The world’s Largest Sharp Brain Virtual Experts Marketplace Just a click Away
Levels Tought:
Elementary,Middle School,High School,College,University,PHD
| Teaching Since: | Apr 2017 |
| Last Sign in: | 327 Weeks Ago, 4 Days Ago |
| Questions Answered: | 12843 |
| Tutorials Posted: | 12834 |
MBA, Ph.D in Management
Harvard university
Feb-1997 - Aug-2003
Professor
Strayer University
Jan-2007 - Present
NOTE: There are 6 questions and each questions requires a MINIMUM no need to format in
APA or any other such as MLA, just simply answer the questions. Do not exceed 3 complete paragraphs
please. These are not essays.
1) Read "The Stories of Two Very Different Family Cultures" on pages 32-35. Question:
Distinguish between the two family businesses. What are some of the key differences between how
these two family businesses were managed? Analyze the management concepts at work in both cases
for impact on the family businesses. Conduct some additional research, such as looking at the leadership
council of the Seattle Times, for
insight: http://www.seattletimescompany.com/communication/leadershipcouncil.htm.
Initial posting minimum
Readings: THE STORIES OF TWO VERY DIFFERENT FAMILY
CULTURES
The Binghams and the Louisville Courier-Journal
Companies
The following stories convey how differently secrecy, open communication, family
cultures, and policies guiding the interaction between a family and its business can
influence the fate of a family company.
Barry Bingham, Sr., had just announced that the Louisville Courier-Journal would be
sold. The Binghams had remained unable to communicate and resolve the differences
between members of the family. (If you have not already done so, please read Case 1: The
Binghams and The Louisville Courier-Journal Companies for additional background
information.) An agreement was reached on that fateful day with the Gannett Company,
and the Bingham family members cashed out. All emerged cashrich, but some who cared
about the legacy were heartbroken.
Much had gone wrong in the Bingham family's leadership of the Louisville CourierJournal and its other media properties. Absent was a visible commitment to continuity on
the part of Barry Sr., the chair and CEO. Also absent was a board with independent
outsiders. Lacking too was spousal leadership by Mary Bingham as a trust catalyst (a
facilitator and communications catalyst); she could have provided the glue that would have
kept the Bingham family united and focused on a win-win environment.9 Relationships in
the Bingham family appeared to be characterized by an emotional distance, which created
an irreparable gulf between adults of two generations. Barry Sr. never vested full authority
in Barry Jr., as evidenced by several instances of second-guessing his son, the president,
and by his retaining voting control. By never communicating his commitment to continuity
or his plans to transfer voting control to his son and by approving the sale of the company
when a consensus could not be reached, he frittered away his power as a father, a CEO, and majority owner to promote continuity across generations. Continuity, at least in retrospect,
would have been preferable to the observed outcomes—high capital gains and estate taxes
paid by Bingham family members, an extended family that remained fractured and distant
after the sale, and the loss of jobs and a community-responsive local newspaper.
The sale of the company did not, after all, bring the family together as Barry Sr. had
expected. Each member of the third generation went off on her or his own. Years later, their
conflict would remain unresolved. Several fourth-generation members openly regretted the
decision to sell the company and the loss of identity, legacy, and opportunity that it
represented for them. After all, the dream that "someday all of this would be theirs" had
found fertile ground in their minds as they grew up. Many of the actions that the Binghams
could have taken to reverse course and prevent the disadvantaged sale of their properties
would have been in the province of family meetings. But without such a governance body,
the conflict was taken to the board of directors, composed primarily of family members,
which was clearly overwhelmed by the conflict and paralyzed by its membership. Board
members Sallie and Eleanor had spent most of their lives away from Louisville, the family,
and the family enterprise. They had pursued careers that hardly prepared them for
leadership of an important media company.
In the absence of family meetings, next-generation family members lacked the education,
information, give-and-take communication, and emotional intelligence that would have
promoted understanding among the individual heirs. When Barry Sr. named Sallie and
Eleanor to the board, he gave them influence far beyond their capacity to understand and
plan for the not-too-distant succession and transfer of power. Membership in a family
council (to be discussed later in this chapter as a way of managing and even preempting
some sources of family conflict) could have fostered the understanding needed for such
planning, through years of working together in council meetings.
(Poza 32-34)
Poza, Ernesto J. Family Business, 4th Edition. Cengage Learning, 20130128. VitalBook file.
The citation provided is a guideline. Please check each citation for accuracy before use.
2) Question:
After reviewing Chapter 4, determine 2 or 3 specific challenges to family governance and assess how
each may impact a family owned business. How might a CEO or President of a family business address
these challenges in order to n effective governance structure?
Initial posting minimum
Reading: (I provided a Summary for the entire chapter). SUMMARY 1 Effective governance empowers leaders of families in business to make the most of the
unique strength of a family enterprise: the synergy between a strong, unified owning family
and a well-run family enterprise or family office.
-----------