Strategy Evaluation Process and Social Responsibility

Anonymous
timer Asked: Feb 24th, 2019
account_balance_wallet $45

Question Description

QUESTION 1

Instructions

According to your textbook, the strategy-evaluation process consists of three basic activities:

  1. Examine the underlying bases of a firm's strategy.
  2. Compare expected results with actual results.
  3. Take corrective actions to ensure that performance conforms to plan.

Answer the following questions:

  • Which of the three strategy-evaluation activities do you think is most critical to be performed well? Why? (must be specific as which one of the three)

Read and reply to at least one (1) post from any classmate. A simple statement such as, “good” or “I agree” does not constitute a substantial comment.

Your post will be graded as follows:

  • Clear and concise answers to all questions - 80%
  • Substantial comment to one classmate - 10%
  • Substantial comment to one more classmates - 10%

QUESTION 2

The purpose of this assignment is to allow you the chance to evaluate the role of social responsibility in society. After you complete this assignment, you will analyze a written article, be able to ascertain your view on social responsibility, and evaluation the pros and cons of social responsibility.

Instructions

  1. Read the article The-Fastest-Growing-Cause-for-Shareholders-is-Sustainability
  2. In your opinion, does it pay to be socially responsible?
  3. What are some of the advantages and disadvantages for a company that pursues a sustainability strategy?
  4. How could a manager’s attitude toward social responsibility affect the company’s strategy?
  5. What is your position on social responsibility, are you for it or against it, why?

You should submit:

  • A word document with your responses
  • Make reference to material covered (textbook, websites, etc.)
  • Each response should be between 1 to 2 paragraphs.
  • Format your paper according to APA guidelines, and include any sources you cite in a reference page.

Remember.........

  • All questions should be answered fully, and concisely.
  • Sentences should be well-structured, complete, clear, and concise.
  • Rules of grammar, usage, and punctuation are followed, and spelling is correct.

The Fastest-Growing Cause for Shareholders is Sustainability By George Serafeim July 12, 2016 Ask someone to name the demands that activist hedge funds make of companies, and they’ll likely list corporate governance issues such as board changes and executive compensation, or perhaps some form of restructuring. In fact, the largest number of shareholder resolutions filed by investors — the method through which activists work — now concern social and environmental issues. This is a recent phenomenon, according to my research: The number of these resolutions has increased dramatically over the past five years. Political spending, climate change, diversity, and human rights are now some of the most frequent resolutions that investors file. This data suggests the need to rethink how we view investor activism. Done well, it can improve a company’s sustainability in addition to performance. Activism takes many different forms, but usually it begins with investors holding private conversations with company management on the need to change a process, business model, or management practice. When management fails to adequately respond to investor queries or concerns, investors typically file shareholder resolutions that ask all of the company’s shareholders to vote on a specific topic. If the company agrees to comply with the request or to take alternative measures that address the investors’ concerns before the resolution is subject to a vote at the annual general meeting, the investors withdraw the resolution. Otherwise, shareholders vote on the resolution. Evidence on the financial value of investor activism is sparse, since collecting data on the private engagement efforts of different investors is difficult. To gain further insights into the sustainability and financial outcomes associated with shareholder advocacy efforts, Jody Grewal, Aaron Yoon, and I analyzed 2,665 shareholder proposals submitted between 1997 and 2012 in a new paper. As we saw in a previous paper and discussed in a previous HBR article, not all environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues are equally financially important across industries. For instance, managing environmental impact is a very important element of business strategy for firms in the fossil fuel or transportation industries, but less so for financial institutio ns or health care companies. In contrast, fair marketing and advertising of products is very important for companies in these sectors. Using the data infrastructure that was created only recently by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), my coauthors and I were able to classify these proposals as addressing either financially material or immaterial topics. SASB develops industry-by- industry accounting standards that identify the material ESG issues that could have financial implications. SASB uses the U.S. Supreme Court’s definition of material information as information presenting “a substantial likelihood that the disclosure of the omitted fact would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having significantly altered the ‘total mix’ of information made available.” We found that 58% of the shareholder proposals in our sample were filed on immaterial issues. The high percentage of proposals on immaterial issues is further evidence that investors aren’t motivated only by short-term profit. Rather, it reflects the pro-social objectives of a large number of sponsors of such proposals. Overall, we found that when investors file a shareholder proposal on an ESG issue, performance of the company on that ESG issue improves whether the issue is material or immaterial. Thus, even though such proposals rarely receive the majority support necessary in the event of a vote, they still have had an effect on corporate management, with managers investing resources and improving performance on issues of diversity, energy efficiency, water consumption, and product safety. We also found that targeted firms experienced changes in market valuation subsequent to filing shareholder proposals. However, proposals had a substantially different effect depending on whether they related to immaterial or material issues. Proposals on immaterial issues were associated with subsequent declines in market valuation. In contrast, proposals on material issues were associated with subsequent increases in market valuation, even several years after the proposal. This suggests that pressure on companies to address ESG issues that are not financially material for the firm but are relevant to other stakeholders could lead to decreases in financial value, while the opposite is true for proposals on material issues. Some policy experts have argued that environmental and social issues divert the attention of senior management and directors away from more-important work, thereby destroying value. We show that this position is supported in cases of financially immaterial ESG proposals. However, our results suggest that one should be careful about overgeneralizing, since a significant number of ESG proposals are financially material and associated with subsequent increases in market valuation. Why would managers choose to respond to investors’ requests on immaterial issues if doing so decreases financial value? After all, activists usually don’t have the necessary votes to compel management to respond. We found evidence for three different explanations. First, responding to immaterial issues was more common when the incentives of managers and investors were misaligned. Perhaps management agrees to initiatives that destroy financial value because they themselves somehow benefit. Second, we found some evidence that management struggled to distinguish between material and immaterial requests. Perhaps management responds to immaterial investor requests because they mistakenly believe that doing so will increase the company’s value. Third, we found that management responded to immaterial issues to divert attention away from material ones. Perhaps a bank is more likely to reduce its use of fossil fuels (an immaterial issue) if doing so distracts investors or the public from problems with false advertising (a material issue). Much of the discussion around investor activism has concentrated on how such activism might increase the short-term orientation of corporate America, but it is important to realize that investor activism takes many different forms. A substantial amount of investor activism appears to be motivated by social or environmental aims. Investors can be a driver for social responsibility and, at least when focused on material issues, can improve both societal and financial outcomes at the same time. Access original version of the article at https://hbr.org/2016/07/the-fastest-growing-cause-forshareholders- is-sustainability

Tutor Answer

CASIMIR
School: University of Maryland

Here you go. In case of any further inputs, please let me know.All the best!I appreciate working with you!

Running head: STRATEGY EVALUATION PROCESS

Strategy Evaluation Process
Name
Course
Professor
Date

1

STRATEGY EVALUATION PROCESS

2

Strategy Evaluation Process
Strategy evaluation is vital since it provides information on whether the efficiency and
effectiveness of plans achieve results. Strategic evaluation is also crucial for the well-being of an
organization. Timely evaluation helps alert the managers to issues or potential problems just
before they become critical. There are three basic activities involved in the strategic evaluation.
These activities all help in the evaluation process. However, there is one that can significantly
help in the evaluation process. Taking too much time evaluating strategies can be expensive.
Strategy evaluation is vital in making sure that the set objectives get achieved.
Taking corrective actions is the activity that is most critical in strategy evaluation (Hill et
al., 2014). It is the final strategy evaluation activity that entails making changes that will
reposition a business competitively for the future. This activity looks at the long-term survival of
the firm since it focusses on the future. For instance, changes may get required include altering
the structure of an organization or selling a ...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Top quality work from this guy! I'll be back!

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags
Study Guides

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors