Published 2013.10.24 CommPRO.biz

Shareholders Come Last!

Corporate America, particularly the Monster Too-Big-To-Fail Banks, have it all backwards. A crazy concept, Shareholder Value, conceived as a business strategy in the late 1980s by college professor Dr. Alfred Rappaport, continues to ravage our economy even though it has been thoroughly discredited. One of its early advocates, Jack Welch, sang its praises back then when he was CEO of General Electric. He touted shareholder value for all to hear. Twenty years later in 2009 Welch turned around and said in a newspaper interview, “Shareholder value is the dumbest idea in the world. Shareholder value is a result, not a strategy; your main constituencies are your employees, your customers and your products".

Welch isn’t the only one to see the light. Jim Collins of Good to Great fame has been pointing to what makes great companies and the importance of long-term strategies rather than the quarter-to-quarter madness obsessing our corporate world today. It is especially dangerous in the case of the Monster Too-Big-To-Fail banks. Striving for short term goals, empowered by immunity from gambling laws, FDIC protected depositors, seemingly unlimited interest-free money from the FED, and the knowledge that there’s a taxpayer bailout waiting if they go too far, leads them to take wildly reckless chances. And the Monster Banks are doing just that, they are going too far.

Back in the real world where corporations are coming to the new Jack Welch, Jim Collins view, they understand that sky-high executive compensation encourages greed, not leadership. Measure after measure shows a different parameter on the road to success. Perhaps most dramatic is the work of two Professors Rajendra Sisodia and Jagdish Sheth. They set out looking for companies that met a list of standards that at first glance seem out of reach, companies that focused on their customers, their employees, their vendors, their communities, the environment and finally last in line, their shareholders; companies striving to serve all their stakeholders. They call them “Firms of Endearment.”

The professors partnered with writer David Wolfe who suggested that before they got too excited when they actually found more than two dozen such companies, that they had better check to see if any of these companies made any money. You know, the “result” where Jack Welch pointed out that shareholder value comes into play. To everyone’s surprise the public companies that made the Firms of Endearment list returned eight times the S&P average over the ten years prior to the list compilation.

Clearly this shows beyond any doubt that all things being equal, the Firms of Endearment high road is far superior even to the taxpayer supported route the Monster Banks inflict on our society. The whole idea that if you take care of the basic stakeholders, your bottom line will take care of itself is lost on these folks. David Wolfe wrote a great book, Firms of Endearment, that details the high road research and results. If you are holding your breath waiting for the Monster Bank CEOs to read it, forget it.

Published – CommPRO.biz 2013.10.18

Shortages That Kill

It seems that every time we try to get something right, some scumbag figures out a way to game the system. While this fact of life is annoying wherever it shows up, it’s deadly when it rears its viperous head in life and death situations. So it is with generic drugs. Once we get past the inflated profits Big Pharma reaps -based on the phonied-up costs to develop a truly new drug- our expectation is that generic versions will serve us at reasonable costs.

We know all about the inexplicably legal game Big Pharma plays where they get to pay off the generic manufacturers to hold off production until they can squeeze the last drop of bloated profit out of the original patented version. As if that isn’t bad enough, it turns out there’s another equally ridiculous legal loophole allowing drug buying groups to bribe their way to higher profits at a cost of billions (out of our pockets) and -more important- at the cost of life itself.

This situation, according to published reports from medical and pharmaceutical practitioners, has its roots in 1987. You remember the “eighties” when “K” Street lobbyists seemed able to write any crazy thing into a law and find one of those we elected to serve us, willing to serve their special interest – for cash. Well, in 1987 Congress passed the “Medicare Safe Harbor Act” giving pharmaceutical buying groups a get-out-of-jail-free card to take vendor kickbacks (AKA bribes).

Since then these huge entities have controlled the manufacturers of generics that are mostly injectables used in hospital settings, antibiotics, pain meds, chemo drugs and anesthetics among others. These buying groups have in some cases limited manufacture to a single company. They have driven pricing so low, that eventually no competitors to their “Favored One” are left standing.

How are low prices bad for us? When a dominant buyer is able to drive pricing below the level of reasonable profits for the producers, there is no longer a truly competitive marketplace. That’s exactly what’s happened in the generic pharma world, resulting in unacceptable and dangerous shortages. A buying group source claims that they “encourage the free market by competitive bidding and multiple rewards for the best supplier performance.” We are with him until the multiple rewards part (sounds like bribes to us).

All of this was thought to be addressed in a 2012 law. Instead by mid-2013 drugs in short supply had soared from near two hundred to near three hundred, a fifty percent surge in one year. How did that happen? While we have no details, we’re betting it had to do with the buying group lobbyists. While we don’t pick up these drugs from our family drug store, we all have a vital stake. It is past time for this perverse law, the innocent sounding 1987 “Medicare Safe Harbor Act,” to have its quarter century of greed driven rule brought to an end. It is time to restore ethics and a true free market to this vital healthcare sector.

Published CommPRO.biz 2013.10.11

Reputation – A Road to Profitability

 

In the run up to its 2013 COMMIT!Forum this week (2013.10.8-9), CR Magazine released the results of a piece of research it commissioned on the effect corporate responsibility and reputation have on recruiting. They had a pollster ask people if reputation would impact their thinking before they took a job. These days you wouldn’t think it would be a big deal. Surprise! 69% said they would pass up a job offer from a smarmy company. This was true of those who have a job and those who are unemployed.

When asked what it would take to get them to take a job with a less than top rate company, the answer was a huge raise, at least 50%, more and in some cases they would not move unless their pay was doubled. On the other hand, 84% would move to a more reputable company if offered as little as 1% to 10% more pay. It seems pretty clear that a quality workforce is easier to hire and less costly for reputable companies. And your best people are at risk if your reputation is shaky.

More than their workforce is at risk for financial organizations with a less than stellar reputation, according to the 2013 Makovsky Wall Street Reputation Study. Communications firm Makovsky commissioned this study to measure the impact of reputation on financial companys’ revenues. We know this segment enjoyed a robust recovery thanks to the bailouts and zero interest FED loans. Their smarmy reputation is costing them revenue, however.

The researchers contacted communications professionals in the sector and asked a range of questions about revenues and what their companies are doing to deal with customers’ negative views. On average, revenues are down 9%, a hefty price to pay. Lost revenues total hundreds of millions. Six in ten companies believe it will take five more years to catch up to where their reputations were before the crash. Only one in four say their firm has already reached that level; obviously that may include wishful thinkers.

Study after study show that firms working to do the right thing see a positive impact on their bottom line. The CR Magazine study shows that most people are focused on working for companies with a reputation for doing the right thing. The Makovsky Reputation Study shows that even Wall Street firms can profit by doing the right thing. Makes you wonder why people like Jamie Dimon at Chase and Lloyd Blankfein at Goldman Sachs keep pushing a culture of profits before any thought about doing the right thing.

Too many business leaders confuse compliance with ethics. Blankfein is a lawyer, trained to see the edge of the law as defining right and wrong; that’s compliance, not ethics. Doing the right thing has nothing to do with compliance. Compliance is what you can get away with, not the right thing. Reputation is about the right thing. Research shows if you strive to do the right thing, profit takes care of itself.

Published CommPRO.biz 2013.10.03

Wall Street Ethics

Mid-September (2013.09.15) marked five years since Lehman Brothers, one of the largest investment banks ever, filed the largest bankruptcy ever, sending sky rockets up all over the world and marking the beginning of what we’ve come to call the “Great Recession.” Lehman’s implosion triggered a serious of herculean bailouts of the rest of our banking sector by the American taxpayers.

Hank Paulson, who became Treasury Secretary after a career at Goldman Sachs, saw a danger of another depression if the banking sector collapsed. He hurriedly threw together the bailouts. However, he failed to impose the controls needed to keep the banks from abusing these funds, leaving them free to award themselves over the top bonuses. The Federal Reserve kicked in billions more, throwing open the doors to the risky gambling (see London Whale) that caused the collapse.

Lehman wasn’t the only bank gone wild; all of the dozen or so monster banks were behaving badly. Lehman was just pushing the limits of the regulation-free climate the banking lobby created over the preceding two decades. Repo 105 was the accounting gimmick of choice at Lehman. The tricksters there would sell off billions of their really bad stuff before each quarterly reporting period, making their books look as though they were sound when in fact they were anything but. Emails, written just before the bankruptcy, show that senior management pushed their subordinates to cover their tracks.

On May 18, 2008, almost exactly two months before the bankruptcy filing, Senior Vice President Matthew Lee had a letter hand delivered to four of Lehman’s top executives with a copy to their house counsel. In it he detailed these practices and questioned both their legal and ethical grounds. Management responded by firing him. Later, Lee identified Repo 105 as one source of the collapse for the federal investigators. Matthew Lee is still out of a job today; nobody on Wall Street has hired this honest man.

Not so most of the schemers who played fast and loose with the financial facts at Lehman. According to a Huffington Post tally, three quarters of the Lehman folks -47 of 63 involved in the Repo 105 scam- are employed in the financial world and doing just fine thank you. In fact, while most Americans are struggling to recover from the crash and millions are unemployed, the Wall Street banksters are fine.

And why shouldn’t they be –aside from ethics and stuff like that– the banks know if they overplay their hand again, Repo 105 or whatever, a taxpayer bailout is just around the corner. So they gamble with your savings, secure in the knowledge that the FDIC will cover their losses and that we’ll loan them whatever they need to get back on their feet. Just don’t ask them to support the small businesses that create jobs or anything like that. Leave that to the suckers who run the regional and community banks.