|

It's Time to Take Your
SOX Off
By Paul Kocourek, Jim Newfrock, and
Reggie Van Lee
http://www.strategy-business.com/resilience/rr00014?tid=230&pg=all
To protect shareholder
value, companies must link risk management with strategic
planning and avoid overreacting to regulatory compliance
mandates.
Here’s a fact
that bucks conventional wisdom: More shareholder value has been
wiped out in the past five years as a result of mismanagement
and bad execution of strategy than was lost because of all of
the recent compliance scandals combined. This is a key finding
of a recent Booz Allen Hamilton survey and analysis of the
performance of 1,200 firms with market capitalizations of more
than $1 billion for the five-year period from 1999 through 2003.
Consider the 360
worst financial laggards. Eighty-seven percent of the value lost
by these firms was attributable to strategic missteps —
management ineffectiveness in reacting to competitive pressures
or forecasting customer demand — and operational blunders, such
as cost overruns and M&A integration problems. Only 13 percent
of the value destruction suffered by these companies was caused
by regulatory compliance failures or was a result of poor
oversight of company operations by corporate boards.
Still, the media
went for the headlines on compliance debacles. And the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) — a legislative attempt to rein in
rogue corporate activities through stringent new rules for
governance, data integrity, and disclosure — was passed to help
U.S. businesses move on from the Enron saga. Obviously,
compliance is vital, and the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation can
help. But it will do little to improve most firms' real risk
profile.
Despite its
reputation as a panacea for raising the bar on business
governance, SOX is essentially a quality-control mechanism
piggybacking on financial reporting systems. It does little to
protect the primary strategic and operational elements that,
according to Booz Allen’s survey, are the primary cause of
shareholder value destruction. Because of this, the impact of
SOX on management reforms to improve corporate performance has
been disappointing: To insulate their boards and senior
executives from extensive scrutiny, firms have ended up
sacrificing growth and innovation for regulatory acquiescence.
In reacting to
Sarbanes-Oxley with an exaggerated fear of risk exposure, many
companies are tempted to reduce risk management to an expensive
“box-checking exercise” in regulatory compliance. However, to
thrive in the current business environment, companies need to do
much more: They must be proactive in addressing risk by
understanding and anticipating the full range of threats to
their businesses. And they must embed risk management in
strategic planning capabilities. These two processes are
interdependent: Only when companies develop a risk management
program that protects and enhances shareholder value
can they eliminate unwanted earnings surprises and foster
growth.
Recognizing that
companies have to deal with SOX and manage for growth,
executives must design a more robust and integrated strategic
planning process built on a broad understanding of all risks to
the business. Board directors and senior managers need to look
beyond traditional risks — typically, capital credit and
physical security — and anticipate earnings-driver risks and
cultural risks, too. The specifics of such an ambitious risk
management agenda will vary from company to company, but we have
identified five imperatives for developing an effective program:
• Define
what constitutes “risk” and develop early-sensing mechanisms.
Most companies need to expand their definition of risk beyond
market, legal, and natural hazards. They need to consider
threats that could have a long-term influence on company
performance, such as customer churn, price pressure, and brand
impairment. They also need to address weaknesses in
organizational behavior, and the management and cultural factors
that influence it, such as misaligned incentives, unethical
conduct, and communications breakdowns. But identifying existing
risks is only half the battle. Companies also need to
institutionalize sensing mechanisms to anticipate emerging
risks. An earnings-driver risk assessment, for example,
identifies and prioritizes key demand and supply-side risks
across the value chain.
•
Determine the risk agenda. After defining, identifying,
and prioritizing risks, management needs to assess how capable
the organization is of mitigating the most critical risks.
Companies can establish an effective risk agenda by determining
the intersection of high-priority risks with weak capabilities.
This risk agenda can be used to align the actions of various
company stakeholders, such as the risk committee, office of the
chairman, and business or functional management.
• Build
and adapt the risk management architecture. This
architecture must reflect the risk agenda and encompass
corporate processes, organization, information tools, and
culture. For example, a company that depends on a nimble,
decentralized organization to succeed in its markets should
consider having a risk management architecture that manages
activities and accountability in a decentralized fashion, but is
also supported by diligent central monitoring of results.
•
Integrate risk management with strategic planning.
Companies must incorporate their risk management capabilities —
such as better business intelligence and scenario planning — in
the strategic planning process. Fundamentally, the same
capabilities that mitigate risk enable a company to capture
growth opportunities. For example, when a company identifies a
competitor that is posing a specific threat to its strategic
position, the tools that will help the company defend itself and
enhance revenues and earnings are better market-sensing
capabilities, improved product development, and more
sophisticated strategic planning activities.
• Adapt
the agenda and architecture to changes in the risk environment.
Any broad risk management system must be flexible and responsive
enough to adjust quickly to changing market dynamics. For
example, if shifts in customer demand require a change in the
company’s product mix, a good risk management system will
anticipate the change and trigger a reassessment of the
capabilities required to manage in the new risk environment
implied by the new product mix.
Executing these
imperatives requires a shift from a “culture of compliance” to a
“culture of confidence.” That is, it requires a cultural shift
from an exclusive focus on controls to an atmosphere in which
managers can confidently choose, on the basis of robust analysis
and strong corporate values, which strategic risks to take,
which to mitigate, and which to avoid. By taking a diagnostic
approach, companies not only avoid negative earnings surprises,
but also save significant sums by targeting their investment on
the key gaps in their strategic risk management capabilities.
Companies that
are successful in establishing an effective risk management
program are more likely to protect directors and officers
against charges of lack of good faith, build stakeholder trust,
capture opportunities, and improve corporate performance and
shareholder value over the long run.
Author Profiles:
Paul
Kocourek (kocourek_paul@bah.com)
is a senior vice president with Booz Allen Hamilton in San
Francisco. He focuses on the strategic transformation of
companies facing changes in the competitive landscape or the
regulatory environment.
Jim Newfrock
(newfrock_jim@bah.com)
is a principal with Booz Allen Hamilton in New Jersey. He
specializes in business strategy and enterprise risk.
Reggie Van
Lee (van_lee_reggie@bah.com)
is a senior vice president with Booz Allen Hamilton in New York.
He has extensive experience in developing and implementing major
growth strategies and change programs for media and high-tech
companies. |