Search results

This study examines audit fee premiums from brand name, industry specialization, and industry leadership after the merger of two Big 6 audit firms, creating the Big 5 in 1998 in the Malaysian audit market. A sample of 679 companies listed at the main and second boards of Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange (KLSE) are investigated for audit fee premiums. Industry specialization is determined on the basis of 20 per cent share of audit market calculated by the number of audited companies in the industry. Audit fee premiums are calculated based on the Simunic (1980) model of audit fees. Results show: that Big 5 audit firms obtain 65.4 per cent audit market share for all KLSE listed companies; that Big 5 audit firms earn higher audit fees than non‐Big 5; and that industry specialization does not generate audit fee premiums. The study finds evidence for audit fee premiums derived from industry market leadership. Results also reflect the competitiveness among Big 5 audit firms in the audit market especially following the merger of Big 6 audit firms.

Modern academic links between leadership and strategy were forged in the early 1960s with the heightened application of strategy to business planning. These links were soon dissolved by the strategy consultants who came to dominate the field of business strategy in the mid-1960s. The consultants dismissed the role of leadership in strategic planning in favor of objective analyses of the external environment that eliminated any need for leadership skills, judgment, values, or intuition. Failures to implement strategy in the 1980s led to limited roles for leaders in implementing strategies they had no role in creating, but the gulf between leadership and strategy has steadily widened.

This paper traces the consequences of this widening gulf for teaching leadership and strategy in the classroom. It explores how an integrated approach to teaching leadership and strategy would better prepare today’s students for the challenges they will face as future business leaders.

The case study highlights two strategic angles – that of the business unit (business strategy, profitability, market leadership. organizational culture, operational turnaround, industry structure and competitive dynamics) and the owner (returns, repositioning strategy and funding plan). By the end of this case study, students would be able to understand the changing competitive forces of a dynamic industry; analyse the circumstances leading to a change in the control of a firm from the state to the private sector; understand the logic of acquiring a perennially loss-making firm operating in a volatile environment without a unique strategy; identify a firm’s strategic and operational choices for financial turnaround, return to profitability and regaining market leadership; and learn about the actual strategic realities and choices confronting a troubled business organization in a difficult industry.

When the Tata Group took over Air India on 27 January 2022 from the state that had ownership for 68 years, Air India was under a long spell of poor performance, bleeding losses and unmanageable levels of debt. Unsatisfactory customer service, management issues and competition were the key reasons. Therefore, a crucial question facing the group’s Chairman N. Chandrasekaran was what workable strategy he could use to reposition Air India and make it profitable again so as to recover the $7.5bn of estimated investment involved in the acquisition and turnaround.

This case study is intended for undergraduate and graduate executive education levels in business administration and management and allied subjects, particularly for courses in strategic management, marketing, financial management, turnaround and transformation, mergers and acquisitions and organizational change.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 11: Strategy.

The current Industry 4.0 era is considered not only as a process that dominates technological developments but also as a process that influences the leadership styles. Management 4.0 is essential for businesses to find and apply the appropriate technologies in the age of Industry 4.0. The leadership styles that business managers will adopt in order to be successful in this process and to survive in an intensely competitive environment can play an important role. At this point, a significant problem arises: identifying leadership styles that will bring success. In this context, the primary purpose of this chapter is to explain the modern leadership styles that business managers can adopt or follow in the age of Industry 4.0. In line with this purpose, the chapter first describes the historical development of leadership, leadership theories and modern leadership styles, such as transactional, transformational, technological, strategic, visionary and agile leadership, and all these concepts are discussed based on the Industry 4.0 perspective.

In the 1990s, the Euro‐Nordic industry leaders in wireless communications enjoyed a period of explosive growth as the vision of the mobile Internet captured the market momentum. But the bursting of the Internet bubble, excessive 3G licence fees and the general industry downturn has dramatically affected Europe’s wireless future. This article examines the reasons for the success of Europe’s wireless communications in the 1990s, explains its vulnerabilities and draws lessons for the future.

Many experts attribute Japan's spectacular economic success to superior management techniques. But the real key to Japan's performance may be outstanding marketing skills.

The purpose of this paper is to present how the past, Fayol's principles of management, is applied to the present, Porter's competitive strategies – cost leadership and differentiation – and in turn how the understanding of this connection between the past and present directs the future development of firms.

This study explores which of Fayol's principles can be matched to Porter's cost‐leadership or differentiation strategy in terms of strategy implementation.

The paper finds that the principles of division of work, authority and responsibility, unity of command, unity of direction and scalar chain are useful in the implementation of a cost leadership strategy but other, more modern alternative principles apply for differentiation strategy. Likewise, the three principles of stability of tenure of personnel, initiative and esprit de corps apply to the implementation of differentiation strategy, but not to cost leadership, where, again, alternative principles apply. The remaining six principles of discipline, subordination of individual interests to the general interest, remuneration, centralization, order and equity are applicable to implementation of both.

By melding the past with the future, it shows that the flexible use of Fayol's principles in an integrated manner lays the foundation for the successful implementation of competitive strategies and the future development of firms.

This study documents the flexible use of Fayol's principles, an issue that has received modest attention in the literature. It also adds to the literature on the potential implication of Fayol's work for successfully implementing competitive strategies.

Companies in all industries are searching for new sources of competitive advantage since the competition in their marketplace is becoming increasingly intensive. The resource-based view of the firm explains the sources of sustainable competitive advantages. From a resource-based view perspective, relational based assets (i.e., the assets resulting from firm contacts in the marketplace) enable competitive advantage. The relational based assets examined in this work are brand image and corporate reputation, as components of brand equity, and customer value. This paper explores how they create value. Despite the relatively large amount of literature describing the benefits of firms in having strong brand equity and delivering customer value, no research validated the linkage of brand equity components, brand image, and corporate reputation, simultaneously in the customer value–customer loyalty chain. This work presents a model of testing these relationships in consumer goods, in a business-to-business context. The results demonstrate the differential roles of brand image and corporate reputation on perceived quality, customer value, and customer loyalty. Brand image influences the perception of quality of the products and the additional services, whereas corporate reputation actions beyond brand image, estimating the customer value and customer loyalty. The effects of corporate reputation are also validated on different samples. The results demonstrate the importance of managing brand equity facets, brand image, and corporate reputation since their differential impacts on perceived quality, customer value, and customer loyalty. The results also demonstrate that companies should not limit to invest only in brand image. Maintaining and enhancing corporate reputation can have a stronger impact on customer value and customer loyalty, and can create differential competitive advantage.

The nature, value, and neglect of integrity capacity by managers and the adverse impacts that Enron executive practices have had on a range of stakeholders are delineated. An explanation is given on how moral competence in management practice is addressed by each dimension of the management integrity capacity construct (process, judgment, development, and system) and how Enron executive practices eroded each dimension. Specifically addressed is how behavioral and moral complexity can be utilized to balance the competing values of management and ethics theories to reduce the likelihood of future Enron‐like managerial malpractice. Finally, three positive action steps are recommended to improve managerial integrity capacity and remedies are proposed for victimized Enron stakeholders.

A postal survey to manufacturing managers in six different industry sectors was conducted to ascertain their views on core competencies. Questions deemed important by the literature centred on establishing the level of understanding the manufacturing managers had on core competence and ascertaining if they operated in an environment where core competence could be built and enhanced. Their views were contrasted with those expressed in the current literature and it was concluded that manufacturing managers need to increase their knowledge and understanding of core competencies. To be more competitive they need to operate more in an outward/strategy driven way and develop a strategic architecture to enable their organisation to develop the necessary core competencies. Of the six manufacturing industries surveyed the machinery producers emerged as the strongest advocators for core competence development with the food industry having the least orientation towards their development. To assist in core competence management an Enabling core competence lens model was presented together with a framework for core competence maintenance.