Question 6
Two weeks have passed since the article about Wodd's role in tax avoidance was published. Thankfully, the initial reaction was to condemn the celebrities who invest in tax avoidance and little was said about Wodd's role in facilitating tax-efficient investments.
You have received the following email from Sarah Johns, Marketing Director:
From: Sarah Johns, Marketing Director
To: Senior Finance Manager
Subject: Forestry certification
Hi,
I am told that you would be a good person to talk to concerning the practical implications of a new venture that has been proposed.
I have attached a sales brochure that I downloaded from Tabel's website. Tabel is a competing forestry company that has similar interests to our own. It has recently launched the certification scheme that it has described in its brochure. It has no competition for this certification in Marland because no other company has sought the qualifications required to offer an accredited Forest Certification Service.
Wodd has the necessary skills to offer a credible Forest Certification Service. Our forestry managers already aim to exceed all of the requirements set out by the global body. We also have a well-resourced internal audit department. I believe that we could transfer either forestry managers or internal auditors to a new external certification department. The transferred staff would complete the training required by the global body and would sit the associated examinations. We could then compete with Tabel's service.
I need your advice on the following:
Could you explain how you imagine that a typical certification investigation would work and the skills that it would require? That will help us to decide whether to approach forestry managers or internal auditors and will also enable us to describe the work that they would be doing if they agreed to be transferred.
What are the challenges associated with motivating and evaluating the investigators in the certification service and how might we address these?
Sarah
Reference Material:

You have received the following email from Sarah Johns, Marketing Director:
From: Sarah Johns, Marketing Director
To: Senior Finance Manager
Subject: Forestry certification
Hi,
I am told that you would be a good person to talk to concerning the practical implications of a new venture that has been proposed.
I have attached a sales brochure that I downloaded from Tabel's website. Tabel is a competing forestry company that has similar interests to our own. It has recently launched the certification scheme that it has described in its brochure. It has no competition for this certification in Marland because no other company has sought the qualifications required to offer an accredited Forest Certification Service.
Wodd has the necessary skills to offer a credible Forest Certification Service. Our forestry managers already aim to exceed all of the requirements set out by the global body. We also have a well-resourced internal audit department. I believe that we could transfer either forestry managers or internal auditors to a new external certification department. The transferred staff would complete the training required by the global body and would sit the associated examinations. We could then compete with Tabel's service.
I need your advice on the following:
Could you explain how you imagine that a typical certification investigation would work and the skills that it would require? That will help us to decide whether to approach forestry managers or internal auditors and will also enable us to describe the work that they would be doing if they agreed to be transferred.
What are the challenges associated with motivating and evaluating the investigators in the certification service and how might we address these?
Sarah
Reference Material:

Question 7
You are sitting in your office when you hear Marcus Svenson, the Finance Director, speaking on the telephone. You can hear only Marcus' side of the conversation:
"Hello, I would like to speak to Sally Walker please. It is Marcus Svenson here. (pause) Hi Sally, you contacted me six months ago to discuss a job opportunity that you thought I'd be suitable for. I said that I didn't wish to pursue it at that time because I was committed to Wodd. Things have changed since then and I would like to be considered for a finance directorship in another company. (pause) Yes, I'm still with Wodd. (pause) Yes, I realise that there was an unfortunate story in the business press about the problems that the weak USD is causing us, but there was very little that I could do to prevent that. (pause) I am sorry to hear that. I had hoped to move on." (sound of telephone hanging up and door opening) Marcus discovers that you are sitting at your desk and realises that you would have heard his side of the call.
"Please don't tell anybody what you heard. Would you regard it as unethical to respect my privacy?
I suspect that the CEO knows that I am thinking of leaving. He commented on the need for Board members to be loyal to Wodd at the last Board meeting. But don't you agree that the shareholders can better protect themselves against currency fluctuations than the directors?
The crazy thing is that I suspect that the Chairman will dismiss me next month. If that happens, I get a year's salary as a severance package. That will really annoy the shareholders. How can I justify accepting the severance package if I am effectively being dismissed for failing to manage Wodd's finances properly?
I need to explain at the next Board meeting why it would have been difficult to evaluate the risk of the USD weakening. According to an article I read, it has been picked up as a serious problem for us. How would you advise me to explain that?" Reference Material:

"Hello, I would like to speak to Sally Walker please. It is Marcus Svenson here. (pause) Hi Sally, you contacted me six months ago to discuss a job opportunity that you thought I'd be suitable for. I said that I didn't wish to pursue it at that time because I was committed to Wodd. Things have changed since then and I would like to be considered for a finance directorship in another company. (pause) Yes, I'm still with Wodd. (pause) Yes, I realise that there was an unfortunate story in the business press about the problems that the weak USD is causing us, but there was very little that I could do to prevent that. (pause) I am sorry to hear that. I had hoped to move on." (sound of telephone hanging up and door opening) Marcus discovers that you are sitting at your desk and realises that you would have heard his side of the call.
"Please don't tell anybody what you heard. Would you regard it as unethical to respect my privacy?
I suspect that the CEO knows that I am thinking of leaving. He commented on the need for Board members to be loyal to Wodd at the last Board meeting. But don't you agree that the shareholders can better protect themselves against currency fluctuations than the directors?
The crazy thing is that I suspect that the Chairman will dismiss me next month. If that happens, I get a year's salary as a severance package. That will really annoy the shareholders. How can I justify accepting the severance package if I am effectively being dismissed for failing to manage Wodd's finances properly?
I need to explain at the next Board meeting why it would have been difficult to evaluate the risk of the USD weakening. According to an article I read, it has been picked up as a serious problem for us. How would you advise me to explain that?" Reference Material:

Question 8
Memorandum of Understanding between Fouce Oil and Slide
It is proposed that Fouce Oil and Slide will temporarily combine their exploration activities, with Slide taking overall control in recognition of the greater expertise of its professional exploration staff.
This collaboration will work as follows:
1. Slide will take responsibility for the management and operation of all future exploration activities for the two companies, with effect from 1 October 2015.
2. Fouce Oil will second all of its professional oil exploration staff to Slide. Fouce will continue to employ these staff and will pay their salaries.
3. Slide will brief Fouce Oil's professional oil exploration staff on all operational matters relating to exploration activities for the duration of this arrangement.
4. The provisions of paragraph 3 will apply to any projects in which Slide participates with third parties on a farm-in or other joint venture basis.
5. In recognition of Slide's greater expertise, Fouce Oil will offer its entire portfolio of existing exploration rights to this venture, without any charge to Slide. Fouce Oil will also pay for 55% of any and all exploration costs, leaving Slide responsible for the remaining 45%.
6. The revenues from all successful discoveries will be shared equally by Slide and Fouce Oil. In the event that either party wishes to sell an oil well, the other will have the option of purchasing the other's rights for 50% of the well's agreed valuation.
7. This arrangement will be subject to review at the end of five years and annually thereafter. In the event that either party wishes to discontinue the arrangement, all ongoing exploration projects will be drawn to an orderly conclusion.
Signed
Thomas Yip, Chief Executive Officer, Fouce Oil
Andrew Jones, Chief Executive Officer, Slide
14 May 2015
It is proposed that Fouce Oil and Slide will temporarily combine their exploration activities, with Slide taking overall control in recognition of the greater expertise of its professional exploration staff.
This collaboration will work as follows:
1. Slide will take responsibility for the management and operation of all future exploration activities for the two companies, with effect from 1 October 2015.
2. Fouce Oil will second all of its professional oil exploration staff to Slide. Fouce will continue to employ these staff and will pay their salaries.
3. Slide will brief Fouce Oil's professional oil exploration staff on all operational matters relating to exploration activities for the duration of this arrangement.
4. The provisions of paragraph 3 will apply to any projects in which Slide participates with third parties on a farm-in or other joint venture basis.
5. In recognition of Slide's greater expertise, Fouce Oil will offer its entire portfolio of existing exploration rights to this venture, without any charge to Slide. Fouce Oil will also pay for 55% of any and all exploration costs, leaving Slide responsible for the remaining 45%.
6. The revenues from all successful discoveries will be shared equally by Slide and Fouce Oil. In the event that either party wishes to sell an oil well, the other will have the option of purchasing the other's rights for 50% of the well's agreed valuation.
7. This arrangement will be subject to review at the end of five years and annually thereafter. In the event that either party wishes to discontinue the arrangement, all ongoing exploration projects will be drawn to an orderly conclusion.
Signed
Thomas Yip, Chief Executive Officer, Fouce Oil
Andrew Jones, Chief Executive Officer, Slide
14 May 2015
Question 9
From: Abdhulla Al- Waihabi, Regional Manager - Middle East - Slide
To: William Seaton, Director of Finance
Subject: Press article
Hi William,
I have just had a telephone call from a journalist at Business News to ask for a comment on a story that it plans to run. As you know, we purchased oil wells in the AZ40 field last year in order to bring them back to full production. We got the wells for a good price because the previous owner was struggling to maintain oil pressure and it appeared that the recoverable reserves in that field were close to exhaustion. Our experts worked out a plan to drill a hole and pump water into the well to force more oil to the surface. That is a standard industry technique. Our geologists are the best in the industry and so we are better than most at bringing wells back on stream.
It now appears that we are being blamed for an environmental catastrophe. Our pumping station is only one kilometre from the sea and there are reports of oil coming to the surface along the coast close to where we are operating. We have only just started operations and there are fears that we have ruptured a rock formation with our high pressure pumping.
I have ordered an immediate halt to all pumping activity, but the oil could continue to bubble up for years. The coastal area has some important coral reefs and there are fishermen who depend on shellfish that can be found there.
I told the journalist that she would have to wait for a response from Slide's Board. Business News is a European newspaper, so any comment from you will carry more weight anyway.
I am sorry to be the bearer of such bad news.
Abdhulla
To: William Seaton, Director of Finance
Subject: Press article
Hi William,
I have just had a telephone call from a journalist at Business News to ask for a comment on a story that it plans to run. As you know, we purchased oil wells in the AZ40 field last year in order to bring them back to full production. We got the wells for a good price because the previous owner was struggling to maintain oil pressure and it appeared that the recoverable reserves in that field were close to exhaustion. Our experts worked out a plan to drill a hole and pump water into the well to force more oil to the surface. That is a standard industry technique. Our geologists are the best in the industry and so we are better than most at bringing wells back on stream.
It now appears that we are being blamed for an environmental catastrophe. Our pumping station is only one kilometre from the sea and there are reports of oil coming to the surface along the coast close to where we are operating. We have only just started operations and there are fears that we have ruptured a rock formation with our high pressure pumping.
I have ordered an immediate halt to all pumping activity, but the oil could continue to bubble up for years. The coastal area has some important coral reefs and there are fishermen who depend on shellfish that can be found there.
I told the journalist that she would have to wait for a response from Slide's Board. Business News is a European newspaper, so any comment from you will carry more weight anyway.
I am sorry to be the bearer of such bad news.
Abdhulla
Question 10
The formal merger with Darrell has been negotiated and the legal formalities have been completed. The two company management teams are working on the integration of the two businesses.
You receive an email from Peter Sorchi, the Chief Executive of the merged company:
From: Peter Sorchi, Chief Executive Officer
To: Senior Finance Manager
Subject: Integration of IT and treasury
Hi,
I need you to advise me on a couple of matters. The attached press clipping shows how sensitive this is.
We need to integrate the IT and treasury functions of the former Wodd and Darrell. I thought that it would be a simple matter of identifying the common ground and slimming down both companies' departments to cover the new entity, but I have the heads of both IT and treasury from each company arguing that their approaches are better for the merged group and that they should take the lead.
Wodd's Treasurer claims to be an expert in natural hedging of currency risks and Darrell's argues that her department was highly successful because it makes excellent use of derivatives for hedging. Both agree only on the fact that they cannot work together. I am afraid that I have to agree with them on that and the Board will have the difficult decision of choosing between them.
I have the opposite problem with the IT function. The two Heads of IT are excited to be able to combine their databases and to develop their respective interests in Big Dat a. They claim that we should retain all of the professional staff in both departments and possibly even expand the merged IT Department beyond that. Given the rationalisation in all of our other functions, I do not think that we can agree to that, but I would hate to throw away a worthwhile opportunity.
Please give me your thoughts on the following:
* What approach to hedging is more likely to meet our needs: natural hedging or heavy use of derivatives?
* Ignoring hedging, what other factors should we consider in deciding between the two treasurers?
* Are the two heads of IT likely to be correct in arguing that we need to retain all existing IT staff in order to exploit synergies in data, particularly opportunities to leverage Big Data?
* What would the challenges be in motivating them to reduce their joint staffing levels and how might we deal with these?
Peter
You receive an email from Peter Sorchi, the Chief Executive of the merged company:
From: Peter Sorchi, Chief Executive Officer
To: Senior Finance Manager
Subject: Integration of IT and treasury
Hi,
I need you to advise me on a couple of matters. The attached press clipping shows how sensitive this is.
We need to integrate the IT and treasury functions of the former Wodd and Darrell. I thought that it would be a simple matter of identifying the common ground and slimming down both companies' departments to cover the new entity, but I have the heads of both IT and treasury from each company arguing that their approaches are better for the merged group and that they should take the lead.
Wodd's Treasurer claims to be an expert in natural hedging of currency risks and Darrell's argues that her department was highly successful because it makes excellent use of derivatives for hedging. Both agree only on the fact that they cannot work together. I am afraid that I have to agree with them on that and the Board will have the difficult decision of choosing between them.
I have the opposite problem with the IT function. The two Heads of IT are excited to be able to combine their databases and to develop their respective interests in Big Dat a. They claim that we should retain all of the professional staff in both departments and possibly even expand the merged IT Department beyond that. Given the rationalisation in all of our other functions, I do not think that we can agree to that, but I would hate to throw away a worthwhile opportunity.
Please give me your thoughts on the following:
* What approach to hedging is more likely to meet our needs: natural hedging or heavy use of derivatives?
* Ignoring hedging, what other factors should we consider in deciding between the two treasurers?
* Are the two heads of IT likely to be correct in arguing that we need to retain all existing IT staff in order to exploit synergies in data, particularly opportunities to leverage Big Data?
* What would the challenges be in motivating them to reduce their joint staffing levels and how might we deal with these?
Peter


















