學門類別
哈佛
- General Management
- Marketing
- Entrepreneurship
- International Business
- Accounting
- Finance
- Operations Management
- Strategy
- Human Resource Management
- Social Enterprise
- Business Ethics
- Organizational Behavior
- Information Technology
- Negotiation
- Business & Government Relations
- Service Management
- Sales
- Economics
- Teaching & the Case Method
最新個案
- A practical guide to SEC ï¬nancial reporting and disclosures for successful regulatory crowdfunding
- Quality shareholders versus transient investors: The alarming case of product recalls
- The Health Equity Accelerator at Boston Medical Center
- Monosha Biotech: Growth Challenges of a Social Enterprise Brand
- Assessing the Value of Unifying and De-duplicating Customer Data, Spreadsheet Supplement
- Building an AI First Snack Company: A Hands-on Generative AI Exercise, Data Supplement
- Building an AI First Snack Company: A Hands-on Generative AI Exercise
- Board Director Dilemmas: The Tradeoffs of Board Selection
- Barbie: Reviving a Cultural Icon at Mattel (Abridged)
- Happiness Capital: A Hundred-Year-Old Family Business's Quest to Create Happiness
Corporate Governance at Citic Pacific
內容大綱
On the evening of 20 October 2008, Citic Pacific, the Hong Kong arm of the CITIC Group, China's largest state-owned investment company, stunned the stock markets by announcing that it would lose as much as HK$15.5 billion (approximately US$2 billion). The company stated that these losses were due to foreign exchange exposures that it had been aware of for six weeks, but had failed to tell the investors about. In an apologetic statement to the public, Larry Yung Chi-kin, the chairman of Citic Pacific, acknowledged the losses and admitted that the contracts had not been properly authorized. Investors and analysts subsequently attacked Citic Pacific for its corporate governance and internal control practices. They expressed shock that the company would make such risky transactions and that it would delay the disclosure of these large potential losses for six weeks. What does this incident say about Citic Pacific's internal risk management and its board of directors, particularly the independent directors? Has the company demonstrated effective corporate governance standards and mechanisms through alignment of its top-level managers' decisions with the interests of the shareholders?