Case Study Analysis

Running head: CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Case Study Analysis
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

CASE STUDY ANALYSIS2
Table of Contents
1. Assessing the Post Merger Structure of the Arcelor Mittal Board...........................................3
2. Power of Institutional Investor to Make an Investor in Family owned or Dominated
Enterprises.......................................................................................................................................5
3. Positive and Negative Aspects of Pre-Merger and Post-Merger Arcelor Mittal......................6
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................8
References......................................................................................................................................10

CASE STUDY ANALYSIS3
1. Assessing the Post Merger Structure of the Arcelor Mittal Board
It becomes clear from reading the case study that has been provided that prior to merging
with Arcelor Steel, the Mittal Company which was still one of the leading steel distributors in the
world, was a company that was largely dominated and run by family members, with there being
very few independent directors on the board of the company (based on given scenario). This goes
to show that most of the business decisions on behalf of Mittal were taken by the Mittal family
members themselves with stakeholders having little or no say in the running of the operations of
the firm, and the firm being more of a family business than a leading steel corporation with a
stakeholder population of a global or international nature. There was little democracy in the
running of the company’s administration and the stakeholder population including the few
independent directors who were serving on the board of the company did not have their interests
served well enough (Armstrong et al. 2015). It can be assumed given, the pre-merger situation of
the company, that the fact that it was a family business meant that decisions could be taken
arbitrarily at any point of time by the Mittal family members without taking into consideration or
taking into account the feelings and opinions of the independent directors who were serving on
the board of the company or the minimal number of non-familial stakeholders that the company
was characterized by. Things of course became more egalitarian with the post-merger situation
of the Arcelor Mittal Company (based on the given scenario). The entire administration of the
company went through a rapid change and care was taken on the part of its chairman Joseph
Kinsch to ensure that independent directors and stakeholders were adequately represented on the
board of the company, thus abolishing the largely family oriented or family centric nature of the
company (based on given scenario).