Showing posts with label CXO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CXO. Show all posts

Saturday, January 19, 2008

John Duffield has 'lost £100m'

NEWS ...

“New Star shares collapse by 31pc, the City wonders if the fund's boss has lost his magic.”



John Duffield, New Star's colourful boss, takes senior managers round London on an open top bus at night to review the fund manager's attention-grabbing billboard adverts. On these monthly evenings out, Duffield is on the prowl for the smallest imperfection in the way the adverts have been presented. If he finds any, the contractor can expect an irate call and a demand for a price drop.

In the cold light of yesterday's profit warning from New Star, many were saying the company's concern with marketing and presentation may have been its problem.

" New Star's shares were sold as a go-go stock, which had to be underpinned by massive growth. That has been fuelled by massive marketing of its funds," said one close observer.

New Star, whose shares collapsed by 31pc yesterday after it revealed a hefty outflow of funds and a dividend cut, was desperately trying to reassure the stock market and the thousands of clients whose money it manages that it is going through a rough patch, triggered by several setbacks coming at once, and will recover later this year.

But some are wondering whether the Duffield magic has worn off and if his own star is on the wane.

When Duffield launched New Star in 2000, he was flush from the success of Jupiter, another asset management firm he had created in 1985 with just £150,000 of his own money, selling it to Germany's Commerzbank in two slices in 1995 and 2000 for a total of £680m. The investment community had high hopes for the new firm.

Mark Dampier, head of research at independent financial advisers Hargreaves Lansdown, said: "Jupiter was a fantastic success. John brought great managers together and he was a brilliant marketer."

Now it is Duffield's talent for combining marketing flair with picking star managers that is in question. In addition to the growing suspicion that New Star may have been over-reliant on marketing, the shine has come off some of its star managers.

Alan Miller, Duffield's right-hand man at Jupiter, followed him to New Star but left the company last year after a disappointing run by his UK Growth fund.

Another long-standing senior employee, Richard Pease, is among the individuals whose poor performance recently contributed to yesterday's profit warning.

Meanwhile James Ridgewell, who has headed up a poster campaign for the group's "New Star's new stars" was demoted earlier this week from running the UK Special Situations Fund to a role helping Tim Steer, the former City analyst, run the company's strongly-performing Alpha Fund.

Duffield yesterday told The Daily Telegraph: "Nobody is more sorry than me - I have lost £100m from the peak to today - and it is pretty tough to lose £100m."

Few had much sympathy. Duffield has crossed swords with many in the financial world since he started as a stockbroker in 1961.

Most infamous was his bust-up with Commerzbank, which he referred to as a group of Nazis, calling members of the bank's senior management Hitler, Himmler and Goering, when they fell out over the sale of the final part of Jupiter in 2000. He has also had a fiery relationship with Jupiter's current head, Edward Bonham Carter, and yesterday some in the City reacted to the serious blow to Duffield's reputation with glee.

There is also a view that Duffield has a lot of work to do to put things right. "The company has grown too rapidly and it seems to be a place where there are lots of people who have joined as stars," said one person in the asset management world. "In contrast at other places a lot of people have joined as management trainees and there is a strong internal culture."

Another challenge at the company - which floated on Aim in November 2005 at 225p a share - is over whether it can keep key staff. The share incentive scheme which has locked in almost all senior employees makes its final pay-out next year.

There are also questions over New Star's decision last year to gear up its balance sheet with £250m of debt so that it could return cash to shareholders. Carolyn Dorrett, an analyst at Citigroup, said New Star should be able to retain enough funds under management to stay within its covenant to its lead banker HBOS, which lent it the money. "However, given the current difficult market conditions for fund flows, both across the UK and at New Star in particular, we will monitor this figure carefully going forward."

Ross Curran at UBS said that by slashing its dividend New Star is freeing up cash which it can use to pay off its debt, giving it breathing space with its banks. "However, a further 10pc fall in markets would make things tight," Curran said.

The final challenge is that New Star has found itself with large bets in many of the least attractive areas. Its commercial property fund was its biggest seller last year, yet its value has fallen sharply, reflecting the 10pc dive in property values in the past six months. Pease - whose historic performance in his European Growth Fund has been strong - has been hit by the fact that his holdings in medium-sized continental companies have had a bad run compared to large-cap stocks.

Duffield does not plan to force through significant change in the European or property funds, sources said. But they added that he has said in briefings this week that major changes can be expected on the funds managing UK shares, which have also been disappointing. Stephen Whittaker, who replaced Miller in charge of UK Growth Fund, and Toby Thompson, who runs the Higher Income Fund, are likely to keep their jobs, sources said, but Duffield may shift some employees sideways and hire more people to beef up his teams.

Howard Covington, New Star's chief executive, said plans for a new incentive scheme were well under way. "We have spoken to all of the big names and they are all on side," he said. But he acknowledged that there could be further ructions. "That is not to say nobody else will leave".

Taking the pressure off New Star a little is the fact that the fund management industry in general has been in turmoil. F&C only swung back into profit last year after its merger with Isis three years ago. Amvescap, which owns the Invesco brand, has had a bumpy ride in the past few years and Schroders has also changed its business model in response to heavy outflows of funds and a squeeze on profit margins.

Some observers believe that even if New Star's shares stay at the current depressed level, it will not be all bad for 68-year-old Duffield. The business, which is 35pc owned by its employees, could be taken private by the multi-millionaire and his senior circle.

Alternatively there are likely to be buyers for the business at its current price. Duffield may prefer to knock New Star back into shape in its current form, as much for his own reputation as for financial reasons.

Source: The Business

Read More......

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Common dilemma company grows, leadership roles change

“Symptoms of a personal/professional misalignment may include”


* Frustration.
* Lack of energy.
* Not enjoying going to work.
* Feeling as though you're leading two lives.
* Not feeling lucky.

When a CXO's individual goals are out of whack with corporate objectives, it undermines your passion, which is an important source of persistence and creativity.
What's more, a lack of passion on your part affects the synergy and energy of your staff. When employees see that their leaders aren't committed, they back off on performance.

Goal alignment revolves around:

  • Mission. Why are you doing what you're doing?

  • Vision. Where are you headed? What specific milestones are you aiming for? (This is especially important for partners to agree on.)

  • Values. What's most important to you? What makes you feel satisfied and happy?


If you're not touching the parts of the business that you love, it can be a big problem and cause a disconnect


Balancing Act
Aligning personal and corporate goals fuels growth, leadership and creativity.

Guideposts for growth
Goal alignment benefits CEOs in a variety of ways.
  • If you're clear on goals and values, you're not going to be sidetracked
  • If employees embrace your corporate goals and values, they'll be proud to be there every day, they'll respect the work that they're doing — and they'll respect each other.


That creates synergy for the organization; the whole group can move together and push to new levels.


Guiding Behaviour
Values are the meat — they're where your goals come from

Reconnecting
Introspection is an important part of goal alignment. Take the time to examine your level of commitment.

Read More......

Friday, December 07, 2007

Women and the Labyrinth of Leadership

“When you put all the pieces together, a new picture emerges for why women don’t make it into the C-suite. It’s not the glass ceiling, but the sum of many obstacles along the way.”


Alice H. Eagly & Linda L. Carli in their book "Through the Labyrinth" identified that Women occupy 40% of all managerial positions in the United States. Where only 6% of the Fortune 500's top executives are female, and just 2% of those firms have women CEOs. "We've long blamed such numbers on the "glass ceiling," notion that women successfully climb the corporate hierarchy until they're blocked just below the summit. But the problem stems from discrimination operating at all ranks, not just the top,"

To move more women into the corporate executive suite, one must attack all barriers to advancement simultaneously. Such as: "Prepare women for line management with demanding assignments. Use objective criteria to measure performance. And give working mothers additional time to prove themselves worthy of promotion."

They explain the need for Metaphors since they matter because they are part of the storytelling that can compel change ... Eagly & Carli goes on to redefine a better metaphor for what confronts women in their professional endeavors naming it "The Labyrinth". Because of its image with a long and varied history in ancient Greece, India, Nepal, native North and South America, medieval Europe, and elsewhere. As a contemporary symbol, it conveys the idea of a complex journey toward a goal worth striving for.

Passage through a labyrinth is not simple or direct, but requires persistence, awareness of one’s progress, and a careful analysis of the puzzles that lie ahead. It is this meaning that they convey in "Through the Labyrinth".

Women who aspire to top leadership, routes exist but are full of twists and turns, both unexpected and expected. Because all labyrinths have a viable route to the center, it is understood that goals are attainable. The metaphor acknowledges obstacles but is not ultimately discouraging.

Times have changed, however, and the glass ceiling metaphor is now more wrong than right. For one thing, it describes an absolute barrier at a specific high level in organizations. The fact that there have been female chief executives, university presidents, state governors, and presidents of nations gives the lie to that charge. At the same time, the metaphor implies that women and men have equal access to entry- and midlevel positions. They do not.

The image of a transparent obstruction also suggests that women are being misled about their opportunities, because the impediment is not easy for them to see from a distance. But some impediments are not subtle. Worst of all, by depicting a single, unvarying obstacle, the glass ceiling fails to incorporate the complexity and variety of challenges that women can face in their leadership journeys. In truth, women are not turned away only as they reach the penultimate stage of a distinguished career. They disappear in various numbers at many points leading up to that stage.

Eagly & Carli explains that tackling the obstacles to women's progress, will increase a firm's competitive prowess. "If we can understand the various barriers that make up this labyrinth, and how some women find their way around them, we can work more effectively to improve the situation, and understand the obstructions that women run up against?"

They recommend these strategies for increasing the number of women in top positions:

Understand the Career Barriers Women Encounter
Extensive academic and government research studies identify these obstacles:

* Prejudice: Men are promoted more quickly than women with equivalent qualifications, even in traditionally female settings such as nursing and education.

* Resistance to women's leadership: People view successful female managers as more deceitful, pushy, selfish, and abrasive than successful male managers.

* Leadership style issues: Many female leaders struggle to reconcile qualities people prefer in women (compassion for others) with qualities people think leaders need to succeed (assertion and control).

* Family demands: Women are still the ones who interrupt their careers to handle work/family trade-offs. Overloaded, they lack time to engage in the social networking essential to advancement.

Intervene on Multiple Fronts

Because of the interconnectedness of obstacles women face, companies that want more women leaders need to apply a variety of tactics simultaneously:

* Evaluate and reward women's productivity by objective results, not by "number of hours at work."

* Make performance-evaluation criteria explicit, and design evaluation processes to limit the influence of evaluators' biases.

* Instead of relying on informal social networks and referrals to fill positions, use open-recruitment tools such as advertising and employment agencies.

* Avoid having a sole female member on any team. Outnumbered, women tend to be ignored by men.

* Encourage well-placed, widely esteemed individuals to mentor women.

* Ensure a critical mass of women in executive positions to head off problems that come with tokenism. Women's identities as women will become less salient to colleagues than their individual competencies.

* Give women demanding developmental job experiences to train them for leadership positions.

* Establish family-friendly HR practices (including flextime, job sharing, and telecommuting). You'll help women stay in their jobs while rearing children, allow them to build social capital, and enable them eventually to compete for higher positions. Encourage men to participate in family-friendly benefits, too (for example, by providing paternity leave). When only women participate, their careers suffer because companies expect them to be off the job while exercising those options.

* Give employees with significant parental responsibilities more time to show they're qualified for promotion. Parents may need a year or two more than childless professionals.

* Establish alumni programs for women who need to step away from the workforce. Then tap their expertise to show that returning is possible. Consulting giant Booz Allen, for example, sees its alumni as a source of subcontractors.

Purchase Full Harvard Business Review Article

Read More......

Thursday, November 15, 2007

Reputation Repairing, All change at the top Investment Banks

“John Thain, the head of NYSE Euronext, appointed as Merrill Lynch new chairman and chief executive”



His appointment, effective on December 1, follows the recent departure of Stan O’Neal after Merrill was forced to admit that it had racked up vast credit crunch-related losses. Mr Thain, viewed as a leading contender for the top job at Citigroup, spent more than 20 years at Goldman Sachs, working on its mortgage bond trading desk before becoming president of the group after stints as head of operations, technology and finance, and chief financial officer.

He moved from Goldman to his NYSE role in January 2004 and is credited with transforming the Big Board from a domestic, nonprofit membership organisation into a global bourse. The 52-year-old also master-minded the group’s push into automated trading. Last year, he merged NYSE Group with Euronext to build the first transatlantic exchange operator.

Source: Times

Read More......

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Quality over Quantity

Former Citigroup chief Chuck Prince commented last week that the firm needed to

“install better leaders within top management rather than break up the various businesses”



Restructuring is an unsettling time for both the management team and its people. It often the case a new person steps into the shoes of his/her predecessor, the reporting lines and the business landscapes shifts from decentralised to centralised and vice-versa.
Todd Thomson ex Citigroup noted at the NY Reuters Finance Summit that “I fundamentally don’t believe the issues at Citi are ones of strategy. I fundamentally don’t believe the issues at Citi are ones of being in too many products and too many businesses. I fundamentally believe it’s an issue of execution.” He futher added: “If you look at every other significant bank out there today, they do exactly the same thing Citi does. There’s nothing that Citi does that JP Morgan doesn’t do, that Bank of America doesn’t do, that UBS doesn’t do, that HSBC doesn’t do. They all do the same things.”

Its true, its not how many product lines you have. It comes back to leadership and execution, having the right person at the top of the company who can look down and see what's happening on the ground level, listens to people, has a management team that works as a team.

Source: Financial News Online

Read More......

Monday, November 05, 2007

Sub-prime mortgage meltdown hits Citigroup

“Citigroup names Robert Rubin as chairman after Charles Prince exits”



Citigroup has appointed Robert Rubin, the former Treasury Secretary, to be its chairman and Sir Win Bischoff, the group’s European head, to act as interim chief executive, as it emerged that the world’s largest bank would need to take up to $11 billion (£5.3 billion) of further writedowns relating to America’s sub-prime mortgage meltdown. The appointments came after the position of Charles “Chuck” Prince, Citigroup’s chairman and chief executive, became untenable in the wake of huge mortgage-related writedowns in the third quarter and expectations of billions of dollars more to come.
Mr Prince, whose resignation was characterised as a retirement, said: “It is my judgment that, given the size of the recent losses in our mortgage-backed securities business, the only honourable course for me to take as chief executive officer is to step down.”

The sheer scale of the additional losses from sub-prime-related investments, which Citigroup last night estimated at between $8 billion and $11 billion, will send shockwaves across the banking industry

Full Article

Read More......