Expected shortfall

Managers of organizations have two options: Either to master the riding (which means ‘to learn how to enjoy variations in the trajectory of the organization’s performance) or to master the ride (which means ‘to smooth out the variations’). He argues that HR managers are often partner or tool in this ‘ride’. To make it more clearly he uses an example: There is the question if HR professionals teach the employees how to manage personal stress or if they try to change conditions that cause the…

In addition, some of our ingredients, such as aspartame, acesulfame potassium, sucralose, saccharin and ascorbic acid, as well as some of the packaging containers, such as aluminum cans, are available from a limited number of suppliers, some of which are located in countries experiencing political or other risks. We cannot assure you that we and our bottling partners will be able to maintain favorable arrangements and relationships with these suppliers. The citrus industry is subject to the…

Why? | Natasha Wylie | 5/13/2012 6:05:23 PM | | I'm on the fence about whether there is too much government intervention in the administering of employee benefits. I'm sure that both sides could argue where oversight is needed and where there is too much involvement. Whether the oversight is handled by the government or another agency, I do believe that someone should look out for the best interest of employees, and ensure things related to benefits are handled in a proper manner. |…

it had agreed could be charged for use of the road. This is a subtle form of expropriation, since a company cannot simply pack up a road and leave.89 Neglect regarding contract law may leave a firm burdened with an agent who does not perform the expected functions, or a firm may be faced with laws that prevent management from laying off employees (often the case in Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, and elsewhere). Other Regulatory Issues Differences in laws and regulations from country…

Unfortunately, some companies have mismanaged their greatest asset—their brands. This is what befell the popular Snapple brand almost as soon as Quaker Oats bought the beverage marketer for $1.7 billion in 1994. Snapple had become a hit through powerful grassroots marketing and distribution through small outlets and convenience stores. Analysts said that because Quaker did not understand the brand’s appeal, it made the mistake of changing the ads and the distribution. Snapple lost so much…