objectifs de l’entreprise | Page 15

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, intéressant article de Dominic Houlder et Nandu Nandkishore intitulé « 4 Hard Questions to Ask About Your Company’s Purpose » sur le Harvard Business Review qui revient sur le cas Volkswagen.

In the early 1930s, cars in Europe were still a luxury for the rich. But in 1933 Dr. Ferdinand Porsche launched the People’s Car: Volkswagen. Its purpose was to enhance people’s lives through great engineering that offered everyone an accessible, high-quality car. The purpose behind the People’s Car resonated throughout the 20th century, and Volkswagen grew and prospered.

Then, in 2007, something changed. The Volkswagen leadership set a new overarching goal for the company: to become the world’s largest automaker by 2018.

(…) Too many leaders today focus on the practicalities of what and how rather than the more distant and abstract question of why. But there are costs to such shortsightedness, as Volkswagen’s example makes clear. How strong is your purpose? Is it solid enough to guide you through uncertain times? Stress-test it with these questions

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Larry Summers s’interroge dans un article du 3 mars 2016 sur les problèmes que soulèvent les profits records des entreprises américaines : « Corporate profits are near record highs. Here’s why that’s a problem ».

As the cover story in this week’s Economist highlights, the rate of profitability in the United States is at a near-record high level, as is the share of corporate revenue going to capital.   The stock market is valued very high by historical standards, as measured by Tobin’s q ratio of the market value of the nonfinancial corporations to the value of their tangible capital.  And the ratio of the market value of equities in the corporate sector to its GDP is also unusually high. All of this might be taken as evidence that this is a time when the return on new capital investment is unusually high.  The rate of profit under standard assumptions reflects the marginal productivity of capital.  A high market value of corporations implies that “old capital” is highly valued and suggests a high payoff to investment in new capital. This is an apparent problem for the secular stagnation hypothesis I have been advocating for some time, the idea that the U.S. economy is stuck in a period of lethargic economic growth.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Dans une très récente tribune parue dans The Globe and Mail, la professeure Janis Sarra affirme que : « Institutional investors must lead our transition to long-term sustainability ». Dans le cadre de cet article, elle réagit à l’annonce par le président de l’Université de Toronto (Meric Gertler) de l’orientation des 6.5 milliards de dollars gérés par son institution au profit de la lutte contre le réchauffement climatique.

Institutional investors have an important role to play in charting a new course in corporate approaches to climate change, aimed at long-term sustainability. Institutional investors, such as pension funds, are by their nature “patient capital” because of their size in the market and illiquidity of their shares. Collectively, they can have a significant influence on corporate decision makers in tackling climate change.

Aside from our collective public interest in a sustainable world, there is a business case to be made. At risk is a significant portion of the value of diversified investment portfolios. Howard Covington of Cambridge and Raj Thamotheram of Oxford have suggested that value at risk due to climate change in just 15 years could result in a permanent reduction of up to 20 per cent in portfolio value. Hence, there are compelling reasons for capital-markets participants to aggressively press for immediate and comprehensive action. Indeed, it can be argued that institutional investors have a fiduciary duty to act to prevent risk to their portfolios from anthropogenic climate change. The strategies need to be multifold: decarbonization of electricity, a massive move to clean energy or lower carbon fuels, less waste in all sectors, improvement of forests and other natural carbon sinks.

There is a nascent but growing type of institutional shareholder activism called “forceful stewardship,” in which investors are demanding a recasting of fiduciary obligation away from short-term shareholder returns toward ethical obligations and reduction of long-term environmental risks. Forceful stewardship involves helping directors and officers of all types of businesses understand that it is a breach of their fiduciary duties to ignore long-term environmental risks such as climate change. This activism by our most powerful advocates in the market is an important development in the potential to change the current course of climate change.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

La journaliste du magazine Challenges Alice Mérieux revient dans le cadre d’un article intéressant (« ArcelorMittal a dix ans : le bilan désastreux d’une fusion ») sur les 10 ans de la fusion importante qui a eu lieu au début des années 2000 entre Arcelor et Mittal… tout cela pour un bilan bien mitigé quelques années plus tard !

Drôle d’anniversaire. A dix ans, la fusion du sidérurgiste Mittal Steel avec son rival européen Arcelor, n’a toujours pas fait la preuve de son efficacité. Le géant fusionné, ArcelorMittal, annonce aujourd’hui des pertes nettes monumentales de près de huit milliards de dollars. Et lance un vaste plan de réduction de sa dette de quatre milliards de dollars grâce à une lourde augmentation de capital – de trois milliards de dollars – et la cession d’une participation dans l’équipementier Gestamp – pour un milliard de dollars de plus. A vue de nez, le bilan de l’OPA apparaît pour le moins sombre.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian