Economy & Credit Chest

One of our recent clients was interested in establishing a “best-inclass” partnering culture. Having an organization with the competency to partner is becoming more critical as we slowly migrate to a true knowledge- and information-based economy. For the internal assessment we conducted one-on-one interviews with a cross section of the organization.We also arranged for approximately two hundred randomly selected employees to take the PQ Assessment online.

This article shows how employees scored in the assessment. You’ll notice that the results show a bell-shaped curve of normalcy, validating that this population would be typical of any other random population taking this assessment. It also shows that this population falls in the average-to-below-average category of Partnering Intelligence. If we graded them on a curve, they would be C–/D+ students.When the organization’s leadership reviewed this data, they understood that if they were to be world-class leaders in partnering, they needed to dramatically improve the skills of their employees.

To compare both asset classes and tranches one needs to construct a corporatebond fund invested in 100 equally weighted BBB corporate bonds (assuming that the bond fund pays a Libor _ 100 bp and runs a maturity of 5 years). The risk/return tradeoff between a corporate bond fund and a BBB–CDO note looks as shown previously.

The BBB note sustains a higher cumulative default rate before suffering any losses, as the equity absorbs the initial losses. But the corporate bond fund may outperform in severe default scenarios. This is largely because of the leverage in the CDO note. At one stage the mezzanine notes become the equity of the structure. The huge difference in IRR is explained by the extra risk between the cash bonds and the BBB-tranche as a total.

The success or failure of a decision frequently depends on the delegation process. Empowerment, which is discussed below, goes beyond the delegation of specific tasks. It involves granting a defined level of authority and responsibility within which someone makes their own decisions and implements them.

There are several stages in the delegation process.

Preparing to delegate. Some preparation and planning are always needed, perhaps limited to gaining the approval of others or simply informing people. Priorities may also need to be considered. Most of all, you should be clear about the reasons for delegation and what it is meant to achieve. This requires a focus on results and having clear, precise objectives.

Matching person and task. The person who is required to do the job must understand it and have the personal skills and competence to have a realistic chance of doing it successfully.

Discussing and agreeing objectives. Targets, resources, review times and deadlines should be discussed with the delegatee and agreed. It may be necessary to formalise the process in writing in order to avoid, or at least minimise, any misunderstanding.

Providing resources and the appropriate level of authority. When delegating work, it is imperative to provide the delegatee with the necessary resources as well as the authority to complete the task, and then to provide support when needed.

A natural tendency to evaluate the present or focus on the immediate decision should be tempered with a sense of perspective and the past. As discussed previously, you need to avoid misinterpreting the lessons of the past or using events to justify current decisions but with a spurious logic. The anchoring, sunk-cost and confirming evidence traps are all behavioural flaws that rely on specific attitudes to past events. A genuine understanding of the past is crucial, but it needs to be related to what is happening in the present and kept in perspective. As Julian Barbour, a theoretical physicist, says:

The higher we climb, the more comprehensive the view. Each new vantage point yields a better understanding of the interconnection of things. What is more, gradual accumulation of understanding is punctuated by sudden and startling enlargements of the horizon, as when we reach the brow of a hill and see things never conceived of in the ascent. Once we have found our bearings in the new landscape, our path to the most recently attained summit is laid bare and takes its honourable place in the new world.

Scenario thinking, and in particular the notion of the strategic conversation described by Kees van der Heijden, enables us to build our knowledge and understanding of the past and present, making connections and creating original insights that inform our decisions.