Harley Davidson has been identified by some in the press as having weak corporate governance. This could be true for a myriad of reasons including directors not preforming their fiduciary obligations by putting their personal goals ahead of the goals of the true owners; the stockholders. Weak corporate governance can be very hard to identify in many instances. The decisions a board makes can take years to come to fruition, so identifying poor governance could be extremely delayed. Stock price or company health is also not a good indicator in all cases such as in the case of Tenet Healthcare. The CEO, Jeffrey Barbakow, delivered six years of record growth when the company imploded in 2002. (https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2003/0512/106.html). Tenet was investigated for Medicare fraud and was ousted from the board and the stockholders in turn suffered great losses. Guarding against having a board that engages in poor governance can be mitigated by ensuring that most of the members are independent directors. This alleviates most of the possibility of conflict of interest. In examining Harley Davidson to better understand their governing process, we will try to answer some basic questioned gleaned from their article of incorporation, bylaws, and stockholder’s agreements located on their corporate website. The first question, and one of the most important as it relates to independence is, “Are the CEO and Board Chairman the same person?” In this case, Harley Davidson’s board does
142). The Hershey Company`s board can be described as an Anglo-Saxon model, which is typically for American companies. It is a one-tier board, where the employees of the company has no direct affiliation or representatives among the directors. This may be a source of Type 3 agency problems (stakeholder vs. shareholders) (Thomsen and Conyon, 2012, p. 20). The board is led by the companies` CEO, Mr. John Bilbrey while other directors are in charge of different committees. Pearce and Zahra (1991) examine the relative power of the CEO and the board. Their matrix suggest that The Hershey Company board is a Participative board as both the CEO and the board exercise a lot of power. John Bilbrey has been involved with The Hershey Company in several positions since 2003 several years and is likely to enjoy the trust and favor of the board of directors through his seniority and as the company stock has been steadily increasing throughout his period at the wheel (Thomsen and Conyon, 2012, p. 172). Due to the fact that he also is on the board himself, he also get to know the board better and get better handling of them.
Organizational structure is a system used to define a hierarchy within an organization which improves operational efficiency by providing clarity to employees at all levels of a company. A systematically outlined structure can also provide direction for internal promotions, allowing companies to create employee advancement routes for entry-level workers. In other words, it identifies each job, its function and where it reports to within the organization. Harley-Davidson’s organizational structure, for example, assists centralized control of the business through the company’s arrangement of its components in terms of their interactions and functions. As one of the world’s oldest motorcycle manufacturers in the world, Harley-Davidson Inc. maintains this organizational structure and centers its current focus on a limited number of markets. While the business continues to grow by international expansion, Harley-Davidson’s corporate structure focuses mainly on the fact that most of the company’s revenues are generated in the United States. Thus, Harley-Davidson has a functional organizational structure that is based on the company’s current focus on the motorcycle markets in developed countries, especially the United States, in addition to ensuring centralized control of business activities. The basic characteristics of Harley-Davidson’s organizational structure include Function based groups, Centralization, and Global hierarchy.
Corporate governance is a set of actions used to handle the relationship between stakeholders by determining and controlling the strategic direction and performance of the organization. Corporate governance major concern is making sure that the strategic decisions are effective and that it paves the way towards strategic competitiveness. (Hitt, Ireland, Hoskisson, 2017, p. 310). In today’s corporation, the primary objective of corporate governance is to align top-level manager’s and stakeholders interest. That is why corporate governance is involved when there is a conflict of interest between with the owners, managers, and members of the board of directors (Hitt, Ireland, Hoskisson, 2017, p. 310-311).
Corporate governance in itself has no single definition but common principles which it should follow. For example in 1994 the most agreed term for corporate governance was “the process of supervision and control intended to ensure that the company’s management acts in accordance with the interest of shareholders” (Parkinson, 1994)1. Corporate governance code is not a direct set of rules but a self-regulated framework which businesses choose to follow. This code has continued to change in the past 20 years in accordance with what is happening in the business world. For example the Enron scandal caused reform in corporate governance with the Higgs Report which corrected the issues which were necessary. Although it does not quickly fix problems, it gives a better framework to
As Canadian Coalition for Good Corporate Governance indicates that the good governance of a corporation is essential to creating long-term sustainable value and reducing investment risk. In other words, the high quality performance of board directors plays a key role in the success of a corporation. We evaluate it based
Ghillyer (2014), explains that how organizations are operated and controlled as corporate governance. Pharmaceutical companies have been the focus of questionable conduct in regards to corporate governance for years. Unlawful promotions and marketing of drugs as well as failure to properly and accurately report safety date led to several off-label lawsuits (Ghillyer, 2014).
People often question whether corporate boards matter because their day-today impact is difficult to observe. But, when things go wrong, they can become the center of attention. Certainly this was true of the Enron, Worldcom, and Parmalat scandals. The directors of Enron and Worldcom, in particular, were held liable for the fraud that occurred: Enron directors had to pay $168 million to investor plaintiffs, of which $13 million was out of pocket (not covered by insurance); and Worldcom directors had to pay $36 million, of which $18 million was out of pocket. As a consequence of these scandals and ongoing concerns about corporate governance, boards have been at the center of the policy
The 2006 governance reform at Rim seems not work well. There was not only the non-compliance with regulations or accounting errors, but also drastic fall of company’s shares due to strategic and operational issues. The probe of the Ontario Securities Commission and Securities Stock Exchange Commission, along with the concern of institutional investors, especially Northwest and Ethical investment, forced RIM to look at its leadership and reform its board structure in 2011. This paper will assess RIM’s board structure in 2011 and present some recommendations to improve RIM’s governance and board structure.
The ASX Corporate Governance Council defines the ‘corporate governance’ as the framework of rules, relationships, systems and processes within and by which authority is exercised and controlled within corporations (Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendations, 2014). The term “failure” of a corporate can be described as “Insolvency” in Australia (Michaela Rankin, 2012). And the reasons for corporate failure can be grouped into six categories: 1. Poor strategic decisions. 2. Greed and the desire for power. 3. Overexpansion and ill-judged acquisitions. 4. Dominant CEOs. 5. Failure of internal controls 6. Ineffective boards(Michaela Rankin, 2012).
Harley-Davidson is well known for its unique motorcycles. Its subsidiary, Harley-Davidson Motor Company (HDMC), manufactures five families of motorcycles, namely, Touring, Dyna, Softail, Sportster and V-Rod. These models are distinguished by their frame, engine, suspension, and other characteristics. The company shipped 233,117 motorcycles in the fiscal year ended December 2011, comprising 39.5% Touring motorcycle units, 39.2% Custom motorcycle units, and 21.3% Sportster motorcycle units.
Good relationships, continuous improvement, employee and management involvement, team building or employee training and empowerment are not just words out of a management book for Harley-Davidson. Only by adopting those management techniques and building a solid base between the management and the Unions/employees made it possible for Harley-Davidson to improve its management processes. While management 's responsibility is to build
Celebrating their 100th anniversary next year, Harley-Davidson is a true American success story. From their modest beginnings in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to one of the most recognized company names worldwide, they have been passionate about motorcycles. Harley offers an experience like none other with the one of a kind look, feel, and sound only available on a Harley. Besides their main business of building and selling motorcycles, they have began to offer financing and insurance through Harley-Davidson Financial Services, and they also offer a full line of accessories and apparel to make the Harley experience complete.
Regardless of their emergence in the market in the year, in 1903, Harley-Davidson together with the motorcycle industry did not have an easy start until the end of the Second World War. Many people used motorcycles during the period the war took place. Harley-Davidson was instrumental in supplying around 90,000 motorcycles to the American military during this period. Many veterans opted to buy motorcycles after returning home. This is because they enjoyed riding the motorcycles during the war and desired to continue riding them after the end of the war. This generation was called the "baby boomers" and became the primary target for Harley-Davidson to market their products.
David, F. (2013). The Business Vision and Mission. Strategic Management. Pearson Education Retrieved from http://faculty.unlv.edu/amiller/BUS496/david%20_sm14_inppt02.ppt
After an investigation by the US International Trade Commission, in 1983 President Reagan imposed a 45% tariff on imported bikes and bikes over 700 cc engine capacity. The new management deliberately exploited the past appeal of their big machines, building motorcycles that purposely adopted the look and feel of their earlier models. Quality increased, technical improvements were made, and buyers returned. Harley-Davidson once again became the sales leader in the heavyweight (over 750 cc) market.