個案總覽

Noel Biderman was the president of Avid Life Media, a profitable Canadian growth company whose main businesses were various online social networks for groups seeking sexual partners and romance. Biderman was seeking to raise $60 million via a private placement offering to acquire a privately held online advertising sales company, merge the companies, and take the new and improved entity to the TSX Venture Exchange or the Toronto Stock Exchange. The Avid Life offering represented a legal and potentially lucrative investment. Nevertheless, only one investment bank (GMP Capital) was willing to help Biderman raise capital — because among the various social networks Avid Life owned the notorious Ashley Madison online community for married people seeking to commit adultery. GMP’s relationship was short-lived; after media coverage of the Avid Life offering started to focus on the bank’s willingness to service Biderman’s company, GMP withdrew its support. Possibly it was the bank’s desire to avoid being linked to someone known, rightly or wrongly, as the king of infidelity, that led to GMP’s withdrawn support, leaving Biderman unable to take a potentially lucrative investment opportunity to market.

This case is a supplement to Avid Life (A).

Noel Biderman was the president of Avid Life Media, a profitable Canadian growth company whose main business was various online social networks for targeted groups seeking sexual partners and romance. Biderman was seeking to raise $60 million via a private placement offering to acquire a privately held online advertising sales company, merge the companies and take the new and improved growth story public on the TSX Venture Exchange or the Toronto Stock Exchange. The Avid Life offering represented a legal and potentially lucrative investment. Nevertheless, only one investment bank (GMP Capital) was willing to help Biderman raise capital - because among the various social networks Avid Life owns is the notorious Ashley Madison online community for married people seeking to commit adultery. GMP's relationship was short-lived; after media coverage of the Avid Life offering started to focus on the bank's willingness to service Biderman's company, GMP withdrew their support from Biderman. Perhaps attributable to the bank's desire to avoid being seen in public with someone known, rightly or wrongly, as the king of infidelity, GMP's withdrawn support left Biderman unable to take a potentially lucrative investment opportunity to market.

In 2010, GMP Capital (GMP) found itself the only investment bank willing to raise capital for Avid Life Media, the parent company of the controversial Ashley Madison online community for married people seeking to commit adultery. Since its inception in 1995, GMP had made a name for itself as a bold deal maker and not afraid to complete "bet-the-firm" transactions. With large profit potential, morality wasn't always an issue when sex-based business plans were being promoted. Yet after facing negative publicity, GMP subsequently withdrew from the deal. How did GMP end up on the wrong side of a line other firms refused to cross?

In 2008, a senior associate at Richard, Wood and Hulme LLP (RWH) was amazed at the speed with which the audit team for an important client of the firm was rapidly falling apart. Two members had just been fired presumably because they did not pass their chartered accounting qualification examinations; team morale had grown non-existent; there were difficulties in completing the engagement due to lack of preparation from both RWH and the client; there were doubts about the commitment of particular individuals; and with the audit falling behind schedule, the senior associate perceived an absence of strong leadership from the partners of the firm. He did not understand why the team had been so unfocused from the start of the engagement, as prior years’ engagements had been quite successful. He was unsure how to proceed. What would he tell the client? What should he do to keep this audit on track and keep the team together?

The sum of virtues, values, and traits equals good character, which, in addition to competence and commitment, is one of the three components that make a leader effective and respected. For many, however, virtues and values remain undefinable or elusive. These authors define and de-construct them, and in the process demonstrate how character helps people in their personal journeys to become better leaders. Furthermore, they explain how character develops and why it matters.

A senior associate at Richard, Wood and Hulme LLP (RWH) was amazed at the speed with which the audit team for an important client for the firm was rapidly falling apart. Two members had just been fired presumably because they did not pass their chartered accounting qualification examination; team morale had become non-existent; there were difficulties in completing the engagement due to lack of preparation from both the RWH and the client; there was a question about the commitment of particular individuals; and with the audit falling behind schedule, the senior associate perceived an absence of strong leadership from the partners of the firm. The senior associate did not understand why the team had been so unfocused from the start of the engagement as prior years' engagements had been quite successful. He was not sure how to proceed. What would he tell the client? What should he do to keep this audit on track and keep the team together?

As of 2010, ING DIRECT USA has had a successful first decade, having grown into one of the largest U.S. banks with $90 billion in assets. It has developed an innovative culture and a unique approach to banking, and has a strong brand name. As a result of a regulatory requirement in the Netherlands, ING Group is required to divest ING DIRECT USA by 2013. The chairman, president, and chief executive officer is reviewing his organization and thinking about what challenges the firm will face in the future.

In 2006, Hermann Gudmundsson (the chief executive officer [CEO] of Bilanaust, an Icelandic automotive spare parts retailer) was part of a group of partners that had purchased Esso Iceland. He had subsequently been appointed to the CEO position at Esso Iceland. The two companies were quite different: Bilanaust dealt with real-time customer needs, carried a wide range of products, and enjoyed a rising market share and profits. Esso Iceland was 12 times the size of Bilanaust, skilled at developing and executing medium- to long-term strategies, and was operating in a stagnated market. Gudmundsson evaluated the opportunities in front of him: could a successful merger be wrought from the two companies or would it be better to maintain two separate entities? He determined that a lot of work would need to be done to gain consensus around the right strategic direction for the future. Careful thought identified three areas of initial focus: 1) improving staff morale; 2) creating a sense of optimism; 3) placing effective leaders at key points in the organization.

Hermann Gudmundsson, the new chief executive officer (CEO) of both Esso Iceland (provider of fuel and lubricants) and Bilanaust (an automotive spare parts retailer) was starting to develop an organizational strategy to carry the two firms forward for the next few years. His overriding concern was to create value for themselves and the customers they served, and Gudmundsson considered several methods to achieve that goal: should each company be led and managed on a stand-alone basis, or would a formal merger bring the hoped-for synergies? He determined that the best approach would be to capture an accurate picture of the talent existing in both organizations but was unsure of the best method to sort, rank and evaluate the talent existing in each of Esso Iceland and Bilanaust. Ultimately, he wanted to create a list of objectives for the evaluation program and methods to implement the findings.

By December 2006, Hermann Gudmundsson (the chief executive officer of both Esso Iceland and Bilanaust) had spent the past 10 months evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of both organizations, and determined that the best approach going forward would be to, consider creating a new organization with a new structure and a new brand name. He weighed the advantages, disadvantages and costs of either retaining two separate companies and their associated brand-image, or merging into one new organization. Gudmundsson was facing resistance from both the board of directors and three different advertising agencies to forgo the Esso brand; but with an ultimate mandate to increase shareholder value he needed to figure out the best method, from a branding perspective, to achieve that objective.

In December 2006, Hermann Gudmundsson (the chief executive officer of both Esso Iceland and Bilanaust) announced to employees of both companies that a merger was to occur. Various workshops were held to involve employees in the developing structure of the new organization, resulting in a tenable logistics strategy and increased trust between members of the different organizations. By April 2007, Gudmundsson and his team had merged the two organizations, created a new company name and designed a new logo. On the official launch day, over 800 employees were expected to be in attendance as Gudmundsson unveiled the new brand. Gudmundsson wanted to deliver a memorable speech that captured all the excitement and conveyed the right message of the brand going forward - but was unsure of what issues to address in the speech and concepts he should emphasize to create the right first impression.

By the end of 2007, Hermann Gudmundsson (the chief executive officer of N1) created from the merger between Esso Iceland and Bilanaust) was focused on building trust within his organization. By involving employees in decision-making, N1 had received valuable suggestions on effective business operations. But Gudmundsson had noted a lack of chemistry between employees of the two former firms, and thought that a stumbling block to better relations was the separate clubs or societies for Esso Iceland and Bilanaust employees. After human resources was unable to find a satisfactory resolution, Gudmundsson reluctantly stepped in to render his opinion on how to resolve the issue.

By October 2008, the merger of Esso Iceland and Bilanaust into the new company N1 was considered a success. Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) was on its way to doubling in three years, and cross-selling was gaining traction. But N1's plans were under threat of derailing due to a looming currency crisis. In October 2008, the Icelandic banking sector collapsed. Gudmundsson called upon his team to determine what internal and external changes needed to be made to remain viable and productive now that they were without access to commercial credit.

In 2006, Hermann Gudmundsson (the chief executive officer [CEO] of Bilanaust, an Icelandic automotive spare parts retailer) was part of a group of partners that had purchased Esso Iceland. He had subsequently been appointed to the CEO position at Esso Iceland. The two companies were quite different: Bilanaust dealt with real-time customer needs, carried a wide range of products, and enjoyed a rising market share and profits. Esso Iceland was 12 times the size of Bilanaust, skilled at developing and executing medium- to long-term strategies, and was operating in a stagnated market. Gudmundsson evaluated the opportunities in front of him: could a successful merger be wrought from the two companies or would it be better to maintain two separate entities? He determined that a lot of work would need to be done to gain consensus around the right strategic direction for the future. Careful thought identified three areas of initial focus: 1) improving staff morale; 2) creating a sense of optimism; 3) placing effective leaders at key points in the organization.

Hermann Gudmundsson, the CEO of Esso Iceland (provider of fuel and lubricants) was expected to begin merging Esso Iceland with Bilanaust, an Icelandic automotive spare parts retailer with the end result of a unified entity that would be dominant in its respective industries. The Icelandic economy was growing at favourable rates and Esso had enjoyed its position as the leading fuel provider in Iceland for the past 60 years with 40 per cent of the market. Gudmundsson and his partners bought Esso Iceland in 2006 from a private equity firm that had been focused on stripping Esso Iceland down to its core fuel business, using staff reductions as part of a cost-reduction program. Gudmundsson believed that Esso Iceland had untapped wealth that could only be enhanced by the cross-selling synergies formed as a result of a successful integration of over 500 accounts in the two companies. His overriding concern was to lead the combined organization to achieve these goals in the next two years without destroying shareholder value.

Hermann Gudmundsson, the new chief executive officer (CEO) of both Esso Iceland (provider of fuel and lubricants) and Bilanaust (an automotive spare parts retailer) was starting to develop an organizational strategy to carry the two firms forward for the next few years. His overriding concern was to create value for themselves and the customers they served, and Gudmundsson considered several methods to achieve that goal: should each company be led and managed on a stand-alone basis, or would a formal merger bring the hoped-for synergies? He determined that the best approach would be to capture an accurate picture of the talent existing in both organizations but was unsure of the best method to sort, rank and evaluate the talent existing in each of Esso Iceland and Bilanaust. Ultimately, he wanted to create a list of objectives for the evaluation program and methods to implement the findings.

By December 2006, Hermann Gudmundsson (the chief executive officer of both Esso Iceland and Bilanaust) had spent the past 10 months evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of both organizations, and determined that the best approach going forward would be to, "consider creating a new organization with a new structure and a new brand name." He weighed the advantages, disadvantages and costs of either retaining two separate companies and their associated brand-image, or merging into one new organization. Gudmundsson was facing resistance from both the board of directors and three different advertising agencies to forgo the Esso brand; but with an ultimate mandate to increase shareholder value he needed to figure out the best method, from a branding perspective, to achieve that objective.

In December 2006, Hermann Gudmundsson (the chief executive officer of both Esso Iceland and Bilanaust) announced to employees of both companies that a merger was to occur. Various workshops were held to involve employees in the developing structure of the new organization, resulting in a tenable logistics strategy and increased trust between members of the different organizations. By April 2007, Gudmundsson and his team had merged the two organizations, created a new company name and designed a new logo. On the official launch day, over 800 employees were expected to be in attendance as Gudmundsson unveiled the new brand. Gudmundsson wanted to deliver a memorable speech that captured all the excitement and conveyed the right message of the brand going forward - but was unsure of what issues to address in the speech and concepts he should emphasize to create the right first impression.

By the end of 2007, Hermann Gudmundsson (the chief executive officer of N1 - created from the merger between Esso Iceland and Bilanaust) was focused on building trust within his organization. By involving employees in decision-making, N1 had received valuable suggestions on effective business operations. But Gudmundsson had noted a lack of chemistry between employees of the two former firms, and thought that a stumbling block to better relations was the separate clubs or societies for Esso Iceland and Bilanaust employees. After human resources was unable to find a satisfactory resolution, Gudmundsson reluctantly stepped in to render his opinion on how to resolve the issue.