cost of social responsibility can lower the organizational efficiency and effect to compete in the corporate world. 2. Cost to Society - The costs of social responsibility are transferred on to the society and the society must bear with them. 3. Lack of Social Skills and Competencies - The managers are best at managing business matters but they may not have required skills for solving social issues. 4. Profit Maximization - The main objective of many organizations is profit maximization. In such a scenario the managers decisions are controlled by their desire

to maximize profits for the organizations shareholders while reasonably following the law and social custom. Social responsibility can promote the development of groups and expand supporting industries.
What is Core Competency?

Core competency is a unique skill or technology that creates distinct customer value. For instance, core competency of Federal express (Fed Ex) is logistics management. The organizational unique capabilities are mainly personified in the collective knowledge of people as well as the organizational system that influences the way the employees interact. As an organization grows, develops and adjusts to the new environment, so do its core competencies also adjust and change. Thus, core competencies are flexible and developing with time. They do not remain rigid and fixed. The organization can make maximum utilization of the given resources and relate them to new opportunities thrown by the environment. Resources and capabilities are the building blocks upon which an organization create and execute value-adding strategy so that an organization can earn reasonable returns and achieve strategic competitiveness.

Figure: Core Competence Decision

Resources are inputs to a firm in the production process. These can be human, financial, technological, physical or organizational. The more unique, valuable and firm specialized the resources are, the more possibly the firm will have core competency. Resources should be used to build on the strengths and remove the firms weaknesses. Capabilities refer to organizational skills at integrating its team of resources so that they can be used more efficiently and effectively. Organizational capabilities are generally a result of organizational system, processes and control mechanisms. These are intangible in nature. It might be that a firm has unique and valuable resources, but if it lacks the capability to utilize those resources productively and effectively, then the firm cannot create core competency. The organizational strategies may

develop new resources and capabilities or it might make stronger the existing resources and capabilities, hence building the core competencies of the organization. Core competencies help an organization to distinguish its products from its rivals as well as to reduce its costs than its competitors and thereby attain a competitive advantage. It helps in creating customer value. Also, core competencies help in creating and developing new goods and services. Core competencies decide the future of the organization. These decide the features and structure of global competitive organization. Core competencies give way to innovations. Using core competencies, new technologies can be developed. They ensure delivery of quality products and services to the clients.

Corporate governance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this article if you can. (July 2011) This article may contain original research. Relevant discussion may be found on Talk:Corporate governance. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. (April 2011) Not to be confused with corporate statism, a corporate approach to government rather than the governance of a corporation

Corporate governance is "the system by which companies are directed and controlled".[1] It involves regulatory and market mechanisms, and the roles and relationships between a companys management, its board, its shareholders and other stakeholders, and the goals for which the corporation is governed.[2][3] In contemporary business corporations, the main external stakeholder groups are shareholders, debtholders, trade creditors, suppliers, customers and communities affected by the corporation's activities[4]. Internal stakeholders are the board of directors, executives, and other employees. Much of the contemporary interest in corporate governance is concerned with mitigation of the conflicts of interests between stakeholders. Ways of mitigating or preventing these conflicts of interests include the processes, customs, policies, laws, and institutions which have impact on the way a company is controlled.[5][6] An important theme of corporate governance is the nature and extent of accountability of people in the business. A related but separate thread of discussions focuses on the impact of a corporate governance system on economic efficiency, with a strong emphasis on shareholders' welfare.[7][8] In large firms where there is a separation of ownership and management and no controlling shareholder, the principalagent issue arises between upper-management (the "agent") which may have very different interests, and by definition considerably more information, than shareholders (the "principals"). The danger arises that rather than overseeing management on behalf of shareholders, the board of directors may become insulated from shareholders and beholden to management.[9] This aspect is particularly present in contemporary public debates and developments in regulatory policy.[10](see regulation and policy regulation).[11] There has been renewed interest in the corporate governance practices of modern corporations, particularly in relation to accountability, since the high-profile collapses of a number of large corporations during 2001-2002, most of which involved accounting fraud[12]. Corporate scandals of various forms have maintained public and political interest in the regulation of corporate governance. In the U.S., these include Enron Corporation and MCI Inc. (formerly WorldCom). Their demise is associated with the U.S. federal government passing the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002, intending to restore public confidence in corporate governance. Comparable failures in Australia (HIH, One.Tel) are associated with the eventual

passage of the CLERP 9 reforms. Similar corporate failures in other countries stimulated increased regulatory interest (e.g., Parmalat in Italy).

Contents
[hide]

1 Principles of corporate governance 2 Corporate governance models around the world o 2.1 Continental Europe o 2.2 India o 2.3 United States, United Kingdom 3 Regulation o 3.1 Legal environment - General o 3.2 Codes and guidelines 4 History o 4.1 United States o 4.2 East Asia 5 Parties to corporate governance o 5.1 Control and ownership structures 5.1.1 Family control 5.1.2 Diffuse shareholders 6 Mechanisms and controls o 6.1 Internal corporate governance controls o 6.2 External corporate governance controls o 6.3 Financial reporting and the independent auditor 7 Systemic problems of corporate governance 8 Executive remuneration/compensation 9 See also 10 References 11 Further reading 12 External links

[edit] Principles of corporate governance

Contemporary discussions of corporate governance tend to refer to principles raised in three documents released since 1990: The Cadbury Report (UK, 1992), the Principles of Corporate Governance (OECD, 1998 and 2004), the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (US, 2002). The Cadbury and OECD reports present general principals around which businesses are expected to operate to assure proper governance. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, informally referred to as Sarbox or Sox, is an attempt by the federal government in the United States to legislate several of the principles recommended in the Cadbury and OECD reports.

Rights and equitable treatment of shareholders:[13][14][15] Organizations should respect the rights of shareholders and help shareholders to exercise those rights. They can help shareholders exercise their rights by openly and effectively communicating information and by encouraging shareholders to participate in general meetings.

Interests of other stakeholders:[16] Organizations should recognize that they have legal, contractual, social, and market driven obligations to non-shareholder stakeholders, including employees, investors, creditors, suppliers, local communities, customers, and policy makers. Role and responsibilities of the board:[17][18] The board needs sufficient relevant skills and understanding to review and challenge management performance. It also needs adequate size and appropriate levels of independence and commitment Integrity and ethical behavior:[19][20] Integrity should be a fundamental requirement in choosing corporate officers and board members. Organizations should develop a code of conduct for their directors and executives that promotes ethical and responsible decision making. Disclosure and transparency:[21][22] Organizations should clarify and make publicly known the roles and responsibilities of board and management to provide stakeholders with a level of accountability. They should also implement procedures to independently verify and safeguard the integrity of the company's financial reporting. Disclosure of material matters concerning the organization should be timely and balanced to ensure that all investors have access to clear, factual information.

[edit] Corporate governance models around the world

There are many different models of corporate governance around the world. These differ according to the variety of capitalism in which they are embedded. The Anglo-American "model" tends to emphasize the interests of shareholders. The coordinated or multistakeholder model associated with Continental Europe and Japan also recognizes the interests of workers, managers, suppliers, customers, and the community.
[edit] Continental Europe

Some continental European countries, including Germany and the Netherlands, require a twotiered Board of Directors as a means of improving corporate governance.[23] In the two-tiered board, the Executive Board, made up of company executives, generally runs day-to-day operations while the supervisory board, made up entirely of non-executive directors who represent shareholders and employees, hires and fires the members of the executive board, determines their compensation, and reviews major business decisions.[24] See also Aktiengesellschaft.
[edit] India

India's SEBI Committee on Corporate Governance defines corporate governance as the "acceptance by management of the inalienable rights of shareholders as the true owners of the corporation and of their own role as trustees on behalf of the shareholders. It is about commitment to values, about ethical business conduct and about making a distinction between personal & corporate funds in the management of a company."[25] It has been suggested that the Indian approach is drawn from the Gandhian principle of trusteeship and the Directive Principles of the Indian Constitution, but this conceptualization of corporate objectives is also prevalent in Anglo-American and most other jurisdictions.

[edit] United States, United Kingdom

The so-called "Anglo-American model" of corporate governance emphasizes the interests of shareholders. It relies on a single-tiered Board of Directors that is normally dominated by non-executive directors elected by shareholders. Because of this, it is also known as "the unitary system"[26]).[27] Within this system, many boards include some executives from the company (who are ex officio members of the board). Non-executive directors are expected to outnumber executive directors and hold key posts, including audit and compensation committees. The United States and the United Kingdom differ in one critical respect with regard to corporate governance: In the United Kingdom, the CEO generally does not also serve as Chairman of the Board, whereas in the US having the dual role is the norm, despite major misgivings regarding the impact on corporate governance.[28] In the United States, corporations are directly governed by state laws, while the exchange (offering and trading) of securities in corporations (including shares) is governed by federal legislation. Many US states have adopted the Model Business Corporation Act, but the dominant state law for publicly-traded corporations is Delaware, which continues to be the place of incorporation for the majority of publicly-traded corporations.[29] Individual rules for corporations are based upon the corporate charter and, less authoritatively, the corporate bylaws.[29] Shareholders cannot initiate changes in the corporate charter although they can initiate changes to the corporate bylaws.[29]

[edit] Regulation

Companies law

Company Business

Business entities

Sole proprietorship

Partnership (General, Limited, Limited liability)

Corporation Cooperative

European Union / EEA

EEIG SCE SE

SPE

UK / Ireland / Commonwealth

Community interest company

Limited company (by guarantee, by shares, Proprietary, Public)

Unlimited company

United States

Benefit corporation C corporation

LLC LLLP

Series LLC S corporation

Delaware corporation Delaware statutory trust

Massachusetts business trust

Nevada corporation

Additional entities

AB AG ANS A/S AS GmbH K.K. N.V.

Oy S.A. more

Doctrines

Business judgment rule Corporate governance De facto corporation and corporation by estoppel Internal affairs doctrine

Limited liability

Piercing the corporate veil

Rochdale Principles

Ultra vires

Related areas

Civil procedure

Contract

v t e

[edit] Legal environment - General

Corporations are created as legal persons by the laws and regulations of a particular jurisdiction. These may vary in many respects between countries, but a corporation's legal person status is fundamental to all jurisdictions and is conferred by statute. This allows the entity to hold property in its own right without reference to any particular real person. It also results in the perpetual existence that characterizes the modern corporation. The statutory granting of corporate existence may arise from general purpose legislation (which is the general case) or from a statute to create a specific corporation, which was the only method prior to the 19th century.[citation needed]

In addition to the statutory laws of the relevant jurisdiction, corporations are subject to common law in some countries, and various laws and regulations affecting business practices. In most jurisdictions, corporations also have a constitution that provides individual rules that govern the corporation and authorize or constrain its decision-makers. This constitution is identified by a variety of terms; in English-speaking jurisdictions, it is usually known as the Corporate Charter or the [Memorandum and] Articles of Association. The capacity of shareholders to modify the constitution of their corporation can vary substantially.[citation needed]
[edit] Codes and guidelines

Corporate governance principles and codes have been developed in different countries and issued from stock exchanges, corporations, institutional investors, or associations (institutes) of directors and managers with the support of governments and international organizations. As a rule, compliance with these governance recommendations is not mandated by law, although the codes linked to stock exchange listing requirements may have a coercive effect. For example, companies quoted on the London, Toronto and Australian Stock Exchanges formally need not follow the recommendations of their respective codes. However, they must disclose whether they follow the recommendations in those documents and, where not, they should provide explanations concerning divergent practices. Such disclosure requirements exert a significant pressure on listed companies for compliance.[citation needed] One of the most influential guidelines has been the OECD Principles of Corporate Governance -- published in 1999 and revised in 2004. The OECD guidelines are often referenced by countries developing local codes or guidelines. Building on the work of the OECD, other international organizations, private sector associations and more than 20 national corporate governance codes formed the United Nations Intergovernmental Working Group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting (ISAR) to produce their Guidance on Good Practices in Corporate Governance Disclosure[30]. This internationally agreed[31] benchmark consists of more than fifty distinct disclosure items across five broad categories:[32]

Auditing Board and management structure and process Corporate responsibility and compliance Financial transparency and information disclosure Ownership structure and exercise of control rights

The investor-led organisation International Corporate Governance Network (ICGN) was set up by individuals centered around the ten largest pension funds in the world 1995. The aim is to promote global corporate governance standards. The network is led by investors that manage 18 trillion dollars and members are located in fifty different countries. ICGN has developed a suite of global guidelines ranging from shareholder rights to business ethics.[citation needed] The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) has done work on corporate governance, particularly on accountability and reporting, and in 2004 released Issue Management Tool: Strategic challenges for business in the use of corporate responsibility codes, standards, and frameworks. This document offers general information and a perspective from a business association/think-tank on a few key codes, standards and frameworks relevant to the sustainability agenda.

In 2009, the International Finance Corporation and the UN Global Compact released a report, Corporate Governance - the Foundation for Corporate Citizenship and Sustainable Business, linking the environmental, social and governance responsibilities of a company to its financial performance and long-term sustainability. Most codes are largely voluntary. An issue raised in the U.S. since the 2005 Disney decision[33] is the degree to which companies manage their governance responsibilities; in other words, do they merely try to supersede the legal threshold, or should they create governance guidelines that ascend to the level of best practice. For example, the guidelines issued by associations of directors, corporate managers and individual companies tend to be wholly voluntary but such documents may have a wider effect by prompting other companies to adopt similar practices.[citation needed]

[edit] History
[edit] United States

In 19th century United States, state corporation laws enhanced the rights of corporate boards to govern without unanimous consent of shareholders in exchange for statutory benefits like appraisal rights, to make corporate governance more efficient. Since that time, and because most large publicly traded corporations in the US are incorporated under corporate administration friendly Delaware law, and because the US's wealth has been increasingly securitized into various corporate entities and institutions, the rights of individual owners and shareholders have become increasingly derivative and dissipated.[citation needed] In the 20th century in the immediate aftermath of the Wall Street Crash of 1929 legal scholars such as Adolf Augustus Berle, Edwin Dodd, and Gardiner C. Means pondered on the changing role of the modern corporation in society. [34] From the Chicago school of economics, Ronald Coase[35] introduced the notion of transaction costs into the understanding of why firms are founded and how they continue to behave.[citation needed] US expansion after World War II through the emergence of multinational corporations saw the establishment of the managerial class. Studying and writing about the new class were several Harvard Business School management professors: Myles Mace (entrepreneurship), Alfred D. Chandler, Jr. (business history), Jay Lorsch (organizational behavior) and Elizabeth MacIver (organizational behavior). According to Lorsch and MacIver "many large corporations have dominant control over business affairs without sufficient accountability or monitoring by their board of directors."[citation needed] In the 1980s, Eugene Fama and Michael Jensen[36] established the principalagent problem as a way of understanding corporate governance: the firm is seen as a series of contracts.[37] Over the past three decades, corporate directors duties in the U.S. have expanded beyond their traditional legal responsibility of duty of loyalty to the corporation and its shareholders.[38] In the first half of the 1990s, the issue of corporate governance in the U.S. received considerable press attention due to the wave of CEO dismissals (e.g.: IBM, Kodak, Honeywell) by their boards. The California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) led a wave of institutional shareholder activism (something only very rarely seen before), as a

way of ensuring that corporate value would not be destroyed by the now traditionally cozy relationships between the CEO and the board of directors (e.g., by the unrestrained issuance of stock options, not infrequently back dated). In the early 2000s, the massive bankruptcies (and criminal malfeasance) of Enron and Worldcom, as well as lesser corporate scandals, such as Adelphia Communications, AOL, Arthur Andersen, Global Crossing, Tyco, led to increased political interest in corporate governance. This is reflected in the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
[edit] East Asia

In 1997, the East Asian Financial Crisis severely affected the economies of Thailand, Indonesia, South Korea, Malaysia, and the Philippines through the exit of foreign capital after property assets collapsed. The lack of corporate governance mechanisms in these countries highlighted the weaknesses of the institutions in their economies.[citation needed]

[edit] Parties to corporate governance

The most influential parties involved in corporate governance include government agencies and authorities, stock exchanges, management (including the board of directors and its chair, the Chief Executive Officer or the equivalent, other executives and line management, shareholders and auditors). Other influential stakeholders may include lenders, suppliers, employees, creditors, customers and the community at large.[citation needed] The agency view of the corporation posits that the shareholder forgoes decision rights (control) and entrusts the manager to act in the shareholders' best (joint) interests. Partly as a result of this separation between the two investors and managers, corporate governance mechanisms include a system of controls intended to help align managers' incentives with those of shareholders. Agency concerns (risk) are necessarily lower for a controlling shareholder.[citation needed] A board of directors is expected to play a key role in corporate governance. The board has the responsibility of endorsing the organization's strategy, developing directional policy, appointing, supervising and remunerating senior executives, and ensuring accountability of the organization to its investors and authorities.[citation needed] All parties to corporate governance have an interest, whether direct or indirect, in the financial performance of the corporation. Directors, workers and management receive salaries, benefits and reputation, while investors expect to receive financial returns. For lenders, it is specified interest payments, while returns to equity investors arise from dividend distributions or capital gains on their stock. Customers are concerned with the certainty of the provision of goods and services of an appropriate quality; suppliers are concerned with compensation for their goods or services, and possible continued trading relationships. These parties provide value to the corporation in the form of financial, physical, human and other forms of capital. Many parties may also be concerned with corporate social performance.[citation needed] A key factor in a party's decision to participate in or engage with a corporation is their confidence that the corporation will deliver the party's expected outcomes. When categories of parties (stakeholders) do not have sufficient confidence that a corporation is being

controlled and directed in a manner consistent with their desired outcomes, they are less likely to engage with the corporation. When this becomes an endemic system feature, the loss of confidence and participation in markets may affect many other stakeholders, and increases the likelihood of political action. There is substantial interest in how external systems and institutions, including markets, influence corporate governance.[citation needed]
[edit] Control and ownership structures

Control and ownership structure refers to the types and composition of shareholders in a corporation. In some countries such as most of Continental Europe, ownership is not necessarily equivalent to control due to the existence of e.g. dual-class shares, ownership pyramids, voting coalitions, proxy votes and clauses in the articles of association that confer additional voting rights to long-term shareholders.[39] Ownership is typically defined as the ownership of cash flow rights whereas control refers to ownership of control or voting rights.[40] Researchers often "measure" control and ownership structures by using some observable measures of control and ownership concentration or the extent of inside control and ownership. Some features or types of control and ownership structure involving corporate groups include pyramids, cross-shareholdings, rings, and webs. German "concerns" (Konzern) are legally recognized corporate groups with complex structures. Japanese keiretsu () and South Korean chaebol (which tend to be family-controlled) are corporate groups which consist of complex interlocking business relationships and shareholdings. Crossshareholding are an essential feature of keiretsu and chaebol groups [4]. Corporate engagement with shareholders and other stakeholders can differ substantially across different control and ownership structures. [edit] Family control Family interests dominate ownership and control structures of some corporations, and it has been suggested the oversight of family controlled corporation is superior to that of corporations "controlled" by institutional investors (or with such diverse share ownership that they are controlled by management). A recent study by Credit Suisse found that companies in which "founding families retain a stake of more than 10% of the company's capital enjoyed a superior performance over their respective sectorial peers." Since 1996, this superior performance amounts to 8% per year.[41] Forget the celebrity CEO. "Look beyond Six Sigma and the latest technology fad. One of the biggest strategic advantages a company can have is blood ties," according to a Business Week study[42][43] [edit] Diffuse shareholders The significance of institutional investors varies substantially across countries. In developed Anglo-American countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, U.K., U.S.), institutional investors dominate the market for stocks in larger corporations. While the majority of the shares in the Japanese market are held by financial companies and industrial corporations, these are not institutional investors if their holdings are largely with-on group.[citation needed] The largest pools of invested money (such as the mutual fund 'Vanguard 500', or the largest investment management firm for corporations, State Street Corp.) are designed to maximize the benefits of diversified investment by investing in a very large number of different corporations with sufficient liquidity. The idea is this strategy will largely eliminate individual firm financial or other risk and. A consequence of this approach is that these

investors have relatively little interest in the governance of a particular corporation. It is often assumed that, if institutional investors pressing for will likely be costly because of "golden handshakes") or the effort required, they will simply sell out their interest.[citation needed]

[edit] Mechanisms and controls

Corporate governance mechanisms and controls are designed to reduce the inefficiencies that arise from moral hazard and adverse selection. For example, to monitor managers' behavior, an independent third party (the external auditor) attests the accuracy of information provided by management to investors. An ideal control system should regulate both motivation and ability.[citation needed]
[edit] Internal corporate governance controls

Internal corporate governance controls monitor activities and then take corrective action to accomplish organisational goals. Examples include:

Monitoring by the board of directors: The board of directors, with its legal authority to hire, fire and compensate top management, safeguards invested capital. Regular board meetings allow potential problems to be identified, discussed and avoided. Whilst non-executive directors are thought to be more independent, they may not always result in more effective corporate governance and may not increase performance.[44] Different board structures are optimal for different firms. Moreover, the ability of the board to monitor the firm's executives is a function of its access to information. Executive directors possess superior knowledge of the decision-making process and therefore evaluate top management on the basis of the quality of its decisions that lead to financial performance outcomes, ex ante. It could be argued, therefore, that executive directors look beyond the financial criteria.[citation
needed]

Internal control procedures and internal auditors: Internal control procedures are policies implemented by an entity's board of directors, audit committee, management, and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance of the entity achieving its objectives related to reliable financial reporting, operating efficiency, and compliance with laws and regulations. Internal auditors are personnel within an organization who test the design and implementation of the entity's internal control procedures and the reliability of its financial reporting[citation needed] Balance of power: The simplest balance of power is very common; require that the President be a different person from the Treasurer. This application of separation of power is further developed in companies where separate divisions check and balance each other's actions. One group may propose company-wide administrative changes, another group review and can veto the changes, and a third group check that the interests of people (customers, shareholders, employees) outside the three groups are being met.[citation needed] Remuneration: Performance-based remuneration is designed to relate some proportion of salary to individual performance. It may be in the form of cash or non-cash payments such as shares and share options, superannuation or other benefits. Such incentive schemes, however, are reactive in the sense that they provide no mechanism for preventing mistakes or opportunistic behavior, and can elicit myopic behavior.[citation needed] Monitoring by large shareholders and/or monitoring by banks and other large creditors: Given their large investment in the firm, these stakeholders have the incentives, combined with the right degree of control and power, to monitor the management.[45]

In publicly-traded U.S. corporations, boards of directors are largely chosen by the President/CEO and the President/CEO often takes the Chair of the Board position for his/herself (which makes it much more difficult for the institutional owners to "fire" him/her). The practice of the CEO also being the Chair of the Board is known as "duality". While this practice is common in the U.S., it is relatively rare elsewhere. In the U.K., successive codes of best practice have recommended against duality.[citation needed]
[edit] External corporate governance controls

External corporate governance controls encompass the controls external stakeholders exercise over the organization. Examples include:

competition debt covenants demand for and assessment of performance information (especially financial statements) government regulations managerial labour market media pressure takeovers

[edit] Financial reporting and the independent auditor

The board of directors has primary responsibility for the corporation's external financial reporting functions. The Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer are crucial participants and boards usually have a high degree of reliance on them for the integrity and supply of accounting information. They oversee the internal accounting systems, and are dependent on the corporation's accountants and internal auditors. Current accounting rules under International Accounting Standards and U.S. GAAP allow managers some choice in determining the methods of measurement and criteria for recognition of various financial reporting elements. The potential exercise of this choice to improve apparent performance (see creative accounting and earnings management) increases the information risk for users. Financial reporting fraud, including non-disclosure and deliberate falsification of values also contributes to users' information risk. To reduce this risk and to enhance the perceived integrity of financial reports, corporation financial reports must be audited by an independent external auditor who issues a report that accompanies the financial statements (see financial audit). One area of concern is whether the auditing firm acts as both the independent auditor and management consultant to the firm they are auditing. This may result in a conflict of interest which places the integrity of financial reports in doubt due to client pressure to appease management. The power of the corporate client to initiate and terminate management consulting services and, more fundamentally, to select and dismiss accounting firms contradicts the concept of an independent auditor. Changes enacted in the United States in the form of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (following numerous corporate scandals, culminating with the Enron scandal) prohibit accounting firms from providing both auditing and management consulting services. Similar provisions are in place under clause 49 of Standard Listing Agreement in India.

[edit] Systemic problems of corporate governance

Demand for information: In order to influence the directors, the shareholders must combine with others to form a voting group which can pose a real threat of carrying resolutions or appointing directors at a general meeting.[46] Monitoring costs: A barrier to shareholders using good information is the cost of processing it, especially to a small shareholder. The traditional answer to this problem is the efficient market hypothesis (in finance, the efficient market hypothesis (EMH) asserts that financial markets are efficient), which suggests that the small shareholder will free ride on the judgments of larger professional investors.[46] Supply of accounting information: Financial accounts form a crucial link in enabling providers of finance to monitor directors. Imperfections in the financial reporting process will cause imperfections in the effectiveness of corporate governance. This should, ideally, be corrected by the working of the external auditing process.[46]

[edit] Executive remuneration/compensation

Research on the relationship between firm performance and executive compensation does not identify consistent and significant relationships between executives' remuneration and firm performance. Not all firms experience the same levels of agency conflict, and external and internal monitoring devices may be more effective for some than for others.[47] Some researchers have found that the largest CEO performance incentives came from ownership of the firm's shares, while other researchers found that the relationship between share ownership and firm performance was dependent on the level of ownership. The results suggest that increases in ownership above 20% cause management to become more entrenched, and less interested in the welfare of their shareholders.[47] Some argue that firm performance is positively associated with share option plans and that these plans direct managers' energies and extend their decision horizons toward the longterm, rather than the short-term, performance of the company. However, that point of view came under substantial criticism circa in the wake of various security scandals including mutual fund timing episodes and, in particular, the backdating of option grants as documented by University of Iowa academic Erik Lie[48] and reported by James Blander and Charles Forelle of the Wall Street Journal.[47][49] Even before the negative influence on public opinion caused by the 2006 backdating scandal, use of options faced various criticisms. A particularly forceful and long running argument concerned the interaction of executive options with corporate stock repurchase programs. Numerous authorities (including U.S. Federal Reserve Board economist Weisbenner) determined options may be employed in concert with stock buybacks in a manner contrary to shareholder interests. These authors argued that, in part, corporate stock buybacks for U.S. Standard & Poors 500 companies surged to a $500 billion annual rate in late 2006 because of the impact of options. A compendium of academic works on the option/buyback issue is included in the study Scandal by author M. Gumport issued in 2006. A combination of accounting changes and governance issues led options to become a less popular means of remuneration as 2006 progressed, and various alternative implementations of buybacks surfaced to challenge the dominance of "open market" cash buybacks as the preferred means of implementing a share repurchase plan.