Branscombe Co has been supplying and fitting premium bathrooms and kitchens in hotel chain

Branscombe Co has been supplying and fitting premium bathrooms and kitchens in hotel chains throughout Effland for the past 20 years. The company started as a small family concern, but because of the rapid growth it experienced and an associated need for additional capital, it was recently listed on the national stock exchange by an initial public offering.

To remain fully compliant with the Effland corporate governance code, the board established audit, remuneration and nomination committees which were solely populated by independent non-executive directors. However, it did not consider it necessary to create a separate risk committee because the board believed that the remit of the audit committee included all aspects of risk management policy. This explanation was formally submitted to the shareholders at its first general meeting, who agreed with the board’s proposal.

As part of its expansion strategy, the board of Branscombe Co decided it needed to enter overseas markets, and in particular the developing country of Geeland. The reason that Geeland was selected as a suitable market was because it had experienced rapid economic growth and domestic prosperity following the discovery of rich, offshore mineral deposits. Unfortunately, this small island nation has never enjoyed stable democratic government and is notorious for corrupt business practices, with customs officials regularly demanding bribes from both importers and exporters. As a result, Geeland has a poor international credit rating. In order to attract both domestic and foreign inward investment, the government of Geeland operates with very low levels of indirect tax, which has stimulated the island’s tourist industry and led in turn to a significant increase in hotel building.

Following a successful tendering exercise, Branscombe Co was awarded the contract to supply all of the bathroom equipment for a 200-room hotel, currently under construction in a remote area of the island. The total value of the supply contract amounted to Geeland $1,800,000, and it was to be paid in three equal instalments as the bathrooms were delivered to the hotel. The contract assigns responsibility for shipping the goods the 3,000 km from Effland to the island solely with Branscombe Co, and no payment will be made until an agreed volume of goods clears Geeland customs. A further problem is that the Geeland dollar is quite volatile, but recently it has been strengthening against the Effland dollar. As all contract payments are to be made in Geeland currency, Branscombe Co is exposed to foreign exchange risks.

The many contract-related issues amount to significant risks to Branscombe Co requiring effective management if the supply contract is to be a success and contribute to the company’s ambitious growth targets.

Required:

(a) Explain the function and roles of a risk committee within an effective corporate governance framework, and discuss the advantages which a risk committee could add to the governance of Branscombe Co. (10 marks)

(b) Explain the term risk appetite, and assess how the risk appetite of Branscombe Co has influenced both its corporate strategy and the risks it has chosen to bear. (7 marks)

(c) Explain how Branscombe Co could effectively control the strategic and operational risks which arise from the Geeland supply contract. (8 marks)

请帮忙给出正确答案和分析,谢谢!

  • 悬赏:0 答案豆
  • 提问人:00****84
  • 发布时间:2018-02-26
您可能感兴趣的试题
When MRA was shortlisted for a valuable contract for the development of a coastal defence system for another country, it was contingent on the payment of a facilitation fee to an official in the defence ministry. Clearly this was an unusual request but it was also made very clear that MRA would not be awarded the contract, worth $2 billion over 10 years, unless the relatively modest sum of $1 million was paid immediately.Recently, business activity in the defence sector had been very slow, and MRA was about to announce around 500 staff redundancies. Therefore news that this contract was about to be awarded came as a great relief to the board of MRA, as the jobs would now be secured. However, only the chief executive officer (CEO) and operations director knew about the facilitation fee, so an emergency meeting of the board was convened with only one item on the agenda.Due to the very sensitive nature of the matter at hand, it was decided not to make a formal record of the discussions at the board meeting. This was more likely to result in a frank exchange of views and encourage all directors to express their opinions openly.The CEO, Charlie Desborough, explained the dilemma to the board, making it very clear that without this contract there would be no way to protect jobs. The finance director, Jake Neilson, said that he was personally very uncomfortable with the idea of paying a facilitation fee, which was in effect a ‘bribe’. As a professional accountant he was bound by a code of ethics which strictly prohibited making such payments, therefore he could not sanction the payment under any circumstances.The HR director, Sarah Shue, took a far more pragmatic stance. She acknowledged that any form. of corruption was utterly deplorable; however, it was a fact of life in many countries. She asserted that if the board of MRA decided not to make the payment and forego the contract, then it could be assured that a competitor would not adopt such a high-minded position. The net effect was that by avoiding a relatively small payment, the firm would be doing a disservice to both its employees and its shareholders, who would undoubtedly suffer a reduction in their shareholder value. She maintained that sometimes it is necessary to take difficult decisions in business that are for the greater good, and so suggested that the payment to the official should be made.Required:(a) (i) Compare relativism and absolutism and explain the significance of individual or personal differences in guiding ethical behaviour under each approach in a given scenario such as the situation at MRA. (5 marks)(ii) Explain the ethical theories of deontology and teleology or consequentialism, and analyse which of the approaches have been adopted by Sarah Shue and Jake Neilson. (6 marks)The involvement of directors in bribery and corruption can seriously undermine the relationships of trust upon which corporate governance is based.Required:(b) (i) Assess how bribery and corruption could undermine confidence and trust in MRA, with reference to the principles of corporate governance. (8 marks)(ii) Describe best practice measures which could be employed by MRA to combat bribery and corruption. (6 marks)

继续查找其他问题的答案?

请先输入下方的验证码查看最佳答案

图形验证:看不清?点击更换 换一换
免验证查看
  • 49.8

    ¥75 每天只需0.6元
    3个月 推荐
  • 39.8

    ¥60
    1个月
  • 99.8

    ¥150
    1年

选择支付方式

  • 微信付款
  • 支付宝付款
郑重提醒:支付后,系统自动为您完成注册

请使用微信扫码支付(元)

订单号:
支付后,系统自动为您完成注册
遇到问题请联系在线客服

恭 喜 您 获 得
扫 码 免 费 领 取
会 员 或 搜 题 次 数
本弹窗关闭将不再弹出
请不要关闭本页面,支付完成后请点击【支付完成】按钮
遇到问题请联系在线客服
常用手机号:
用于找回密码
图片验证码:
看不清?点击更换
短信验证码:
新密码:
 
绑定后可用手机号登录
扫码看答案