What really works

When it comes to improving business performance, managers have no shortage of tools and techniques to choose from. But what really works? What's critical, and what's optional? Two business professors and a former McKinsey consultant set out to answer those questions. In a ground-breaking, five-year study that involved more than 50 academics and consultants, the authors analyzed 200 management techniques as they were employed by 160 companies over ten years. Their findings at a high level? Business basics really matter. In this article, the authors outline the management practices that are imperative for sustained superior financial performance--their "4+2 formula" for business success. They provide examples of companies that achieved varying degrees of success depending on whether they applied the formula, and they suggest ways that other companies can achieve excellence. The 160 companies in their study--called the Evergreen Project--were divided into 40 quads, each comprising four companies in a narrowly defined industry. Based on its performance between 1986 and 1996, each company in each quad was classified as either a winner (for instance, Dollar General), a loser (Kmart), a climber (Target), or a tumbler (the Limited). Without exception, the companies that outperformed their industry peers excelled in what the authors call the four primary management practices: strategy, execution, culture, and structure. And they supplemented their great skill in those areas with a mastery of any two of four secondary management practices: talent, leadership, innovation, and mergers and partnerships. A company that consistently follows this 4+2 formula has a better than 90% chance of sustaining superior performance, according to the authors.     

Pull the plug on stress

Stress is rampant, stress is growing, and stress hurts the bottom line. A 1999 study of 46,000 workers revealed that health care costs are 147% higher for those who are stressed or depressed, independent of other health issues. But what exactly is stress? It usually refers to our internal reaction to negative, threatening, or worrisome situations--a looming performance report, say, or interactions with a dismissive colleague. Accumulated over time, negative stress can depress you, burn you out, make you sick, or even kill you--because it's both an emotional and a physiological habit. Of course, many companies understand the negative impact of cumulative stress and offer programs to help employees counteract it. The problem is that employees in the greatest need of help often don't seek it. Since 1991, the authors have studied the physiological impact of stress on performance, at both the individual and organizational levels. Their goal largely has been to decode the underlying mechanics of stress. They've sought not only to understand how stress works on a person's mind, heart, and other bodily systems but also to discover the precise emotional, mental, and physiological levers that can counteract it. After working with more than 50,000 workers and managers in more than 100 organizations, the authors have found that learning to manage stress is easier than most people think. They have devised a scientifically based system of tools, techniques, and technologies that organizations can use to reduce employee stress and boost overall health and performance. In this article, they use the story of someone they call Nigel, a senior executive with whom they've worked, to describe how these techniques reduce stress in the real world.     

Precautionary Demand for Education, Inequality, and Technological Progress

This paper offers an explanation for the evolution of wage inequality within and between industries and education groups over the past several decades. The model is based on the disproportionate depreciation of technology-specific skills versus general skills due to technological progress, which occurs randomly across sectors. Consistent with empirical evidence, the model predicts that increasing randomness is the primary source of inequality growth within uneducated workers, whereas inequality growth within educated workers is determined more by changes in the composition and return to ability. Increasing randomness generates a precautionary demand for education, which we show empirically to be significant.     

领先财富管理的运营思路——BCG中国财富管理市场研究报告摘要

波士顿咨询公司(BCG)发布的有关中国财富管理市场的最新报告探讨了在中国建立领先的财富管理业务的关键因素.BCG授权本刊撷取其精要,希望能给予致力于提升中国财富管理水平的机构和理财从业人员有益的启示.     

Implications of Components of Income Excluded from Pro Forma Earnings for Future Profitability and Equity Valuation

Abstract:  This study addresses three research questions relating to total exclusions, special items, and other exclusions. Are each of these pro forma exclusion components forecasting irrelevant? Are each of the exclusion components value irrelevant? Are the valuation multiples on the exclusion components justified by their ability to forecast future profitability as predicted by the Ohlson (1999) model? Findings are generally consistent with the market-inefficiency results presented in Doyle et al. (2003) . Total exclusions are valued negatively by the market despite the prediction that total exclusions will be valued positively. Valuation results also suggest that stocks with positive other exclusions are overpriced.     

Income Tax Accounting Policy Choice: Exposure Draft Responses and the Early Adoption Decision by Canadian Companies*

We extend prior literature through a detailed examination of the relationship between lobbying behavior and subsequent accounting standard adoption timing, using changes to a Canadian accounting standard with a prolonged transition period. We develop a model linking lobbying and adoption timing. We test hypotheses based on recontracting costs, information production costs, efforts to manage investor perceptions, and corporate governance practices to assess the ability of these factors to explain corporations' choice of adoption timing. We examine responses to the Income Taxes exposure draft using content analysis to identify trends in lobbying behavior. We evaluate the accounting standard adoption decision for Toronto Stock Exchange (TSE) 300 firms using a LOGIT model. Our findings indicate that early adoption appears to be most prevalent for firms that benefit from improved financial statement performance. In contrast, late adopters tend to be firms that have lobbied standard‐setters regarding the out‐of‐pocket costs of the standard and that rate highly on certain corporate governance measures.     

The effect of deposit-rate ceilings on bank risk: A comment

In a recent issue of this journal, Mingo (1978) analyzed the effect of deposit-rate ceilings on bank risk. The analysis showed that deposit-rate ceilings increase a bank's total risk. The purpose of this note is to examine a different but related question: Is systematic risk affected by Regulation Q ceilings ceteris paribus? The results of our empirical test indicate that systematic risk is not affected by deposit-rate ceilings. Taken together then, Mingo's and the present results show that removal of deposit-rate ceilings would not increase bank risk.