Search results

The learning outcomes of this paper is as follows: to understand and analyze the turnaround model of Pearce and Robbins (1993); to familiarize with parameters and actions in the Prompt Corrective Action (PCA) framework of Reserve Bank of India (RBI); to comprehend the probable situation warranting turnaround; to identify the key ratios which signal the financial health of a bank; and to understand the applicability of the turnaround model in bank’s revival.

The case explores various challenges faced by Mr Prashant Kumar during the turnaround process of Yes bank. The youngest bank started its operation in 2004, and in the first six years of operations, Yes bank registered a compound annual growth rate of 100% on the balance sheet, becoming the fourth-largest private sector bank in the country. However, the irony is that this shine and glitter was a short-lived phenomenon and after the regulatory inspection of 2016, Yes bank collapsed like a house of cards. This case has incorporated the three major phases of Yes bank i.e. the rise, the fall and the revival. The turnaround process led by Mr Kumar was explained using the turnaround model given by Pearce and Robbins (1993) and the PCA framework of the RBI. The conditions which warranted the need for the turnaround in Yes bank and the factors responsible for the same are discussed. The multiple challenges faced by Mr Kumar and the strategic responses adopted by him were incorporated in great detail. What were the outcomes of those strategic choices? Should he continue with similar approaches? Was he successful in stabilizing the bank which was broken from the core? What next if stability is achieved? How Mr Kumar should lift Yes bank to the recovery zone? And most importantly, will Mr Kumar be able to change the poor public image of Yes bank? The reflections of all the above questions are narrated with the actions of Mr Kumar.

The case is intended to be taught in the class of strategic management for postgraduate-, master- or executive-level participants of business administration. As the case is focused on a banking organization, it also can be taught in banking class.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and Finance.

The purpose of this paper is to review the literature from the organizational sciences to develop a grounded narrative of turnaround leadership.

The paper is a review of literature, which employs a ten‐step process to explore and make sense of the turnaround literature from the organizational sciences. The paper relies on strategies appropriate for document analysis, and borrows analytic strategies (e.g. memoing, coding) employed with interview data.

The paper finds three defining themes that flow from the review of empirical and theoretical work on organizational recovery in firms, non‐educational public agencies, and not‐for‐profit organizations: leadership as the critical variable in the turnaround equation; change of leadership as a generally essential element in organizational recovery; and type of leadership, but not style, as important in organizational reintegration work.

The paper posits that the literature on turning around failing organizations in sectors outside of education provides blueprints for recovery activity in failing schools. The implications for turnaround leadership are particularly strong.

This paper is the first systematic effort to mine research in the corporate, not‐for‐profit, and public sectors to develop insights for leadership in failing schools.

CEO turnover and chronic corporate underperformance are examined through the lens of Transgenerational Response.

The criteria for investigating Transgenerational Response in corporations consisted of identifying a Critical Corporate Incident, the number of corporate generations and the resultant corporate financial performance.

The evidence presented in the case studies illustrates how a Critical Corporate Incident has produced the consequential effect of chronic financial performance in the years following the incident.

These case studies have not presented the “actual” adaptive responses, inherited attitudes and behaviours that have subsequently embedded themselves in a new corporate culture, post the Critical Corporate Incident, to the detriment of the long-term health and performance of each firm.

Examining CEO turnover and chronic corporate underperformance through the lens of Transgenerational Response means that business leaders can identify how a historic event has affected the performance of their firm in subsequent generations. With this knowledge in hand, they will be able to examine the inherited attitudes and behaviours, organizational policies, strategy and adaptive cultural routines that have combined to consolidate the firms chronic under performance.

This is a highly original, evidence based, idea that has the potential to reshape our current understanding of CEO turnover and underperforming firms. It will help business leaders identify how a historic event has affected the performance of a firm in subsequent generations.

Companies facing disaster and needing turnaround have included the biggest and best names. This article looks at the four major criteria an organisation must satisfy to achieve successful turnarounds.

Successful corporate turnarounds occur, thus avoiding liquidation, but historical examples are few. In late nineteenth century France Henri Fayol became managing director (CEO) of a vertically integrated iron and steel firm and made various decisions that retrieved the firm from the brink of liquidation. In examining his career, the competitive nature of the industry, and his decisions, it is suggested that he employed a deliberate and comprehensive corporate strategy to guide the firm toward its objectives. While he developed his theory of management from these experiences and claimed that its application was the primary cause of the turnaround, this paper suggests that there were several other factors at work.

Organisational decline has far-reaching, negative emotional and financial consequences for staff and customers, generating academic and practitioner interest in turnaround change processes. Despite numerous studies to identify the stages during turnarounds, the findings have been inconclusive. The purpose of this paper is to address the gap by defining these stages, or episodes. The characteristics of leaders affect the outcome of organisational change towards turnarounds. This paper focusses, therefore, on the leadership requirements during specific episodes, from the initial crisis to the full recovery phases.

A total of 11 semi-structured interviews were conducted with executives from the public sector in South Africa who went through or were going through turnaround change processes and 3 with experts consulting to these organisations.

Contrary to current literature in organisational change, this study found that, in these turnaround situations, leadership in the form of either an individual CEO or director general was preferable to shared leadership or leadership distributed throughout the organisation. This study found four critical episodes that occurred during all the public service turnarounds explored, and established that key leadership requirements differ across these episodes. The study shows how these requirements relate to the current literature on transactional, transformational and authentic leadership.

The findings on the leadership requirements ultimately inform the selection and development of leaders tasked with high-risk turnaround change processes.

Four episodes with corresponding leadership requirements were established in the particular context of public sector turnaround change processes.

Imagine a world without turnarounds – just well‐managed companies. Strategic exploration is the means to achieving strategic resilience. But how can senior managers build organizations where strategic exploration is the rule rather than the exception? First, by exhibiting the courage to explore, and second, by confronting the uncomfortable truths that such exploration might uncover. The article presents a simple but powerful framework, conceived by the Woodside Institute, for strategic exploration. The framework identifies which discoveries merit most attention (“strategic breakthroughs”), which deserve further consideration (“self‐discoveries” and “windows of opportunity”), and which will lead to the back of beyond (“duds”). Examples are drawn from IBM, AT&T, Intel, Sony, Cisco, Hewlett‐Packard, Nokia, Sun Microsystems, and the Coca‐Cola Company.

Many of the recent cases of corporate collapse might have been avoided had company leaders been in a position to interpret the early signs of collapse. Existing financial models provide some indication of how to avoid failure, but these need to be supplemented by a holistic, strategic management approach. Recent experience in Australia underscores the importance of this integrated approach, and suggests that specific reforms to directorship and auditing practices might militate against failure.

Assuming that “change” is an ongoing, ordinary business condition, this paper seeks to introduce turnaround management as an ongoing management task to secure competitive advantage.

The paper briefly reviews the impact of market turmoil on successful corporate management with particular reference to the Romanian market. It includes key learning based on structured, qualitative interviews of executives (corporate CEOs and leading corporate banking managers). Building on it, the paper comments pitfalls out of several emprical case studies at Eastern European companies, lost in a deemed “ever‐lasting growth” trap while losing grip over their true roots of competitive advantage. It assumes that turnaround management and sustainability are not mutually exclusive corporate paradigms during times of incisive economic recession.

Ongoing turnaround management can be a successful key to achieve sustainable corporate performance improvement.

Turnaround refers to multiple stakeholders, market dynamics and corporate culture; hence it differs in different contexts. This might result in a slight limitation to generalizing the findings to other organization types. Replicating analogue research in different market contexts and corporate cultures would be a beneficial follow‐up research pattern.

Practical implications are ongoing turnaround management targets to anticipate corporate crisis. It includes multilateral perspectives (corporate executives' view, organizational support, external influencing forces, other stakeholder perspectives) and operates at different management levels (strategic scenarios, operative scenarios, decision and implementation management, monitoring and adapting). Mere cost reduction based management practices prove insufficient to maintain competitive advantage, even in times of incisive market turmoil.

The paper provides insights on different dimensions of turnaround management and the way it sustainably enhances corporate performance. It distinguishes its view from the frequently reactive and mainly cost‐cutting‐based character of turnaround management in management literature.