HR Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

HR - Essay Example ations on the base pay, which include external competition, employee equity, the Equal Pay Act of 1970, communication strategy, and use of point-factor rating and definition and evaluation of benchmark jobs. In the contingency pay reward structure, the main proposal is to disregard the current system in place (contribution pay) with a combination of Competence Related Pay and Individual Performance Related Pay reward schemes. The section also proposes several cost-cutting measures and exercises. Part three of the report highlights the non-financial rewards and an overall reward recommendation, including learning and development, performance management, career development, and work environment. Part four of the report contains all the possible alternative retention plans and cost cutting strategies that are applicable in MB’s environment, including Employment Stock Ownership Plan, time extension of paying bonuses, and enhancement of job designations. The fifth and final part of the business report concludes with specific recommendations on a cost-effective reward structure for MB that will enhance the commitment of the workers, raise the morale of the employees, and thus increase the profitability of the company. The combination of low profitability, a lack of performance culture, low morale, and commitment in MB is the result of embedded complacent attitude, irrelevant reward structure, and multiple shortcomings in HR practices multiplied by too hierarchical structure and remote location of departments from each other and the Head Office. The changes offered below are vital to stay afloat. 1. Increasingly popular in job evaluation is a method of combining of two analytical schemes: using point-factor rating to define and evaluate benchmark jobs (jobs which can be used as points of comparison for others), and evaluating the remaining jobs by means of analytical matching (Armstrong pg 254 - 263) 2. External competitiveness: it is necessary to operate exact

Project management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 18

Project management - Essay Example 1b) The second difference is the work of Sprints that Hill describes. This is achieved through regular iterations of work, known as Sprints which enhance the product as depicted by the team. It is clear to understand that Agile enhances the churn by reducing defects and defining the product resourcefully. The team evaluated by practicing this technique to steer the direction of the product via this methodology. When a team stops and re-evaluates the direction of a project every two weeks, there’s time to steer it in another direction without spending quality time. 1c)The third difference is the change of scope that is prominent according to Hill 2.The closest role as defined in the Scrum Guide is The Project Manager itself, who must verify these deliverables are those items that have been finished. 2a)However, upon the end of implementation phase, closing a project becomes a necessary point. Closing a project requires careful analysis and often misunderstood from a project management standpoint. 2b) It is the best role because Keeping in track with their progress on day to day basis can be truly helpful in the long run. This become problematic as the project due date comes closer since many smaller tasks may not be captured in the WBS itself. One of the biggest concerns for closing a project is the end the finer details of the store. This becomes more problematic the project does not achieve optimal results. In the Scrum Master Toolkit, the 3 reasons it is supreme is because it is Agile. 3a) Agile allows organizations to harness growth, breed innovation, and define products that can be tangible and intuitive. 3b)Secondly, it allows organizations to one can prototype. Prototyping allows Agile engineers to draft an idea in a constructive manner. This allows organizations to capture interface requirements as depicted by Hill as a central mechanism. 3c)Lastly, props are used in non-tangible sense that allows Scrum Masters to excel in their

Active Listening at a Parent-Teacher Association Meeting Essay

Active Listening at a Parent-Teacher Association Meeting - Essay Example For this particular meeting, the teacher's table was set off to a side of the room to hold the laptop and projector that would be used for the power point presentation later on. Anticipation built up as to who would be the speaker for the night as the parents and teachers began to trickle into the classroom. There were rumors that the school Principal, Ms Berry would be addressing the parents directly due to the need for financial pledges in the improvement of the private school facilities. I noticed that most of the parents seemed to have been coming in directly from work, some still dressed in their official uniforms or looking haggard as they ran from an office meeting to the PTA conference. I chose to attend this particular event because I knew that the people who would be in attendance would already be distracted by either their exhaustion from a busy day at the office or their desire to get home as soon as possible in order to attend to their household and parental duties. From what I observed of the attitude of the people gathered in that classroom that evening, they wanted to be anywhere but at the school at that very moment. It seemed obvious to anyone observing the group such as myself, that this was one group that was not in the mood to listen to anything the speaker of the night had to say. Once the school principal arrived, it became fairly obvious that the rumors were true and she would be taking to the stand in order to address the parents. Knowing very well that I would have to report about the meeting to my cousin upon her arrival, I began preparing myself to become an effective listener based upon the principles outlined in our book. DeVito clearly outlined the principles of listening within the pages of our textbook.  

International Management Accounting Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

International Management Accounting - Essay Example Answer: In the era of merging cultures and competition in businesses, the criticality of management role and decision-making strategies has increased significantly. Decision making on the basis of estimates and assumptions has far been obsolete. The need of a systematic approach for decision-making has been felt, by companies and organizations to improve the authenticity and accuracy of the decisions made (Gelinas et al., 2010). This need urges the researchers and analysts to devise a methodology, which covers the useful data and information about the company’s revenue, loss and expenditures, which could aid in making company plans and decisions accordingly. Previously, the method used for gathering information, which would be the base of management decisions, was the Management Information System (MIS) (Gelinas et al., 2010). This system was based on manual data collection and there were great chances of human error and delay in forming reports. Maintenance was another viable issue with this system, causing company much time and problems in extracting old data and statistics. Practices show that the ambiguity in the system, leads to unfair approach in the decision-making process, due to lack of accountability of executives to the investors or creditors (Gelinas et al., 2010). MIS was also influenced by the environment and society norms of the region. In many organizations, cultural and economic factors influence the decision-making strategy and proposals of the top level management (Nicolaou, 2000). Managers from two different religions, or two different backgrounds, would have different decision-making criterion and approach. Many a times this factor influences largely on their problem handling and planning approach, which differs from the real interest or objective of the organization. Thus, a functional method was needed, which could curtail the influence of cultural and socio-economic factors from the decision-making phenomenon (Nicolaou, 2000, pp.1 03). These factors accounts for the design of the accounting information method to use in decision-making by executives and managers. It is commonly known as the Accounting Information System (AIS), in the corporate market. Its function is to collect information and generate accurate statistical and financial reports of the company or organization. These reports are available to both the internal management and executives and the external management that are the shareholders, investors or the taxation agencies (Gelinas et al., 2010). With the accuracy and transparency AIS provides in its reports, people related to the company have a clear idea and company’s standing, and the financial ups and downs. Looking into the history of AIS, we can draw a picture, of the limitations and problems in its implementation on a wider scale. Based on computer-aided technology, AIS was installed as legacy systems, which were expensive to install and maintain. Moreover, only professionals could operate the format and language used in those systems, with high complexity in generating report and comparing two or more data (Beke, 2010).

Modern and Contemporary Essay Example for Free

Modern and Contemporary Essay This paper deals with two things in relation to pantheism: first a few samples of the contemporary literature, which argue very little and unpersuasively, However, two major historical theorists of pantheism, Spinoza and his later follower, Schelling, serve to rescue the theory and place it on a firmer, more scientific ground. Pantheism has taken many forms throughout its history, and no one definition will suffice to take in all particular manifestations of this phenomenon. One of the main disconnects concerning pantheism as an ontology is to what extent Pantheism can be called a religion: this is the real issue. The modern, contemporary pantheists seem to have no religion whatsoever: no God, no doctrine. The contemporary readings on this question seem to â€Å"socialize† the vague â€Å"interconnections of all living things. † (Russell, 2008, 2). To merely attach a vague feeling of the â€Å"sacred† to a purely secular view of natural interconnections is not to create a religion. And hence, the problem. One might take the view that there are generally two forms of pantheism over time: the modish, trendy version that seeks to sacralize the secular phenomenon of nature, and a far more sophisticated form of pantheism made famous by Baruch Spinoza and his later pupil (of sorts) Friedrich Schelling. Both of these questions will be dealt with in this paper. First, we will deal with the contemporary readings on this subject, and then, the far more substantial questions of pantheism brought up by the Dutch philosopher. Standing in the Light is a book that says very little. It is heavy in vague emotive connectiveness, very light on definition and ontology. Ultimately, the â€Å"light† is whatever you want it to be: it can be a religious figure, a philosophical idea or merely a feeling, hence reducing it to nothingness by attempting to cover every emotive reaction (Russell, 2008, 3-4). In this view, she seeks to redefine atheism (cf page 4) as a view where the â€Å"universe† is seen as not sacred. But since the concept of the sacred is never defined, there are no atheists. Or, better, that this vulgar view of pantheism, which is reduced to a feeling of awe in the face of nature (as representing both good and evil, as she holds, 87ff), is itself atheism in that there is no God, but there is an awe in the face of nature’s grandeur. Few atheists would recoil at awe when looking at nature. In this same vein lies the work of Paul Harrison (2004). Again (35), he holds that â€Å"nature is to be revered. † It is unclear whether he thinks nature of â€Å"god,† since god is an elastic term that covers the object of one’s awe or respect. His dispensing with philosophical rigor is typified in his manipulation of Anselm’s famous ontological argument for god’s existence. In Harrison’s case, he mutilates it beyond recognition. The original argument was, to summarize, that god is that about which nothing greater can be conceived. But since this object must have existence (since to have existence is to be greater) god must exist, since that would be the greatest thing conceptualizable. Harrison does not seem to understand the nature of this controversial view. He assumes (Harrison, 36) that nature is the greatest thing that can be conceived, and hence, is god. This has no bearing on the argument ascribed to Anselm of Canterbury. He also seems to completely misunderstand Aristotle’s argument from causality. On page 38, Harrison holds that the â€Å"skeptical† answer rejects the necessity of a first cause, there is no need for one. If one can imagine a limitless future, one can imagine a limitless past. Since no one can imagine or visualize a â€Å"limitless† future, the same might be said of the past. Harrison seems to posit an actual religious element to pantheism in that it holds that matter is eternal, ever existing, always changing, and hence, it is a belief to be taken on faith, and hence, religious. A mildly interesting argument is his philosophy of history. He holds that history contains three movements: the hunter gatherer stage, agricultural and technological (Harrison, 50-53). It goes like this: at one time, man lived in full accordance with nature as hunter’s and gatherers. Then he decided to become settled. This was the great evil: settled agriculture places man as master of nature. Only in the technological phase was nature reintroduced, permitting a rational eco-centrist to rebuild our planet. Making sense of this argument is difficult: there are several fallicies: first, that the hunter gatherer lives in accordance with nature. He seems to have the hidden premise that all things primitive must be eco-friendly. Second, that agriculture means that man masters nature. This seems hard to swallow, since the agriculturalist mind, up until the 20th century, worked as a partner of nature, not its master. The explicit Baconian idea of dominating nature is precisely the beginnings of the industrial revolution. The argument is that when people no longer had any connection to nature, no longer lived off the land, they could then romanticize nature, and hence, see it â€Å"for its own sake† (Harrison, 52). In other words, when the technological revolution created urbanization and rape the landscape, the now alienated urbanite could make of nature of object of romantic devotion. It is precisely in the leaving of the land that one can then see it as an aesthetic object. Lastly, the author refuses to deal with the question of determinism (60). The pantheist determinism argument might look like this: all things are interconnected, the force, the unity of the interconnection is â€Å"divine,† human beings are part of this divine interconnection and hence, to conclude, humans are determined by these connections. It is difficult to wiggle out of this argument, an argument that is not found in Harrison’s book, but dismissed regardless. If freedom exists, it cannot be material. If it is not material, it is spirit. If it is spirit, then it must have a cause. But the concept of pantheism presented by Harrison posits no cause. Hence, human beings are merely determinations of material reality and hence determined. Harrison denies that human beings are determined, but does not explain how one can get out of the pantheist argument, unless one posit’s human beings as, to some extent spiritual beings and hence outside of the natural, universal causal chains that are so evocative of reverence. This is another serious flaw. Next, we have the short piece by Wood (2005). Wood is not so much arguing here for pantheism as for evolution, upon which all contemporary theories of pantheism seem to rest. This piece is basically an attack on fundamentalism, which is defined as that belief system that rejects evolution in that it rejects the principle of change inherent in all things. Pantheism has no belief system, only evolutionary ecology. One need not be a pantheist to accept everything that Wood says, it is a non-philosophical piece. Far more substantial is that work by Steinhart (2004) on the question of ontology. This is an interesting survey piece dealing with the nature of pantheism from the point of view of materialism, Platonism and Pythagoreanism. But just as interesting is his idea of the nature of god: God, in traditional theology must be: supernatural, complex (in the sense of maximal inclusivity), God must represent Himself to man, and God must be holy (Steinhart, 2004, 65-66). Of course most of these can be challenged. In Christianity, for example, God is not complex, he is simple. He is not merely supernatural, but exists within nature as its designer and guide (thought this is never an ontological connection). Nevertheless, the key to the argument is maximum inclusivity, which is not an attribute of God in traditional theology in the sense Steinhart means it, and it is question begging in terms of pantheism, since the argument presented her is that the nature god of the pantheists is by definition all inclusive, and hence, comes closest to the â€Å"traditional† idea of God. He seems to engage in the same logical fallacies as Harrison. Steinhart fails on several levels. First he fails to explain how the materialist whole can be â€Å"holy,† in any sense. Second, he fails to show how the disembodied forms of Plato can be associated with pantheism in the definition he provides. In fact, the relationship between the forms and matter is precisely Plato’s rejection of earlier Greek pantheism (referenced by Russell, 2008) and, more importantly, is nearly identical with the early Christian and Augustinian view of the relationship between God and creation. God is identified with nature as its guide and creator, but is not identified with nature simpliciter. This is a severe logical flaw. He has better luck with Pythagoras, though it is possible to see a similar objection arising. Nevertheless, it remains the case that this work also fails to do justice to pantheism. The greatest and most interesting approach to pantheism is the creation of Baruch de Spinoza. Here is an intelligent, logical and extremely interesting of the idea. Nearly all the works surveyed reference him, but only for a short time, as it is clear that few of the above authors have spent the large amount of time necessary to master the difficult system of the Dutch metaphysician. Spinoza is the greatest and most intelligent manifestation of the Pantheist idea, and hence, should be treated at length. Spinoza begins with the concept of Substance, which is to be identified with god. Substance is the â€Å"in itself. † That is, it is something that defines both affirmation, since affirmation requires negation (Parkinson, 1977, 451). Substance has gone beyond affirmation/negation because it is the whole, the everything. Hence,. Substance is its only name, and that incomplete. If substance in the Aristotelian sense is that which remains unchanging, that which survives change, for Spinoza, since all Aristotelian substances are part of a larger sphere of interconnections, the only real substance is Substance, or god. All things are determinations of God. There is no external reason for its existence. It is eternal causality. Of this Substance there are two Attributes, thought and extension, experienced as different but making reference to two forms of expression os substance relative to the limited sense experience of human beings. Further, these attributes are divided into a huge multiplicity of modes, which might be called all particular things, which are incomplete existences by definition. What is worth mentioning is that Spinoza holds that these attributes that subdivide into modes are not real. They are experienced, but this experience derives from the limited abilities of the human observer. But God in Himself is Substance that contains infinite attributes, only two of which are available to human beings. The attributes must be infinite because, given the nature fo Substance, there is nothing to constrain their development. A fully understood attribute of an infinite Substance is by definition infinite (Spinoza, 1927, 124-125). Science might struggle with this. First, it suggest that science is only a tiny form of knowledge in a sea of infinity. In other words, science can only deal with incomplete experiences relative to the limited observational capacities of the person. A â€Å"fact† in the truest sense of Spinoza’s pantheism is that which contains all reality, it must be Substance and only Substance. Anything less would be limited, and hence abstract, outside of its true context and contingent. Even Spinoza’s epistemology is limited in the sense that sense data is only the persistence of a pattern of perception. Hence, there is no direct human mode of perceiving God. God is full interconnectedness (the phenomenon, th international of Modes relative to both attributes, i. e. thought and extension make up the same Substance relative to humans) that has its root in the Substance itself (the noumenon, outside of experience) (Rocca, 1996, 192). Spinoza writes: Hence it follows, firstly, that there is no cause, either external to God or within Him, that can excite Him to act except the perfection of his own nature. It follows, secondly, that God alone is a free cause; for God alone exists from the necessity alone of His own nature. Therefore He alone is a free cause (Spinoza, 1927, 132) . Several things come from this: first, that human beings are determined, being themselves manifestations of the divine nature, containing in themselves the two attributes of thought or extension, the only two forms of experience permitted to man. That this determination is a good thing in that all things are pre-determined in the infinite nature of God, and hence, there is little to be done but live peacefully. But it should also be clear that there is no emotive attachment to this will-less and thought-less entity (Spinoza, 1927, 132). God is God only in that He is Substance. He is a metaphysical principle, not a cause of awe or worship. He is substance deduced logically in the following way: A cause of a thing must exist either inside or outside the object being caused. The reason for a square to exist is not to be found in the square itself. There must be a cause, then, outside it, a cause that has made it necessary to exist. Hence, Substance, which exists necessarily, is uncaused. This is because if Substance (that which survives all change) has a cause outside itself, then it is not Substance; that Substance must be it. Hence, there is a cause that is uncaused, Substance, and this is what survives all change, existing necessarily and the (logical) cause of all things (Spinoza, 1927, 124, â€Å"On the Essence of God. † also cf. Bennet, 1997) Friedrich von Schelling is another metaphysician who skirted the concept of pantheism, and is often considered one. Here we have a post-Spinozistic idea of the Spinozian concept of God, taking liberally from Spinoza and yet another interesting approach to the concept of pantheism. Schelling’s basic metaphysic is the spiritual exists as such in nature. Putting this differently, nature is the physical expression of the spiritual, but constantly limited by materiality. Even further, the pantheism derives form the idea that nature eventually creates the conditions necessary for the spirit, or conscious life. Here, the idea of spirit deriving from nature is posited from the circular concept that nature is spirit in expression in matter (Bowie, 2001). The development of the spirit in nature moves like this: 1. The absolute principle is the ground, just as in Spinoza, between the conscious and sub-conscious life, that is, sprit and matter respectively, since here, matter is merely â€Å"slumbering spirit. † 2. Nature and spirit are identical to Spinoza’s two modes, extension and thought respectively. Nature tends to objectification, while spirit tends to subjetification, but there is no ultimate distinction between the two. 3. These are held together in actual life by force: attraction/repulsion; light, gravity, while in spirit these forces take the form of knowledge, will, etc. 4. Both these forces are attributes (in Spinoza’s sense, not modes, since they are not â€Å"particular† and hence unreal, things) derive from the single Substantial source, not called Substance, but the Absolute. (Snow, 1996) 5. The movement of Substance then, is the reconciliation of opposites: thought and extension, matter and spirit, object and subject. Spirit will suffuse matter, matter will be saturated with spirit. This is the evolutionary picture of Schelling prior to Darwin (and is interesting on that account alone). In other words, Schelling differs from Spinoza in granting some limited â€Å"will† to the otherwise abstract absolute: the will for interpenetrating and the end of philosophy with a spiritualized matter. God will be present in matter in full when consciousness and matter merge, or more accurately, nature is suffused with consciousness. This paper has done two things: first it basically dispensed with the contemporary literature in pantheism is non-scientific and hence non-philosophical. Instead, this paper has briefly summarized two major pantheistic writers and metaphysician who are highly related in terms of basic ideas, Spinoza and schelling. In their view of pantheism, the absolute/substance is necessary existence. This is posited and proved because it is impossible to imagine a cause without origin, or a causal chain with ether no purpose or no beginning. Spinoza does not believe that causes exist eternally, but that Substance does: time, and hence, cause, is a human, mental construct. A serious, philosophical pantheism avoids the problems mentioned above, and posits a Substance or Absolute that is conscious experienced in forms or modes. All things are God in that all things are expressions of God. References: Russell, Sharman. Standing in the Light: My Life as a Pantheist. Basic, 2008. Harrison, Paul. Elements of Pantheism. Media Creations, 2004. Wood, Harold. â€Å"Practice of Pantheistic Mindfulness. † Pantheistic Vision 24, 2005. Steinhart, E. â€Å"Pantheism and Current Ontology. † Religious Studies 40: pp 1-18 Parkinson, HGR. â€Å"Hegel, Pantheism and Spinoza. † The Journal of the History of Ideas. 38, 1977: 449-459 Spinoza, Baruch de. Ethics and Other Writings. Joseph Ratner, Trans. Modern Library, 1927. Bennett, Jonathan. â€Å"Spinoza’s Metaphysics. † in The Cambridge Companion to Spinoza. Cambridge University Press, 1996. Pps 61-89 Della Rocca, Michael. â€Å"Spinoza’s Metaphysical Psychology. † in The Cambridge Companion to Spinoza. Cambridge University Press, 1996. Pps 192-267 Bowie, Andrew. â€Å"Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University Press, 2001. Snow, Dale. Schelling and the End of Idealism. SUNY Press, 1996.

Benefits Of The Olympic Games

Benefits Of The Olympic Games This essay will analyse the benefits of the 2012 Olympic Games which will bring and has brought to the UK. The London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games will bring a lot of benefits to the UK this essay intends to look at several of these opportunities; these opportunities include the development of sport, increase in tourism and increase in economic activity throughout the UK. (reference) Local authorities are already using the inspiration of the Games to spread wider social, economic and sporting benefits to their communities in the run up to the 2012. This will be the basis for a long term and UK wide legacy from the Games. The local Government Association has worked with local authorities to identify six UK wide legacy benefits: Inspiring children and young people Raising sporting game and influencing healthier lifestyles Volunteering Championing culture Generating and supporting tourism Boosting the local economy Many of these legacy benefits are already important to local communities, and local authorities are working hard to partners to improve performance and service delivery. The 2012 Games provide a unique catalyst to reach new groups of people, bring new partners to the table and help local authorities achieve existing targets. (reference) Hosting the 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games is an opportunity to bring about positive change on a massive scale. The Games would not only add to the UKs nations sporting heritage but will also celebrate the diversity of the capital. It is a unique chance to showcase the best of London to the world and would generate huge benefits for all those who live or work in the city: Boost for Sport: The London 2012 Games will accelerate the delivery of new world-class sports infrastructure for the UK and London in particular. For example, after the Games, the athletics Stadium, Aquatics Centre, Velodrome, Indoor Sports Arena, Hockey Centre, and Canoe Slalom will all be available for use by the community as well as elite athletes. The 2012 Olympic Games is most likely to generate large amounts of interest from local authorities and businesses, this could possibly open up further links for the funding of sports at all levels. Based on the experiences of former host Olympic countries, funding for the development of elite athletes in the years running up to the Games would increase. Hosting teams for many months before the Games could also act as a catalyst for developing and refurbishing existing UK sports facilities. Boost for Business, Jobs and Skills: The hosting the Olympic Games will benefit every sector of the economy, this will provide a much needed boost for Business, more jobs will be created and skills will be gained from the 2012 Olympic Games. Thousands of UK businesses will be used to deliver the Games for example catering, manufacturing, construction, services etc, and creating valuable opportunities for businesses. An example such as the Sydney Olympic Games showed that business in Australia won over a billion pounds in contracts for the Games (PWC report), more than 200 million from regional businesses and over 55,000 people receiving employment related training. Londons tourism industry will receive a significant boost, not just for the duration of the Games but in the run up to and long after the Games. An example of how an area can benefit from the 2012 Olympic Games is how Dorset, Weymouth and Portland has increased their local visitor economy. They will host the Sailing events in 2012. The Spirit of the Sean festival, which celebrates the areas close relationship with the sea, has completed its second year and is going from strength to strength. Last years festival showcased around 50 activities at 27 venues. The festival has a range of cultural and sporting events which include water sports competitions for all ages and of all abilities, concerts on the beach, the Dorset seafood festival, the Moving Tides Childrens Procession and the Henri Lloyd Weymouth Regatta. These events all in turn encourage people to be more active and to get involved with the towns cultural opportunities. People who attend these events spent on average  £68, w hich has provided a boost in the economy. Dorset, Weymouth and Portland will be using the councils status to share with other local authorities how to secure a tourism legacy from the London 2012 Olympic Games. A London Games would also provide many new learning opportunities for Londoners to train and develop their skills. The Olympic park which is being built will also create thousands of new jobs. The running of the 2012 Olympic Games will require around 70,000 volunteers, this is set to cause the largest volunteer recruitment force in the UK. This will lead to a volunteering boost in general sports and specific sports. An example of this is Kent County councils aim to secure maximum benefit from the 2012 Olympic Games by using the Kent event team, whom are in partnership with the Kent county council and the voluntary sector, and the use of the Games as a key focal point to employee volunteers for sporting events and leisure and cultural activities across the UK. Another example is the Voluntary Action Maidstone which is the lead voluntary sector partner. In its first 18months, a manager and voluntary support staff were appointed, 700 volunteers and 40 organisations were registered and 20 events were supported. These included sporting, cultural and artistic events and festivals. The Kent event team aims to create a network of volunteers for wider community use who are available to volunteer after the 2012 Games, encourage people who are unable to make a long term commitment to volunteering, and help support the volunteering sectors to develop good practices with regard to community events. Various test events will be held during the run up to the 2012 Olympic Games, some of these test events include world championships. International Sports Federations will hold European and world championships and other large scale events in the UK, this will allow their athletes to acclimatise with the country. This will have a positive effect to the UK in the sense that it will deliver several million pounds to the UK for example Birmingham City Council concluded that hosting of the World Indoor Athletics Championships and World Badminton Championships in 2003 had a positive economic impact of  £3.5M and  £2.5M respectively. (reference) Another example Is in the Australian Olympic Games 125 teams from 39 countries went through training before the Games in different locations across Australia, the training estimated to have benefited the states economy by about 70 million (PWC, 2002). Creative Capital: Creative Industries is the fastest growing sector in London, responsible for one in five new jobs in the capital. An Olympic cultural Programme is a major aspect of the Games. From concerts in the parks to street theatre, the Games would provide a platform for talented artists in London to showcase their skills to a global audience. Boosting Health and Sporting success: Hosting the worlds greatest sporting event given the passion, excitement and interest likely to be generated would boost Government initiatives to promote participation in sport and physical activity at all levels. Physical Change: The Olympic Games would bring forward one of the largest and most significant urban regeneration projects ever undertaken in the UK, through the transformation of the Lower Lea Valley in east London. The area has already been identified as a priority by the Government, the Mayor and the LDA. Thousands of athletes, officials, spectators and media will be travelling to the Games and in order to achieve a smooth running transport system London will be improving several of the transport links to the east of London. Some of these improvements include, Channel Tunnel Shuttle link from Stratford to Kings Cross and  £1bn improvement to London East line. (reference) The creation of the Olympic Park will create more green space, maintain local biodiversity, and improve the soil, water and air quality in the London area. The ways in which this will be achieved is the waterways and canals of the river lea will be made wider and will be cleaned, and the levels of the water will be renewed to achieve a new wetland habitat for wildlife, the park will also be planted with native species some of these include oak and ask, this will provide a home for wildlife in the middle of the city, by improving the park it will encourage birdwatchers and ecologists to come and enjoy the area. The London 2012 Olympic Games would set new standard for recycling of natural resources, consumption and sustainable production. They will achieve this by†¦. During the Games The Olympic Village will be used for officials and athletes to stay during the Games and then after the Games the renovation of the Olympic village will take place, the village will turned into 5,000 homes. Houses will also be built on the Olympic park site after the Games as well as new amenities for the local community which will include shops, restaurants and cafes. This is one of the key benefits of the 2012 Olympic Games. The ODA, the Olympic delivery authority, has an equality and inclusion programme, the ODAs equality and diversity strategy and the ODAs three equality schemes covering race, disability and gender equality, the aim of this programme is to create an inclusive Games, which promotes good equality practices and access for all. This mission extends the aims of the ODA beyond these statutory duties to include the newer equality strands of age, religion and sexual orientation and other inclusion issues centred on socio-economic, culture and political disadvantage. The regeneration of the area will have many social and economic benefits. It will have a positive impact on local communities in different parts of the UK and example of how they are managing to achieve this is having a fair, open and a wider range of diverse suppliers the way in which recruiting and managing employees is done fairly, this helps to promote equal opportunities to all and eliminate discrimination in the workplace. The ODA are also working with partner organisations to encourage women, black, Asian and minority ethnic people and disabled people, to train and apply for jobs in construction and other areas. The 2012 Olympic Games is set to be inclusive for people of all cultures, faiths and ages, and fully accessible to disabled people with a wide range of impairments. The ODA will also provide a transport network that will be accessible and give everyone the opportunity to enjoy the Games, as well as leave a lasting legacy for equality and inclusion. The London organising committee of the Olympic and Paralympic games plan to get women, disabled people and BAME people actively involved in sport by raising awareness so a wider range of people watch the 2012 Games and influencing key partners to train young people in sports volunteering, coaching and other related skills. They will also challenge discrimination in sport by spreading positive messages, supporting programmes that promote equality and making full use of the London 2012 Paralympic games to inspire disabled people. They hope that with the right approach that the 2012 Games will benefit everyone.

The US and UK takeover regulations

The US and UK takeover regulations A takeover of a public company is the purchase of one company whose shares are listed on a stock exchange by another. Empirical evidence on takeovers suggests that they generally create value. The question is why have the UK and U.S- two countries with ostensibly similar systems of corportate governance taking different routes when it comes to regulating takeovers. A rich analysis draws from each countrys historical development, focusing on the shareholder-oriented regulations in the UK and the defence managerial tactics employed in the U.S. This paper would critically analyse the views of the writers of the Divergence of U.S and UK Takeover Regulation written by Armour and Skeel JR, both well seasoned Professors of Law, a thorough analysis would be made of hostile takeovers and the reasons why takeover tactics in the UK is regarded as a better option. An analytical framework would be used explain the diversity in the systems of takeover in the UK and the U.S. subordinate lawmakers such as Judges have had the herculean task of filling the unintended vacuum and consequences of legislation in the two countries that had other objectives at the time of enactment. An examination of the way regulations took shape in the UK and the U.S as the goal is to gain an understanding of the defensive tactics adopted and used frequently in the U.S but is frowned at and has dire consequences if adopted in the UK. Earlier case examples from each jurisdiction would be analysed to gain understanding of why different takeover regulations are used. In the UK, defensive tactics by target managers are prohibited, whereas in the U.S, Delaware law gives managers a good deal of room to manoeuvre  [1]  . The primary focus of this essay is to provide a simple yet thorough framework to understanding defence tactics, what it is; why it is so successful in the U.S and is prohibited in the UK. Clearly the two ways of takeover regulations appear to work fairly well in each jurisdiction and despite the authors of the articles view one must never forget that because the UK methods seem more share holder oriented and works very well, it does not mean there is any anything wrong with the method used in the U.S. In a takeover bid, accounting and law firms are hired to conduct Due Diligence- Lawyers review contracts, agreements, leases, current and pending litigation and all other outstanding or potential liability obligations so that the buyer can have a better understanding of the target companys binding agreements as well as overall legal related exposure. The facilities in the company and capital equipment also need to be inspected so as to avoid unreasonable expenditures in the first few months of acquisition  [2]  . The first section of the essay would look at an overview of the history of business law development and corporate governance in the UK and the U.S. the takeover development and institutional responses to them. The second part looks at the US and UK takeover regulations and their differences. Also legislation that have been implemented and the fact that despite legislation, subordinate lawmakers make rules that govern the process of takeovers. Who are these subordinate lawmakers and why do they appear to have so much discretion as to what becomes a rule? They include a diverse range of characters from Judges to interest groups (Institutional investors). The identity of the subordinate lawmaker, in turn has major consequences for both the substance and the enforcement of the regulatory rules  [3]  . Various case examples would be used to explain the difference in takeover methodology in the UK and the U.S, objectives of takeovers, the disciplinary hypotheses of the importance of ta keover regulations. Finally, proposed reforms in the US and UK and a conclusive summary on the issues of hostile takeover tactics. History The UK and the US are distinguished from other jurisdictions based on their high levels of takeover activities; in contrast Europe has a little or no market for corporate control (Franks and Mayer, 1996). The UK does not have the federalist structure of the U.S which does not allow room for corporate managers to exert influence. In the U.S the Delaware jurisdiction became the sole source of rules on takeovers more so, hostile takeovers. The U.S takeover regulations give target managers discretion to defend a bid whereas in the UK the shareholders make the decision. Delaware have a monopoly and is home to about 60% of the largest corporations in the country. Due to the amount of tax and other benefits that Delaware State enjoys from these corporations the State is attentive to the managers needs and the state lawmakers have an incentive to keep the managers content. The Legal rules have to be amenable so that unprecedented cases can be brought cheaply and quickly after has been a chan ge in business practices so as to allow the precedent cases to be developed and updated. The Delaware takeover doctrine was firmly established in the 1990s- that US institutional investors became a significant force in corporate governance  [4]  unlike their UK counterparts that embraced the importance of the concept of institutional investors. Corporate takeovers tend to improve not only the stock prices of the companies involved but also the stock market overall. Although there is a substantial increase in the targets companys stock price, the outcome for the acquirer and the market over time however is considerably negative. Also some ill-fated takeovers turn into an embarrassment for the parties involved for example the merger in 1996 of San Francisco banking giant Wells Fargo and its Los Angeles rival First Interstate Bancorp in an $11.6bn hostile takeover, the merge led to many of the latter companies executives leaving, account errors appeared in the companys account and the problems were visible to the customers. In the UK, lawyers play a relatively little role in takeover bids, complaints and law suits are made to the Takeover Panel located in the London Stock Exchange building. The Takeover Panel includes representatives from the Stock Exchange, the Bank of England, major merchant banks and institutional investors  [5]  . The Takeover Panel is a body that administers a set of rules known as the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers. The Panel and the rules were self-regulatory until around 2007 when the EU directives have been implemented into the UKs regulations and have a statutory underpinning designed with the objective of maintaining the characteristic features of the Panels approach, which is based on self-regulation. In the U.S however, takeover regulations are moderated principally by the Securities and Exchange Commission which ensures that disclosure and process rules are adhered to. A managers response to a takeover bid in the U.S is regulated primarily by the Delawares Chancer y Judges and Supreme Court- the key players here are lawyers and judges. U.S takeover Takeover offers are regulated under the Williams Act Amendments to the Securities and Exchange Act (SEC) 1934. The act was created to provide governance of securities exchange in the stock market, all the companies listed on the stock exchange must follow its requirements. The SEC is regarded as relatively share-holder friendly, however managers are known to sometimes adopt a hostile approach to takeovers and they adopt defence mechanisms such as poison pills or shareholder right plan which are designed to ward off a hostile bidders stake particularly if the bidder acquires more than a specified proportion of target stock, usually 10-15 percent. The poison pill is a defence tactic that allows companies to thwart hostile takeover bids from other companies, examples of the poison pill include Flip-over Rights Plan, Flip-in Rights Plan, poison debt, voting poison pill plan etc. The managers of a company that use the poison pill defence and a staggered board of directors have almost complete discretion to resist an unwanted takeover bid, the poison pill is a method that is slowly declining in the last couple of years. The U.S tender offers are generally not share holder friendly, in the case of Atmel Corp a maker of microchips used in video game controllers, successfully defeated a challenge by investors using the poison pill tactic. Some shareholders who sued over the failed buyout by Microchip Technology Inc stated that the revisions made by Atmel were vague, a Delaware state judge rules in Atmel Corps favour. State statute such as Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law furthers the federal policy of investor protection. It was enacted to protect shareholders from the coerciveness of two-tier offers by preventing the offer unless the targets board of directors and in some instances the shareholders approves, the legislation has been successful in stopping such coercive practices. Section 203 also gives target boards some authority in resisting unwelcome, under priced tender offers that are not beneficial to shareholders. In the BNS Inc v Koppers Co., the U.S District Court explained that Section 203 does not stop the aims of the William Act even though it may give target boards significant advantage in preventing un-solicited takeovers. To the contrary, the statute may have substantial deterrent effects on tender offersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦so long as hostile offers which are beneficial to target shareholders have a meaningful opportunity for success. Section 203 does not have to let bad offers succeed to be constitutional, and in fact, if it did let bad offers succeed, it would frustrate, and not further, the Williams Acts purpose of investor protection. In BNS , the district court concluded that, on this record, the statute appears to offer hostile bidders the necessary degree of opportunity to effect a business combination and upheld the statute  [6]  . Another example is the recent April 2011 hostile takeover battle in the U.S between Tenet a hospital chain resisting a $7billion takeover by rival Community Health Systems. Tenet filed a lawsuit stating serious allegations that Community Health Systems is an unfit acquirer because the company has been systematically defrauding Medicare, evidence to support Tenets claim was provided. Not only is this allegation posed to resist a takeover, it can also potentially damage the reputation of Community Health Systems. This case ranks high in the pantheon of aggressive counter punches. The health care in the U.S remains the most targeted industry since 2009 with $179.1bn; accounting for 22.9% of total U.S targeted volume  [7]  . Another case example was AOLs purchase of Time Warner for $164bn at the height of the internet mania; it remains the largest corporate merger in American history  [8]  . Bidders are more likely to enter into negotiations with the targets board which results in a friendly transaction than them making a hostile offer directly to the shareholders. UK Takeover In contrast to the U.S, the UK takeover regulation is shareholder oriented. Managers in the UK are not permitted to make use of any frustrating defence tactics when there is a takeover bid without the shareholders permission unlike their U.S counterparts. The Takeover Code only becomes relevant when there is a bid therefore managers can take advantage of less stringent ex ante regulations well before any takeover bids come to light  [9]  . J.Armour, D.A. Skeel, JR, in their article; The Divergence of the U.S. and UK Takeover Regulation state that the UKs ban on defensive tactics by managers clearly makes it easier for hostile bids to succeed. It is bewildering to find that while the U.S adopts defence tactics measures, figures show that hostile takeovers are less likely to succeed there than in the UK. Case Examples in the UK In Jan 2010, Cadbury ended its nearly 200 years of independence after it was acquired by Kraft, a U.S food giant for 11.9bn pounds. The acquisition led to media frenzy and revived concern over the UK slowly becoming a so-called branch office for foreign companies, the UK Government was powerless to protect Cadbury, a heritage and one of the oldest companies in the country from foreign investment. The financial times stated in a article that erecting barriers is not the answer, the key to solving the problem of foreign business moving their head offices to more favourable jurisdictions is to make Britain an appealing business location, with a skilled workforce and a predictable tax regime. Another case example is the Vodafone-Mannesmann acquisition in 2002 which is still referred to a lot by economists and critics. There have been concerns that hostile takeovers can take place provided that there is a simple majority vote from shareholders. The Government wants reforms to change this to two-thirds of shareholders and the bidders must be subject to the same rules. Figure 1 below shows that the performance effects of takeovers differ by industry, some industries such as insurance companies have a higher number of takeover bids as opposed to banks that have a lower number. Figure 1 Beneficial Ownership of UK shares end-2008 (Source: Office of National Statistics, Share Ownership 2008) Difference between the US and UK takeover regulations The most significant difference between the two countries is not the substance but the mode of regulation. The U.S depends on formal law such as the Delaware law while self-regulation is the norm in the UK. In the Kraft-Cadbury takeover in the UK there was an outcry for change in the regulation as Cadbury was unable to defend itself to the same extent as a US company in similar circumstances, control decisions were made not by the directors but by short term investors. Leading U.S law firms such as Wachtell, Lipson and Cravath that specialise in Mergers and Acquisition (Hereafter MA) oriented practice generate significantly more revenue per lawyer than their UK counterparts. Importance of Takeovers- Disciplinary Hypothesis A takeover is sometimes used as a measure to restructure poorly performing companies. Critics and economics have long argued that the likelihood of competition in capital markets and the threat of a takeover is an incentive to discipline self-interested managers. Many writers have suggested a ban on the defence takeover tactics used in the U.S, such as the poison pills, golden parachutes and white knights- stating that these tactics more often than not are used purely for the managers/directors self interest. There have been numerous attempts by the Congress to set up legislative measures to prevent this out right abuse of power by the company managers and to protect the interests of the shareholders. There are however two hypotheses for the purpose of these defences: the shareholder hypothesis (SIH) and the management entrenchment hypothesis (MEH). The SIH is used purely to keep and satisfy the interests of shareholders whilst the MEH is used by the managers/directors of the company intended to be takeover to act in the interest of the shareholders for fear of losing their jobs if the takeover is successful, the end result of the MEH is usually that the shareholders would lose out on takeover premiums that the offeror would have paid. This leads one to question whether the managers pursuing their self interests is a breach of their fiduciary duties to the company and its shareholders, as they have a duty to act in the best interest of the company first and foremost. The managers may use the argument that the two hypothesis work together and that the main reasons for the defence tactics is not for their self interest but to maximise the wealth of the shareholders, a valid argument I daresay, both conflicting views are obviously utmost in the strategies of the management in a takeover power tussle. In the U.S the courts when determining whether a company management is in breach of its fiduciary duties look at the Business Judgement Rule- which provides that a court should evaluate decisions by directors to employ an anti-takeover defence in the same way as they would evaluate any other business judgement  [10]  . Basically anti-takeover defence tactics must be reasonable in relation to the threat posed and made in good faith. If the companys corporate value or shareholders interest could be harmed due to the acquisition of its shares by a specific person or group, the company needs to take substantial measures to raise corporate value and secure shareholders interests to the extent permitted by laws, regulation, and the companys Articles of Incorporation  [11]  . In the UK, the takeover code states in Rule 19.1 that public criticism is one of the disciplinary measures available to the Panel. Rule 19.1 states that each document or advertisement published or statement made, during the course of an offer must be prepared with the highest standards of care and accuracy and the information given must be adequately and fairly presented  [12]  . For example in the Kraft takeover case of 2010, the company promised to keep operational some Cadbury factories, but failed to do so, this led to a public criticism from the press and the Takeover Panel. OBJECTIVES OF TAKEOVER Takeover or merger, in practice, depends upon the motives of the persons behind such move. Generally, the following types of decision limit their choice for a particular firm in which takeover or merger activity could be organised: (1) Acquisition of shares in the target company; (2) Acquisition of the assets of the target companys undertaking; (3) Acquisition for full or part ownership of the target undertaking; (4) Acquisition for cash or for shares or other securities of the Offeror Company or combination of cash and variety of securities; There is not one single reason for a takeover but a multiple of reasons cause which are precisely discussed below: Synergistic operating economies: It is assumed that existing undertakings are operating at a level below optimum. But when two undertakings combine their resources and efforts they with combined effort produce better result than two separate undertakings because of savings in operating costs, combined sale offices, staff facilities, plant management etc which lower the operating costs. Thus the resultants economies are synergistic operating economy. These gains are most likely to occur in horizontal mergers in which there more chances for eliminating duplicate facilities, vertical and multinational mergers do not offer these economies. Diversification: Takeover are motivated with the objective to diversify the activities so as to avoid putting all the eggs in one basket and obtain advantage of joining the resources for enhanced debt financing and better service it shareholders. Such takeovers result in conglomerate undertakings. But critics hold that diversification caused takeover of companies does not benefit the shareholders as they can get better returns by having diversified portfolios by holding individual shares of these companies. Taxation advantage: Takeover take place to have benefit of tax laws and company having accumulated losses may merge with profit earning company that will shield the income from taxation. Growth advantage: Takeovers are motivated with a view to sustain growth or to acquire growth. To develop new areas becomes costly, risky and difficult than to acquire a company in a growth sector even though the acquisition is on premium rather than investing in a new assets or new establishments. (http://jurisonline.in/2011/03/takeover-a-critical-analysis/ Assessed 12th April 2011) Reforms in the UK There was an urgent need for reforms in the UK takeover regulation after acquisition of Cadbury by Kraft. The following are some of the proposed reforms. Proposals to give target companies more protection under the Takeover Code The Government wants the simple majority vote by shareholders to be changed to a two-thirds of shareholders in other to ensure that as many shareholders as possible are supportive of the takeover. The prohibition of any offer related arrangement e.g implementation agreements Reducing the put up or shut up deadline from 2months to 28days- This means that a potential bidder must announce a firm intention to make an offer, declare no intention or ask for an extension of the deadline. If no bid is announced the bidder is excluded out of the market for six months. There have been criticisms that the 28day period is not enough time for bidders to undertake due diligence and arrange financing. Detailed disclosure of advisory fees- there is no requirement at the moment under the Takeover Code for advisory fees to be disclosed. It is intended that any offer-related fees be disclosed in the offer document and targets response. This includes legal advice, accounting and consulting advice, broking advice etc. The proposal disclosure changes are not controversial and in fact tally with the current system in the U.S. Greater disclosure of debt facilities and other instruments to finance an offer- a bidders financing arrangements should be disclosed in any offer documents. This need for transparency and accountability may be prompted due to the recent financial crisis in the UK Provision of better protection of the interests of employees of the target company These proposals were made in March 2011 and a consultation period is open until the 17th of May 2011 after which the UK Panel will then issue a statement with the final version of the amendment, the amendments will be adopted into the UK Takeover Code later in the year  [13]  . Conclusion Even before the financial crisis there have been fundamental reassessments of the value of takeovers in the UK and the U.S. Since the financial crisis most board of directors and managers have been more concerned with running their businesses and staying afloat than with chasing expansion through takeovers. This factual point is true when the probability of a successful merger is far less certain, as in hostile takeover attempts. A hostile takeover presents executive board leaders with unique organisation and people challenges. It is often very difficult to overcome the challenges of acquiring and integrating an organisation and people especially after a hostile takeover. Times like this need a higher level of strategic thinking, flexibility and innovative problem solving  [14]  . This paper finds that the UK takeover regulation despite its numerous advantages is prone to hostile takeovers due to its compliance with upholding the interests of shareholders, while this hostile takeovers act as a form of disciplinary function by restructuring poor performing companies and improving their performance, evidence above stated shows that hostile targets in most cases experience a significant decline in profits and share returns in the first year of acquisition. Despite the criticisms of the U.S system of regulation, hostile takeovers are in decline due to the level of discretion given to the executive directors and managers by the legislation that provides antitakeover regulations that are enshrined in the corporate charters and/or state legislation. Also in a self regulated system like the UK, institutional investors who own majority of the shares in UK quotes companies shaped the Takeover Code. BIBLIOGRAPGHY http://www.guardian.co.uk/business http://www.mallesons.com/MarketInsights/marketAlerts/2011/UKPanel-Takeover-Code-Reforms/Pages/default.aspx John Armour, Jack B. Jacorbs Curtis J. Milhaupt, The Evolution of Hostile Takeover Regimes in Developed and Emerging Markets: An Analytical Framework, 52 Harv. Intl L.J. 219 (2011) J Coffee. Regulating the Market for Corporate Control: A Critical Assessment of the Tender Offers Role in Corporate Government, 84 Columbia Law Review 1145 (1984), copyright Columbia Law Review Association, Inc. T I Ogowewo. The inequality in takeovers, Journal of International Banking Law and Regulation 178 (2008), reproduced by permission of the publishers, Sweet and Maxwell Ltd Dolbeck, A. Hard to Swallow: Poison Pills on the Decline Weekly Corporate Growth Report, 22nd March 2004, 1-3 Hermalin, B.E Weisbech, M.S., 1991. The Effects of Board Composition and Direct Incentives on Firm Performance, Papers 91-02, Rochester, Business-Financial Research and Policy Studies. J.H.Farrar, Business Judgement and Defensive Tactics in Hostile Takeover Bids (1989) 15 Can. Bus. L.J. 15 at 22 http://www.complianceweek.com/s/documents/DealogicGlobalReview.pdf (assessed 18th April 2011) Does Delaware Law Improve Firm Value? by Robert Daines. Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 62 (2001) http://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/07/buyside_m_and_a.asp (Assessed 18th April 2011) Morck,R., Shleifer, A., Vishny, R., 1990. Do Managerial Objectives drive bad acquisitions? Journal of Finance, 31-48 http://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk