PurposeThe purpose of this research is to examine the effect of supply chain implementation issues on firm value.Design/methodology/approachUsing case study methodology, this paper outlines the cases of Hershey and Nike and the impact of supply chain implementation issues on these firms’ value.FindingsDifficulties in the implementation of supply chain management software designed to maximize firm value, can result in a disruption of a firm's supply chain, causing losses for the firm and a decline in firm value; thereby creating much disappointment for the firm's shareholders. Hence, great care should be taken with the implementation of new SCM solutions.Research limitations/implicationsFuture research may be directed at extending this work by examining the changes in the market values of a wide sample of client and provider firms following the implementation of new supply chain solutions.Practical implicationsWhen modifying a standard supply chain template to suit a customer's requirements, particular care should be used in implementation and provider firms should insist that clients follow the provider's implementation methodology. Complex SCM systems designed to track a multiplicity of product varieties, may lead to difficulties in implementation. Prior to switching to a new SCM system there should be adequate testing to see if the system meets the client's requirements. Premature switching can have disastrous consequences.Originality/valueThis research demonstrates the impact of implementation issues on the effectiveness of SCM technology.

The sales‐maximization hypothesis and the shareholder wealth‐maximization hypothesis have been suggested in prior finance literature to explain the determinants of CEO pay. This paper proposes that CEO influence over the board is an additional explanation for the size of CEO pay. Evidence from the 1989–1991 period indicates that CEO pay is positively related to measures of CEO influence over the board. Results of this study suggest that CEO salary levels are mostly a function of CEO influence over the board, the growth in sales and the size of the firm.

On December 2, 2001, Enron, once a global energy‐trading giant, filed for protection under Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. In the weeks preceding the filing, numerous reports of accounting irregularities and the perception of a notorious lack of transparency in the company's financial statements raised questions about the responsibility and role played by Enron's auditor Arthur Andersen. On January 10, 2002 Andersen disclosed that employees at its Houston office had shredded thousands of documents and deleted several emails relating to the Enron audit. On March 14, the Justice Department indicted Andersen on charges of obstruction of justice relating to its inquiry into Enron's accounting. On June 15, 2002, a jury in a Texas court convicted Andersen of these charges. In the context of the Enron‐Andersen case, this paper investigates and discusses the importance of financial transparency, auditor independence and auditor responsibility for the health of global financial markets and the world economy.

Between October and November 2001 the world witnessed the collapse of Enron, a major US publicly traded corporation with global operations. The Enron case highlights the impact corporate failure has on American society and capital markets and underscores the need for better enforcement of regulations and ethical business behavior. This paper discusses the role played by Enron’s senior management, its board of directors, Enron’s auditors, consultants, bankers, Wall Street and the government, in the spectacular rise and fall of this corporate giant. It also examines the impact of Enron’s failure on its employees, the employees of Andersen, and on thousands of ordinary Americans who invested in the stock via their pensions and mutual funds. This paper highlights the conflicts of interest that pervade the financial system and discusses the social and financial impact of a combined business and oversight failure. Students and teachers of finance, corporate governance, and business strategy may be interested in this paper as a pedagogical tool to teach undergraduate finance, business ethics, business strategy, and corporate governance.

No abstract