"This case addresses how to account for an environmental catastrophe from its initial stages to its conclusion, using the 20-year history of the Exxon Valdez oil spill as an illustration of the accounting disclosures required over time. The spill resulted in severe social, environmental, and economic damages to the Prince William Sound region and led to more than 20 years of litigation regarding the appropriate amount of damages to be paid by Exxon. The case has two parts. Part I addresses the question of whether a company has a responsibility to accrue and disclose a provision in its financial statements before a disaster occurs. Part II addresses accounting disclosures required in the aftermath of such a disaster. A student in intermediate accounting performs the role of an intern working at an international public accounting firm with clients who may be faced with incidents similar to Exxon's, such as the British Petroleum Deepwater Horizon catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico, in 2010. These incidents, whether they occur in the United States or elsewhere, may have significant financial, social, and environmental impacts; create uncertainty over payment amounts; and span years before final settlement. Students must research and write a memo that discusses how to account for such losses using the 20-year history of the Exxon Valdez event as a possible scenario. The research should include authoritative pronouncements in effect at the current date using U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and international financial reporting standards (IFRS). "
From 2005-2006, Federated Department Stores converted some 15 regional department store chains into a single national brand, Macy’s, with 810 stores across the United States. In addition, the company repositioned the consolidated Macy’s in the overall retail landscape in an attempt to differentiate the new company from its competitors. These maneuvers were undertaken to counter decreasing sales and profits in the traditional department store industry. Some retail analysts suggested that the consolidation of Macy’s, while interesting, was destined to fail because the traditional department store was an obsolete entity; however, other analysts suggested that Macy’s strategy might hold the key to success in a declining industry. In 2008, the U.S. economy entered a recession, and by 2011 it remained far from booming. Did Macy’s need to change parts of its strategy to remain competitive? What would need to change?
The CEO of a bicycle manufacturing company is considering outsourcing the production of one of the company's lines to a low-cost manufacturer. Students must analyze the relevant costs and strategic implications.
A middle manager has an attractive new product proposal that is expected to make a lot of money. However, senior management is rejecting it. Students must analyze the proposal and determine whether it is as good as presented and, if so, how to present it.
A multi-product company has a dysfunctional management control system. The system had gone into effect 18 months ago, and this year had become fully operational. The CEO was questioning its utility,
The CEO of an electric utility company is considering requesting a rate increase. At issue is the cost of the various services that the company provides and how overhead is to be allocated fairly to them.
The CEO of a supplier of parts to automobile and truck companies has three concerns about the companuy's present cost accounting system: (1) its adequacy for purposes of cost control, (2) its accuracy in arriving at the true cost of products, and (3) its usefulness in providing data to judge the supervisor's performance.
The CEO of a retail distributor is trying to decide whether to keep or discontinue a product line. Students must undertake a tricky differential cost analysis
The CEO of a manufacturing company is assessing the value of variable costing as opposed to full-absorption costing. The teaching note contains a simple exercise to assist students to understand the differences.
The CEO of a retail distributor is trying to decide whether to keep or discontinue a product line. Students must undertake a tricky differential cost analysis
This case concerns Microsoft's attempt to completely restructure its major global finance processes and operations through what the authors call a Vested Outsourcing agreement. In February 2007, Microsoft signed an outsourcing agreement with Accenture, with an original contract term of 7 years at a value of US$185 million. This was extended 2 years later, to 2018, with expanded scope, and a total contract value of $330 million. Called the OneFinance initiative, the effort outsourced nearly all back office finance transactions spread across 95 countries to service provider Accenture under a new kind of outsourcing model. Under the agreement the parties operate under incentives to improve performance and deliver increased value year-over-year, while sharing in the risks and rewards of doing so. The case focuses on the rationale for this distinctive approach to outsourcing and transformational change, and provides details of the definitions of work, measurements, pricing models and governance structures adopted. The fine-grained account of the OneFinance outsourcing arrangements provides an opportunity to identify the distinctive principles and practices adopted by the parties. Readers can compare and contrast the case with other outsourcing deals and assess the challenges in choosing the supplier and the approach. The case also invites an assessment of the risks being incurred, the inherent implementation and operational challenges and how they might be met. The case also raises questions about what levels of success might be achieved, and what conditions would need to be present for success. Finally, the case raises the issue of whether, and if so how, this distinctive 'vested' approach could be adopted elsewhere.
When Carroll became the CEO of Anglo American, in 2007, the company had suffered 200 worker fatalities over the previous five years. Some company veterans insisted that deaths were inevitable at such a large mining company, given the dangerous nature of the business. Carroll fundamentally rejected that assumption. She undertook a tour of operations in Australia, Chile, Colombia, Venezuela, and South Africa. The platinum business in South Africa had the worst track record in terms of safety, and Carroll was troubled by her conversations with its local managers. Immediately after her visit, another worker died. That was it. She ordered the world's largest platinum mine, which employed 30,000 people, to be shut down immediately. Intensive retraining began, and 3,000 leaders and 12,000 line managers, supervisors, and frontline employees have been through the program since 2008. Carroll also initiated the Tripartite Alliance, a collaboration with the South African Department of Mineral Resources and the National Union of Mineworkers, to study global best practices in safety and make recommendations. By 2011 she had reduced fatalities at Anglo American by 62% and had cut time lost owing to injuries by half.
Risk management is too often treated as a compliance issue that can be solved by drawing up lots of rules and making sure that all employees follow them. Many such rules, of course, are sensible and do reduce some risks that could severely damage a company. But rules-based risk management will not diminish either the likelihood or the impact of a disaster such as Deepwater Horizon, just as it did not prevent the failure of many financial institutions during the 2007-2008 credit crisis. In this article, Robert S. Kaplan and Anette Mikes present a categorization of risk that allows executives to understand the qualitative distinctions between the types of risks that organizations face. Preventable risks, arising from within the organization, are controllable and ought to be eliminated or avoided. Examples are the risks from employees' and managers' unauthorized, unethical, or inappropriate actions and the risks from breakdowns in routine operational processes. Strategy risks are those a company voluntarily assumes in order to generate superior returns from its strategy. External risks arise from events outside the company and are beyond its influence or control. Sources of these risks include natural and political disasters and major macroeconomic shifts. Risk events from any category can be fatal to a company's strategy and even to its survival. Companies should tailor their risk management processes to these different risk categories. A rules-based approach is effective for managing preventable risks, whereas strategy risks require a fundamentally different approach based on open and explicit risk discussions. To anticipate and mitigate the impact of major external risks, companies can call on tools such as war-gaming and scenario analysis.
Few managerial transitions are more difficult than making the move from leading a function to leading an entire enterprise for the first time. The scope and complexity of the job increase dramatically, in ways that can leave executives feeling overwhelmed and uncertain. It truly is different at the top. But how, exactly? Career transition expert Michael Watkins set out to explore that question in an extensive series of interviews with leadership mentors, HR professionals, and newly minted unit heads. What he found was that at this turning point, executives must navigate a tricky set of changes in their leadership focus and skills. Watkins calls these the seven seismic shifts. New enterprise leaders must move from being a specialist to a generalist; from analyzing data to integrating knowledge from multiple sources; and from implementing tactics to developing strategies. They also need to transform themselves from bricklayers into organizational architects; from problem solvers into agenda setters; and from warriors intent on beating the competition into diplomats who engage with a full range of stakeholders. Finally, leaders must move out from the wings and get used to living on center stage in the full spotlight. To make the transition, managers have to acquire new capabilities quickly. And though what got them to the top may no longer be enough, there are steps that they and their organizations can take to prepare them to succeed.
Globalization and new technologies have sharply reduced the efficacy of command-and-control management and its accompanying forms of corporate communication. In the course of a recent research project, the authors concluded that by talking with employees, rather than simply issuing orders, leaders can promote operational flexibility, employee engagement, and tight strategic alignment. Groysberg and Slind have identified four elements of organizational conversation that reflect the essential attributes of interpersonal conversation: intimacy, interactivity, inclusion, and intentionality. Intimacy shifts the focus from a top-down distribution of information to a bottom-up exchange of ideas. Organizational conversation is less corporate in tone and more casual. And it's less about issuing and taking orders than about asking and answering questions. Interactivity entails shunning the simplicity of monologue and embracing the unpredictable vitality of dialogue. Traditional one-way media--print and broadcast, in particular--give way to social media buttressed by social thinking. Inclusion turns employees into full-fledged conversation partners, entitling them to provide their own ideas, often on company channels. They can create content and act as brand ambassadors, thought leaders, and storytellers. Intentionality enables leaders and employees to derive strategically relevant action from the push and pull of discussion and debate.
By now we expect personalized content--it's routinely served up by online retailers and news services, for example. But the typical leadership development program still takes a formulaic, one-size-fits-all approach. And it rarely happens that an excellent technique can be effectively transferred from one leader to all others. Someone trying to adopt a practice from a leader with a different style usually seems stilted and off--a Franken-leader. Breakthrough work at Hilton Hotels and other organizations shows how companies can use an algorithmic model to deliver training tips uniquely suited to each individual's style. It's a five-step process: First, a company must choose a tool with which to identify each person's leadership type. Second, it should assess its best leaders, and third, it should interview them about their techniques. Fourth, it should use its algorithmic model to feed tips drawn from those techniques to developing leaders of the same type. And fifth, it should make the system dynamically intelligent, with user reactions sharpening the content and targeting of tips. The power of this kind of system--highly customized, based on peer-to-peer sharing, and continually evolving--will soon overturn the generic model of leadership development. And such systems will inevitably break through any one organization, until somewhere in the cloud the best leadership tips from all over are gathered, sorted, and distributed according to which ones suit which people best.
Many companies are in competition with their customers to extract as much value as possible from every transaction. Pricing is their weapon of choice, and consumers fight back by rooting out and disseminating pricing policies that seem unfair. The problem is that companies generally think of value as a pie that is rightfully theirs. But value is not fixed, and it neither originates with nor belongs solely to the firm. Without a willing customer, there is no value. Instead of using pricing in a way that turns customers into adversaries, companies can use it to enlarge the pie. That means viewing customers as partners in value creation--a collaboration that increases customers' engagement and taps their insights about the value they seek and how firms could deliver it. The result can be new revenue, increased customer satisfaction and loyalty, positive word of mouth, and cost savings. The multiyear process to price the 8 million tickets to the upcoming London 2012 Olympic Games suggests five principles for using pricing to create shared value: Focus on relationships, not on transactions, by using pricing to communicate that you value customers as people; set prices proactively to discourage detrimental behavior and to encourage behavior that is beneficial to both your firm and your customers; allow prices to change in response to shifting customer needs; promote transparency by providing the rationale for your pricing; and make sure that prices and the processes by which they are set meet consumers' expectations about what is fair.