He focused more on the amount of revenue the company made than on the business ethics. Arthur Andersen auditors failed to audit Enron’s financial statements according to the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, and failed to advice the audit committee of conflicts of interest with internal controls. They approved Special Purpose Entities which were used to generate false profits, hide losses, and kept financing off Enron’s consolidated financial statements, and they did not consider the advice of their quality control partner. 3. What was the primary motivation behind the decisions of Arthur Andersen’s audit partners on the Enron audit: the public interest or something else?
Consequently, shareholders have no flexibility to alter their legal treatment with respect to one another, with respect to the corporation, and with respect to outsiders” (15-3). However, states provide default provisions for LLC’s and allow members the flexibility to alter arrangements based on their management style and desired outcomes. Corporations also require onerous fees and organizational requirements that must be met. LLC’s have fewer formalities, do not require board meetings and do not impose strict organizational reporting requirements. Tax considerations are also an important part of forming a business and play a significant part when choosing an entity.
The problems are compounded by the duality of unrefined form of ethical culture in the company and the economic pressure which is at the face of any business progression. Further note, because the airline conducts business outside of the U.S., to define ethics is another barrier due to the differences in culture in foreign countries. From the top down perspective, there is no one to be identified who models exquisite behavior for which others can follow in foot step. The assumptions that is made for Eclipse Airlines is that there is no current form of any ethical programs which yields no positive ethical culture. It is so important to note that because no such programs or culture exists, there seems to be no communication being conducted from top management down to the entry-level employees about any ethical procedures or values.
With all of those pros to classifying a worker as an independent contractor you have to wonder why businesses choose not to. Along with those many benefits there are also a few disadvantages. Independent contractors, by definition, do not work set hours which means they are free to come and go as they please which could lead to schedule disruption. There are risks of disloyalty to the company that are increased by hiring as an independent contractor because their livelihood is not connected with the business entity. A third major disadvantage is that the “companies may not own the copyrights on materials created by independent contractors” (Durban, 2010).
A Critical Examination of the Impact of Section 172 of the Companies Act 2006 There has been a plethora of debate surrounding the approach to directorial decision making in the scheme of corporate governance. A divergence has emerged between numerous schools of thought as to whose interests the directors are to consider in conducting the company’s management. The approach under English law is codified under section 172 Companies Act 2006 (‘CA 2006’) which professes an‘enlightened shareholder value’ approach to corporate governance. This has given rise to scrutiny and challenge from numerous critics but most notably from proponents of the ‘stakeholder management’ stance. The aim here is therefore to evaluate the scope and impact of section 172 and consider the possible alternatives whilst seeking to establish whether section 172 can be considered a positive development within company law.
Firms or company resources say that the finance or money will be directly effected by the research and development department in the firm. So if there is no money available for R&D, no research can take place, thus no projects can take place which will limit the many opportunities. Simple to say, everything eventually adds up. No money for R&D eventually means no research which next leads to no project which simily means no opportunity. A search firm generally cannot and will not approach executives it has recently placed, and the firm may have agreements with its own clients that limit its ability to provide the information about the employment opportunities at their companies.
In fact, the Cogen, Inc., made the executive decision to no longer deal with their initial law firm, Wilson Scott Associates who attempted the actual incorporation, however created a typographical error of naming the corporation Cogene instead of Cogen. Therefore, Cogen, Inc., is not an official incorporation and extracts them from being “De Facto Corporation”, a company which operates as if it were a corporation although it has not completed the legal steps to become incorporated or has been dissolved or suspended but continues to function. Arguments in which the individual founders can make to support their claim of the default in loan agreement, would be to consider the idea of “Corporation by Estoppel”. This idea states that if a third party (Firstloan) treats a business as a corporation, the third party cannot deny it is a corporation and try to reach shareholders personal assets. Since Firstloan determined that Cogen, Inc., was in fact a corporation and
Hence contractarians argue that firms should not be treated as entities; a corporation does not exist in itself as it is a non-tangible concept. Instead firms consist of a framework of measurable contractual relations (Hayden and Bodie). The nexus-of-contracts theory has provided crucial foundations in the development of legal theory conveying both descriptive and prescriptive elements (Hayden and Bodie). There is ongoing academic debate on how the theory should be interpreted in creating an effective legal framework. An example of the theory of constraints
(1) Prejudicial exemption and public information－J.P. Morgan concerns that the ED doesn’t make clear exemption from disclosing information that may do harm to companies. (2) Attorney-client privilege－J.P. Morgan thinks that the existing disclosing requirement of claim amounts is generally appropriate. Too much additional information of claim amounts would allow the opposing parties to use this information and waive attorney-client privileges.
1. What is the most compelling justification for attempting to calculate a return on marketing investment? a. The most compelling justification for attempting to calculate a Return on Marketing Investment (ROMI) is the discontent with traditional metrics, which does not allow managers to assess the future performance of their firm at any moment. While the traditional accounting methods are good to measure past performance and financial stature, it does not allow for managers to see the impact or value that marketing has on the bottom line.