Corporate Governance: Lessons from Corporate Collapses and Global Financial Crisis
Verified
Added on  2022/11/15
|5
|1275
|302
AI Summary
This article discusses the reasons behind corporate collapses in Australia and the global financial crisis of 2008. It also highlights the modern corporate governance principles and practices that aim to prevent corporate negligence and malfeasance.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
CORPORTE GOVERNANCE
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
Question 1 Owing to the reasons of the globalisation and complex business practices, there have occurred a range of corporate collapses. The said corporate collapses highlight the needs of the stringent provisions in the corporate governance codes and the rules for the better control over the ones in the power and the protection of the interests of the various associated stakeholders (Tricker and Tricker, 2015). The following segment would shed light on the various popular corporate collapses in Australia, as described follows. One of the earliest corporate collapses include that of the Bond Corporation Holdings Limited which was an international conglomerate, the business operations of which ranged from real estate, brewing, media, and natural resources. The owner Alan Bond would consistently engage in acquisition of interests in various companies (Carnegie and O’Connell, 2014). However, the business collapsed in the event of the economic downturn when the company was in attempt of buying an iron-ore extraction company in Western Australia. The said acquisitions were financed by the risky borrowing such that the overall debt balances of the company had reached $7 billion which made the company technically insolvent. The second case of the corporate collapse included that of the Girvan Corporation, which is stated to be prime example of the breach of the agency theory. From the finance point of view, the continuous rise in debt combined with the high negative operational cash flows were the main culprit of the corporate collapse. However, the management of the entity made use of the creative accounting practices to hide the liabilities. The company was in limelight by virtue of supplying the shareholders, creditors and the other stakeholders with misleading, distorted information, leading to conflict of interest of different parties. The third case of the corporate collapse was of the Rothwells Ltd, which was a merchant bank and was formed by Mr Laurence Robert Connell. The bank was in lime light because of the backing offered to a number of high profile business figures. However, the period of 1987 witnessed stock market collapse followed by the financial difficulties to the merchant bank. In reality, the bank was always insolvent and the same was not depicted in the books on the discretion of the management (Bongiorno, 2015). The striking fact was that a huge amount was pumped into the bank in an attempt to save it with the efforts of the high profile personalities of Australia.
Today the modern corporate governance principles that include the compliance requirements, inlawandinpracticeareaimedatpreventionofthecorporatenegligenceandthe malfeasance as purported by those in power in the entities. For instance, the Corporations Act, 2001 has mandated it clearly that the directors of the companies would be accountable towards the laws. In addition, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) consistently scrutinizes the conducts of the directors that contravenes the statutes. For instance one of the events where the directors would be subjected to the scrutiny is indulging into trading practices when the company has insolvent which was the main cause of collapse in case of theBond Corporation. A wide range of massive fines has been imposed on the directors including the lifting of the corporate veil to protect the interests of the stakeholders. Hence, it can be concluded that the modern corporate governance practices are expanded the traditional management responsibilities to mitigate corporate disasters and the financial risks. Question 2 The Global Financial Crisis of the year 2008 is until date regarded one of the most serious financialcatastrophes.Notonlyitaffectedtheeconomiesofdifferentregions,both developing and developed but also led to the serious disruptions in the stock markets around the globe and the various financial and other industries. One of the key reasons that led to the disruptions in the financial industry was the inadequate policies of the banks and the financial institutions with respect to the exposure to the risks (De Haas and Van Lelyveld, 2014). Some of the yet another major reasons that led to the economic and financial disruptions were that of the inefficient choices about strategy and risk, inefficient control of the allocation of authority and responsibility and poor compensation structures. The consequences of the global financial crisis for the financial institutions can be stated to be the tightening of the lending policies, and others as explained follows. Some of the notable institutions that faced the heat of the collapse during and post the crisis were the Northern Rock Bank, Bear Sterns, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, American International Group and others. The top management representing the institutions were quoted as stating that the entities would not be further engaged in the buying of the risky subprime mortgages, and would not be investing in the related securities. Seeing the high rates of the financial institution collapses, there was a temporary prohibition in trading of the securities of major financial players by the US market regulator Securities and Exchange Commission in respect of the naked short selling (Ait-Sahalia et. al, 2012). However, the
policy could not help much as the damage was already done. The modern corporate governanceimplicationsthathavebeendevelopedandimplementedtoaddressthe shortcomings that led to the global financial crisis are explained as follows. In global contexts, the corporate governance codes have been reformed involving amendments on the lines of theapportionmentof authority and responsibilityby the management of the enterprise,selectionandoverseeingofthepersonnel,protectingtheinterestsofthe depositors, shareholders and stakeholders and establishment of the control functions. Further, the reforms have been made in the corporate governance practices to strengthen the directors’ remuneration in the banking and the financial sectors that form the base for the conflict of the interests among the directors and the shareholders. In addition to the above mentioned, a new liability regime has been introduced for the senior management of the entities.
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
References Ait-Sahalia, Y., Andritzky, J., Jobst, A., Nowak, S. and Tamirisa, N. (2012) Market response to policy initiatives during the global financial crisis.Journal of International Economics, 87(1), pp. 162-177. Bongiorno, F. (2015)The eighties: The decade that transformed Australia. Australia: Black Inc.. Carnegie, G. D. and O’Connell, B. T. (2014) A longitudinal study of the interplay of corporate collapse, accounting failure and governance change in Australia: Early 1890s to early 2000s.Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(6), pp. 446-468. De Haas, R. and Van Lelyveld, I. (2014) Multinational banks and the global financial crisis: Weathering the perfect storm?.Journal of Money, Credit and Banking,46(s1), pp. 333-364. Tricker, R. B., and Tricker, R. I. (2015)Corporate governance: Principles, policies, and practices,USA: Oxford University Press.