Search results

In the wake of the market timing, late trading, and conflict‐of‐interest‐related scandals in the investment company industry, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted rules and rule amendments designed to enhance the governance practices of registered investment companies, or “funds.” In an effort to protect shareholders and reduce conflicts of interest between fund boards and fund investment advisers, the SEC has adopted rules that, among other things, increase the required disclosure regarding approval of investment advisory contracts and prescribe the composition of and processes for fund boards. Under these new rules, funds that rely on certain SEC exemptive rules will be required to comply with new governance standards such as having an independent board chairmen and a 75% independent director majority and conducting annual board self‐evaluations. This article addresses the responsibilities fund boards will face in the wake of these new rules.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

With this interview of W.R. Goodwin, President and Chief Executive Officer of Johns‐Manville, Planning Review initiates a series of articles designed to elicit the opinion of top management on the effectiveness of planning and the proper direction for the state of the art. In simple terms the question is, “How are planning and the planning process viewed from the CEO's office?” Dr. Goodwin was chosen to be the first CEO interviewed because he is one of those rare chief executives who was promoted to top management after a stint as chief planner. Obviously, he is well acquainted with the methodology of planning, the various ways it can be utilized by a corporation, and its potentials. Other executives interviewed in the series will be selected on the basis of their professional experience with planning before their promotions. In this first interview, the interviewers — Robert J. Allio, President of NASCP, and Robert Randall, contributing editor to Planning Review — attempted to make the session informal and more a conversation than an interrogation. For this reason, specific and detailed questions about the Johns‐Manville planning cycle and organizational structure were omitted. Instead, the time spent with Dr. Goodwin gave Planning Review an invaluable chance to learn about his attitude toward planning. Planning Review would like to take this occasion to thank Dr. Goodwin for being so generous with his time. To condense the hour and a half of insight he so cheerfully gave the interviews, the editors have blue‐penciled extensively. In addition, much of the responsibility for the interview's organization rests with the editors. Interestingly, although the interviewers provided Dr. Goodwin with a list of questions in advance, these never became a central part of the discussion. Chief executives tend to answer questions they raise themselves.

A collection of essays by a social economist seeking to balance economics as a science of means with the values deemed necessary to man′s finding the good life and society enduring as a civilized instrumentality. Looks for authority to great men of the past and to today′s moral philosopher: man is an ethical animal. The 13 essays are: 1. Evolutionary Economics: The End of It All? which challenges the view that Darwinism destroyed belief in a universe of purpose and design; 2. Schmoller′s Political Economy: Its Psychic, Moral and Legal Foundations, which centres on the belief that time‐honoured ethical values prevail in an economy formed by ties of common sentiment, ideas, customs and laws; 3. Adam Smith by Gustav von Schmoller – Schmoller rejects Smith′s natural law and sees him as simply spreading the message of Calvinism; 4. Pierre‐Joseph Proudhon, Socialist – Karl Marx, Communist: A Comparison; 5. Marxism and the Instauration of Man, which raises the question for Marx: is the flowering of the new man in Communist society the ultimate end to the dialectical movement of history?; 6. Ethical Progress and Economic Growth in Western Civilization; 7. Ethical Principles in American Society: An Appraisal; 8. The Ugent Need for a Consensus on Moral Values, which focuses on the real dangers inherent in there being no consensus on moral values; 9. Human Resources and the Good Society – man is not to be treated as an economic resource; man′s moral and material wellbeing is the goal; 10. The Social Economist on the Modern Dilemma: Ethical Dwarfs and Nuclear Giants, which argues that it is imperative to distinguish good from evil and to act accordingly: existentialism, situation ethics and evolutionary ethics savour of nihilism; 11. Ethical Principles: The Economist′s Quandary, which is the difficulty of balancing the claims of disinterested science and of the urge to better the human condition; 12. The Role of Government in the Advancement of Cultural Values, which discusses censorship and the funding of art against the background of the US Helms Amendment; 13. Man at the Crossroads draws earlier themes together; the author makes the case for rejecting determinism and the “operant conditioning” of the Skinner school in favour of the moral progress of autonomous man through adherence to traditional ethical values.

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Tenn. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.

In writing this case, the research team used secondary resources such as academic journals, trade magazines and websites to inform and verify the information.

January 7, 2021, was not a good day for Goya Foods CEO Robert Bob Unanue, who has been at the helm of Goya since 2004. On that day, the nine-member board of directors of Goya censured Unanue for publicly questioning the legitimacy of the 2021 United States Presidential election. A day before, on January 6, a mob “trapped lawmakers and vandalized the home of Congress in the worst desecration of the complex since British forces burned it in 1814” (Hockstein, 2021).

Unanue was considered a follower of former president Trump and has expressed that “the country was […] blessed to have a leader like President Trump, who is a builder” (Hawkins, 2020). In January 2021, Unanue appeared on Fox News and said a “ war was coming,” as Joe Biden’s election was “unverified.” These, among other words, motivated the censured by the board of Goya Foods, Inc. (Santana and Isidore, 2021).

Students are asked the following questions for discussion: Did the board of directors of Goya Foods carry its role too far by openly censuring Unanue? Did Unanue go too far by openly expressing subjective opinions and thus influencing how people view the election results? Should he have remained as CEO of Goya Foods after his words on Joe Biden’s election?

One of the authors has taught the case in the Strategic Management course for MBA students. In addition, graduate students of corporate governance, business ethics, social responsibility and leadership, among other classes, will be the target segments for the case.

1. Recognize the effects on brand image and sales when CEOs participate in political arenas and publicly discuss social issues.

2. Understand the dynamics behind ethnic family businesses, such as their governance and conflict resolution approach.

3. Assess the value of the corporate board’s management of corporations.

CCS11: Strategy

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.