case study lessons learned

An official website of the United States government.

Here’s how you know

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs

Case studies.

To help start or improve your organization's safety and health program, see the case studies listed below for lessons learned and best practices.

• The Electric Power Industry relies on Safety and Health Programs to keep workers safe on the job ( PDF )
• Hazards that OSHA's voluntary On-Site Consultation Program helped companies identify.
• Methods companies implemented to correct the hazards.
• Business practices that changed to prevent injuries and illnesses.
• Challenges, successes, and overall impact on businesses.
• More than 60 success stories from 2008 through 2016 are presented from a wide range of industries throughout the country.
• You can read stories highlighting successes and best practices from companies participating in VPP – 21 recent stories arranged by industry - as well as 26 archived stories from 1994 to 2010 .
• Read about "CEOs Who Get It":
• 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009
• Noble Corporation
• Johnson and Johnson
• DM Petroleum Operations
• Fluor Hanford
• Schneider Electric
• Dow Chemical

  Download

Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs (en Español)   Download

Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs in Construction   Download

Understanding Multiple Environmental Stresses: Report of a Workshop (2007)

Chapter: 4 lessons learned from the case studies, 4 lessons learned from the case studies.

This workshop looked at two case examples, using presentations and discussion, to explore current understanding of multiple environmental stresses in the earth system and to discuss the types of research needed to improve integrated understanding of these kinds of complex, nonlinear problems. Understanding multiple stresses is challenging because it almost always requires consideration of multiple variables and larger, more complex spatial scales. Yet without a more sophisticated understanding of the impacts of a suite of environmental stresses, we cannot make the kind of progress necessary to improve our predictive capability and response strategies.

The overarching lesson of the workshop discussions is that a thorough understanding of the integrated effects of—and future vulnerability to—multiple stresses to natural and socioeconomic systems requires improved use of existing tools and strategies and, in addition, the development of improved tools and strategies—such as observational, modeling, and information systems infrastructure—to support environmental monitoring, vulnerability assessment, and response analysis and that the entire process needs significant involvement of stakeholders.

During the workshop, the National Ecological Observing Network 1 (NEON) was mentioned as an example of the type of nationally networked research, communication, and informatics infrastructure needed to provide more comprehensive and interdisciplinary measurements and experiments. References were also made to other possible infrastructure, such as

the National Phenology Network 2 (USA-NPN), designed to facilitate systematic collection and free dissemination of phenological data from across the United States to support research concerning interactions among plants, animals, and the lower atmosphere, especially the long-term impacts of climate change;

the Ocean Research Interactive Observatory Networks 3 (ORION), designed to provide high-frequency, continuous time-series measurements in broad-scale spatial arrays needed to define the links among physical, biological, chemical, and geological variables in the oceans and provide spatially coherent data to study processes and enable modeling efforts;

the Ameri-Flux Network, 4 designed to provide continuous observations of ecosystem-level exchanges of CO 2 , H 2 O, energy, and momentum spanning diurnal, synoptic, seasonal, and interannual timescales;

the proposed Integrated and Sustained Ocean Observing System 5 (IOOS);

the International Global Ocean Observing System 6 (GOOS); and

the Global Earth Observation System of Systems 7 (GEOSS).

Observing systems alone cannot solve the puzzle of understanding multi-stress environmental problems, but they are a necessary component because they provide the data needed to characterize the environment and determine trends. There is a real need for careful attention to the systematic creation and validation of long-term, consistent climate data records (NRC, 2004a). The following paragraphs describe some of the other tools and strategies highlighted during the workshop.

COMPREHENSIVE REGIONAL FRAMEWORKS

Many participants advocated development of comprehensive regional frameworks for environmental studies as outlined during the workshop’s keynote address by Dr. Eric Barron. The vision Dr. Barron proposed included

an integrated regional web of sensors that link existing observations into a coherent framework and enable new observations to be developed within an overall structure;

an integrated and comprehensive regional information system accessible to a wide variety of researchers, operational systems, and stakeholders;

directed process studies designed to examine specific phenomena through field study to address deficiencies in understanding;

a regional, high-resolution modeling foundation for constructing increasingly complex coupled system models at the spatial and temporal scales appropriate for the examination of specific and integrated biological, hydrological, and socioeconomic systems; and

a strong connection to significant regional issues and stakeholders.

Workshop participants returned repeatedly to the Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISA) 8 program as a possible model for such regional frameworks. (RISAs are discussed in greater detail later in this chapter.)

A WEB OF INTEGRATED SENSORS

Current U.S. observation strategy tends to focus on the measurement of discrete variables at a specific set of locations designed to serve the different needs of weather forecasting, pollution monitoring, hydrological forecasting, or other specific mission objectives. This mission focus results in a diverse set of networks supported by a number of different federal agencies, states, or regional governments. A host of environmental issues motivates additional new observations. However, these new observations are frequently viewed independently of an integrated observing strategy. In addition, it is difficult to identify sufficient financial support for regular and consistently repeated observations. These factors severely limit our ability to integrate physical, biological, chemical, and human systems.

Creating comprehensive regional observing networks would allow us to (a) link observing systems into a web of integrated sensors building upon existing weather and hydrological stations and remote sensing capability; (b) create the agreements across a set of more limited agencies and federal, state, and local governments needed to create a structure to the observing system; (c) provide a compelling framework that encourages or demands the integration of new observations into a broader strategy; and (d) create strong linkages between research and operational observations that result in mutual benefit. Clearly, these steps will be difficult to achieve given political dynamics and constrained budgets, but these sorts of comprehensive approaches are needed to improve our capability to respond and ensure flexibility over time. The importance of continued support for and maintenance of existing environmental networks should not be under-estimated as a foundation for what needs to happen in the future.

REGIONAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Efforts to create comprehensive information systems increasingly reflect federal and state mandates to make data more accessible and useful to the public

and to ensure that our investments in research yield maximum societal benefit. Development of a tractable regional digital database is feasible and enables participation of universities; federal, state, and local governments; and industry in an endeavor for which immediate benefit for a state or region can be evident. For this to happen efficiently these information systems will need to take advantage of existing facilities and infrastructure, augmenting selectively as needed and, overall, improving the connections that bind the pieces together. This will take careful and detailed planning and a strong commitment to implementation.

FRAMEWORK FOR PROCESS STUDIES

Process studies are a critical element of scientific advancement because they are designed to probe uncertainties in knowledge about how the earth system functions. The objective is to use field study to address deficiencies in our understanding. Targeted process studies improve our ability to quantify thresholds, understand nonlinear interactions of multiple environmental factors, and decipher long timescale responses to climate change. The benefit of these intensive studies is maximized when they can be coupled with a highly developed, integrated set of sensors, with readily accessible spatial and temporal data within a regional information system, and with a predictive model framework that readily enables the entrainment and testing of new information from process studies.

IMPROVING OUR PREDICTIVE CAPABILITY

Prediction is central to the translation of knowledge about the earth system into economic benefit and societal well-being. Although there is still substantial room for improvement, over the last several decades we have experienced enormous increases in our ability to forecast weather and to project climate and climate variability into the future. The demand for new forecasting products involving air quality, energy demand, water quality and quantity, ultraviolet radiation, and human health indexes is growing rapidly. Environmental issues will demand an even greater capability to integrate physical, biological, chemical, and human systems in order to examine the response of critical regions or cases to multiple stresses.

Global weather and climate models provide the strongest physical foundation for more comprehensive predictive capability. The numerical models that underpin this type of forecast are increasingly becoming the framework for the addition of new numerical formulations designed to predict air quality, the water balance for river forecast models, and a host of other variables, including the migration of forests under climate change conditions. As we attempt to produce predictions at the scale of human endeavors, mesoscale models (capable of predicting synoptic weather systems) and downscaling of coarser resolution model output are increasingly becoming the focal point of weather and climate studies because of their

potential to make predictions on the scale of river systems, cities, agriculture, and forestry. Development of a mesoscale numerical prediction capability that meshes with regional sensor webs and information systems would facilitate development of tractable coupled models, initiate experimental forecasts of new variables, and enable assessment of the outcomes associated with multiple stresses.

RESEARCH NEEDS RELATED TO NONLINEARITIES AND THRESHOLDS

Workshop participants frequently highlighted lessons learned about non-linearities in the climate system and the difficulties associated with quantifying

the effects of multiple interacting stresses and technological change. Although current models are useful in identifying single-variable nonlinearities, few models are sufficiently comprehensive to provide quantitative predictions of the effects of multiple environmental stresses. While coupled modeling systems developed in the future are expected to be useful in the identification of nonlinearities, it was thought that nonlinearities are currently best identified by long-term observations.

The thresholds considered by participants to have the highest priority for study include climate/pest interactions resulting in changes in functional types of natural vegetation; megadrought (climate threshold, ecosystem thresholds, human thresholds, cascading effects); and interaction between ecosystems, climate change, and air pollution. Suggestions regarding how best to approach the study of thresholds included studies involving initial system observations followed by single-variable and multiple environmental stresses experiments and modeling; studies focused on ecotones, zones where marginality of nutrients, predators, climate, land use, economics, and policies create unstable land uses that are especially sensitive to small variations in drivers; and studies of extreme conditions (e.g., air pollution in megacities) where changes in state may be observed. Participants also encouraged development of threshold typology, identification of a core set of controlling (and dynamic) variables that determine system behavior, assessment of the interaction of fast and slow variables (as related to the threshold); assessment of the degree to which a system may be capable of self-organization; and assessment of the ability to build and increase the capacity for learning and adaptation. Threshold-focused research needs to study both direct and indirect effects, linking thresholds and impact occurrence to indicators/indices, study of the full probability space of observations and model outputs, and consideration of new opportunities that are likely to result from globalization.

RESEARCH NEEDS RELATED TO INCREASING RESILIENCE

Workshop participants encouraged the following approaches to increasing resilience to multiple environmental stresses:

use of models;

improvement of models for response planning;

identification of additional water storage;

consideration of new conservation strategies;

maintenance of biodiversity;

improved communication of environmental capacities and limitations to local officials;

improved understanding of adaptive or buffering capacity, which is determined by the types of capital available (natural, social, human, cultural, and produced);

full leveraging of adaptive capacity, technological capacity, and expertise;

in-parallel focus on combinations of social and environmental stresses and combinations of environmental stresses;

use of war games as a scenario-based tool for informing decision making, examination of historical analogs that share important similarities with contemporary (and anticipated future) stresses;

incorporation of “normal” (rather than fair to good) socioeconomic conditions and civil and regional wars in scenarios for sustainable development; and

linking results of models to resilience, improvement of public awareness of related issues, and elimination of nonsustaining financial incentives.

Moreover, a number of steps were suggested for the creation of vigorous and continuous links between researchers and decision makers, including

incorporation of the variety of time and space scales and the diversity of variables that are important to decision makers;

emphasis on the education of the user in the meaning and significance of climate and land use information in order to promote greater use and more robust applications;

ensuring mutual information exchange and feedback;

focus on communication and accessibility of information;

continuous evaluation and assessment of the use and effectiveness of the services;

employment of active mechanisms to enable the transition from research discovery to useful products; and

employment of a variety of methods of education and outreach.

RESEARCH NEEDS RELATED TO REGIONAL STUDIES

During the workshop the argument was made that the ability to anticipate the future is what makes knowledge powerful. The knowledge we seek concerns the role and effects of multiple stresses in the context of atmosphere-ecosystem interactions. These interactions include climate variability and change over a wide range of time/space scales, land use/land cover changes, human social systems, waste products and streams, and the combined effects of all the above on natural ecosystems. This knowledge must perforce be place based (i.e., site or region specific) because context is important. Integrated assessments of multiple stresses across a variety of time/space scales are required in which the impacts and decisions are place based but the drivers of impacts are drawn from a much larger scale. We can summarize by saying it is critical to link the large-scale drivers to place-based contexts with a focus on multiple stressors and put the knowledge to work—that is, connect in partnerships with real stakeholders and decision makers from the place where the work is done.

Obstacles to realizing the vision above include lack of the following:

integrated observing systems;

a common modeling framework;

a foundation of process studies geared toward prediction;

an integrated data and information system; and

systematic, vigorous connections to real users of the information and decision makers.

One program in existence comes close to meeting the challenge described above and that is the Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISA) program of NOAA’s Office of Global Programs. As described at the workshop, the RISA program was launched in 1995 with a pilot project at the University of Washington (the Climate Impacts Group). The program now consists of eight regional teams distributed across the United States, each with a focus on the role of climate variability and the projected impacts of climate change in defined sectors of human socioeconomic activity and on specified ecosystems. Each program is required to establish links and partnerships with stakeholders and decision makers so that research results can be translated into usable knowledge and decision-support tools that are specific to the subregion. Emphasis is placed not only on assessing the climate sensitivity of different activities and ecosystems but also on their vulnerabilities to climate variability and change and on policies and programs that would increase the resilience of these subregions to climate-related risks of varying magnitude.

So far RISA teams cover the Pacific Northwest, the Southwest, the Colorado River system, California, Hawaii, the Southeast (Florida and Georgia), the Carolinas, and New England. Although the basic template and objectives for each team are the same, there is considerable variation in the way the teams implement the vision because each team is grounded in a particular place in which the mix of concerns varies along with constituents, capabilities, and climate-related risks. These teams document what and how climate drivers function in specific places, what impacts they typically exert on various kinds of natural systems and socioeconomic activities that are sensitive to climate variability, and what levels of risk each subregion faces, inter alia. The crucial questions, not surprisingly, shift from place to place. So, for instance, “Will winter snowpack and spring streamflow be above or below normal this year?” might be a critical question in the Pacific Northwest, but it will have no meaning in Florida where “Will it freeze?” is definitely one of the critical questions. In the western United States water is the central issue and will be even more so under scenarios of climate change because the entire West consists largely of snowmelt-driven systems. No matter what their foci, all subregions are now faced with the necessity of trying to understand what their vulnerabilities to anthropogenic climate change are, what the magnitudes and rates of change might be, and how best to adapt to and cope with these changes over time.

The RISA teams clearly demonstrate how useful such an approach can be. But to date this is still a small program and a long way from fulfilling the vision of cohesive observations, data management, data access, carefully designed process studies across regions and subregions nested in a framework for developing regional predictive models of the effects of multiple stresses and translating the research outputs in a series of vigorous and continuing connections with stakeholders.

NEAR-TERM OPPORTUNITIES

Looking overall at the workshop presentations and discussions, a great range of issues and opportunities were explored. As a final step, the steering committee reviewed the information generated and identified seven near-term opportunities for advancing our understanding of multiple stresses and making this understanding useful to decision makers.

1. A Ground-Based Measurements Network . There is a real need for comprehensive ground-based measurements of important ecological indicators such as biodiversity, species composition, ecosystem functioning, ecological aspects of biogeochemical cycles, and other elements. This information over time will allow improved understanding of the ecological implications of climate change, the evolution of infectious diseases, invasive species, and land use change over time and across large spatial scales (NRC, 2003). The National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) that has been under development is an example of the kind of system that could contribute the types of information needed.

2. Global Information Systems and Satellite Observations . In 2005 members of the Group on Earth Observations (GEO), which includes 60 countries and the European Commission, agreed to a 10-year implementation plan for a Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS). Anticipated foci and socioeconomic benefits include

sustainable agriculture and reduced desertification;

disaster reduction and improved ecosystem management and protection;

biodiversity conservation;

improved weather information, forecasting, and warning;

adaptation to climate variability and change;

improved water resource management;

understanding of environmental factors affecting human health and well-being; and

improved management of energy resources (NRC, 2005b).

GEOSS could be configured to assist with detecting and understanding multiple stresses and extreme events. For example, one of the key components of the

International Earth Observing System (IEOS), 9 the primary contribution by the United States to GEOSS, would be a National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS). The goal of NIDIS is to develop an integrated drought information system that would enhance the ability of users to assess on a timely basis the risks and potential impacts associated with drought through the availability of appropriate decision-support tools. Other aspects of NIDIS focus on the development of a comprehensive drought early warning and delivery system, an enhanced research environment that emphasizes impact mitigation and improved predictive capabilities, and a framework for interacting with and educating stakeholders and the public on causes of drought, preparedness strategies, and how drought impacts human and natural systems. NIDIS is considered to be an invaluable resource in helping water managers and policy makers at all levels deal with the increasing impacts of drought and water resources management in a climate change environment.

IEOS/GEOSS could also provide longer-term forecasting, especially for severe weather events, such as Hurricane Katrina, and an all-hazards, all-media alerting system. (In the case of wildfires, hikers, for example, would get immediate messages on their cell phones to evacuate areas . ) Furthermore, as improved forecasting will help with the distribution of resources in warm or cold years and in extreme wet or dry seasons, IEOS/GEOSS could be very important to the water and energy sectors.

3. Synthesis of Data . The Heinz Center’s 10 State of the Nation’s Ecosystems project—done in concert with federal, corporate, and academic partners—is characterizing data gaps and data integration needs by sector (urban, forests, coasts, etc.) in order to produce indicators on the improvement or degradation of U.S. resources. This multiyear effort could include a section on the composite effect of multiple stresses on ecological and urban sectors and identify missing data most needed to characterize the status of trends of ecosystem health.

4. Nonlinearities and Thresholds . There is a rich historical record of responses to extremes of record (droughts, floods, hurricanes). Overlaying those conditions on the socioeconomic and ecological conditions of today—conducting “what if” scenarios to see if today’s communities and natural resources could cope with, for example, the drought of the 1930s or a direct hit of hurricane Andrew on Miami—would be extremely valuable. Similarly, scenarios reconstructing extreme events of the past could study if an increase in temperature and a change in water availability would lead to breakpoints or thresholds in the ecological or economic realms (e.g., as observed by Breshears et al., 2005).

5. Resilience . Within the assessment processes, institutional, technological, and economic options that offer insurance or appear the most robust to a suite of environmental changes could be identified. These could include such measures as changed cropping patterns, water conservation, germplasm preservation, park design, and habitat connectivity, within the context of long-term resiliency to a changing climate. In addition, early warning systems for various environmental indicators (droughts, floods, tropical cyclones, wildfires) could be established in pertinent regions. Finally, development of a compendium of best practices for coping with extreme events and deployment of appropriate preparedness programs would enhance resilience.

6. Regional Foci . Understanding the impacts of climate change in a particular place in concert with the other environmental stressors operating in that region is key to developing wise coping options. The Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments program and the regional studies begun under the U.S. National Assessment process are models of this nascent type of analysis, and an increase in this kind of activity is greatly needed.

7. Stakeholder Involvement . Connecting stakeholders to an ongoing research effort directly aimed at producing usable knowledge of value to stakeholders requires long-term partnerships, trust that researchers will actually stay the course, thorough familiarity on both sides about what each is doing, considerable effort expended by the research teams to gain knowledge about the decision context and the needs of the different types of stakeholders, and appreciation by the stakeholders of the added value the results of the research can offer to their concerns. All of this takes time and resources. The RISA teams, for example, have used periodic systematic surveys, annual workshops custom-tailored to the specific interests of different combinations of stakeholders (e.g., water resource managers, forest fire managers, fisheries managers, farmers, coastal managers), and the co-production of specific decision-support tools as ways to build in true stakeholder involvement.

Research and experience to date show that overemphasizing climate forecasts per se is counterproductive. Users have a decided preference for deterministic forecasts and lack of understanding of probabilistic forecasts to an extent that only the technically advanced early adopters find probabilistic climate forecasts to be useful. For others a softer approach is more useful and more readily understood. This approach is grounded on the fact that all stakeholders really want to understand to what extent climate is responsible for the underlying variation in the resources they use or manage or the economic activities in which they are engaged. Once researchers recognize this fact, it is possible to have fruitful, long-term relationships that evolve. However, each party to the relationship has to be committed to learning from the other, and the researchers need to strive to produce information and decision tools that are useful and timely to the stakeholders. However, it should be understood that stakeholders cannot define the totality of the research agenda for the simple reason that often the stakeholders do not and

cannot be expected to know what they need to know about the dynamics of the climate system. So the research agenda must be balanced; it cannot be the product of curiosity alone but rather it must be defined to meet certain ends that can be transferred to the decision maker.

The research of the last decade has demonstrated that ecosystems and human systems are influenced by multiple factors, including climate, land use, and the by-products of resource use. Understanding the net impact of a suite of simultaneously occurring environmental changes is essential for developing effective response strategies. Using case studies on drought and a wide range of atmosphere-ecosystem interactions, a workshop was held in September 2005 to gather different perspectives on multiple stress scenarios. The overarching lesson of the workshop is that society will require new and improved strategies for coping with multiple stresses and their impacts on natural socioeconomic systems. Improved communication among stakeholders; increased observations (especially at regional scales); improved model and information systems; and increased infrastructure to provide better environmental monitoring, vulnerability assessment, and response analysis are all important parts of moving toward better understanding of and response to situations involving multiple stresses. During the workshop, seven near-term opportunities for research and infrastructure that could help advance understanding of multiple stresses were also identified.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

What the Case Study Method Really Teaches

by Nitin Nohria

Summary .   

During my decade as dean of Harvard Business School, I spent hundreds of hours talking with our alumni. To enliven these conversations, I relied on a favorite question: “What was the most important thing you learned from your time in our MBA program?”

Partner Center

Lessons from the Case Studies

• First Online: 19 July 2017

Cite this chapter

• Robert O. Zdenek 3 &
• Dee Walsh 4  

812 Accesses

Lessons and challenges from the case studies are presented in this chapter, and common themes and patterns are identified. One of the major goals of the analysis of the case studies is to provide practical examples of how organizations can work together with multiple partners, policy makers, and funders to advance strategic partnerships built on core competencies of diverse organizations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Choi, Laura, and David Erickson. 2015. Towards a New Business Model: Strengthening Families Helps To Strengthen Communities and the Nation. What It’s Worth. San Francisco. CA: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and CFED, 373.

Google Scholar  

Kotter, John P. 1996. Leading change . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Snyder, Howard, and Tina Daniell. 2011. The Northwest Side Community Development Corporation: Transforming the Approach to Creating Positive Economic Impact in Distressed Communities , 2–7. Chicago: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

San Francisco, CA, USA

Robert O. Zdenek

Portland, OR, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert O. Zdenek .

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Zdenek, R.O., Walsh, D. (2017). Lessons from the Case Studies. In: Navigating Community Development. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-47701-9_8

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-47701-9_8

Published : 19 July 2017

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, New York

Print ISBN : 978-1-137-47700-2

Online ISBN : 978-1-137-47701-9

eBook Packages : Economics and Finance Economics and Finance (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Corporate Governance Failures: Case Studies and Lessons Learned

The importance of robust and transparent practices in Corporate Governance cannot be overstated. Corporate Governance—the system by which companies are directed and controlled—is pivotal in ensuring organisation accountability, fairness, and transparency. However, history has shown us that even well-established institutions are not immune to governance failures. These failures can have catastrophic consequences for companies, investors, employees, and the broader economy.

The study of Corporate Governance failures offers invaluable insights into the flaws and weaknesses in governance frameworks and practices. By examining high-profile cases of governance breakdowns, we can uncover the underlying issues that led to these failures and understand how similar pitfalls can be avoided in the future. The lessons learned from these cases are critical for strengthening governance structures and fostering a culture of ethical leadership and accountability.

This exploration of Corporate Governance failures delves into some of modern history's most notorious cases of mismanagement and unethical behaviour. We will analyse the key factors contributing to these failures, their impact on stakeholders, and the following reforms or changes. Through detailed case studies, we will uncover common patterns and warning signs that can serve as crucial learning points for organisations striving to enhance their governance practices.

Each case study is a cautionary tale, revealing the consequences of governance lapses and the imperative need for vigilance and integrity in corporate management. By dissecting these failures, we aim to shed light on how governance mechanisms can be strengthened to prevent similar issues in the future. This analysis not only highlights the importance of good governance but also underscores the potential for transformative change when lessons are learned and applied effectively.

Examining these high-profile governance failures, we gain a deeper understanding of governance's critical role in sustaining organisational health and credibility. The lessons learned from these cases are not merely theoretical; they are practical and actionable insights that can help shape more resilient and ethical governance practices. As we delve into these case studies, we are reminded that pursuing good governance is an ongoing journey marked by continuous learning, adaptation, and a commitment to upholding the highest standards of integrity and accountability.

Key Insights from Corporate Scandals and Governance Failures

Regrettably, corporate scandals and forgeries perpetrated by a company's Chairman, CEO, or Directors are a reality that can have catastrophic repercussions for the broader economy, shareholders, and employees. These individuals' actions can significantly impact the financial health of the company and the trust of stakeholders in the company's leadership, as they hold significant power and influence within their organisations.

In certain instances, these individuals may be driven by personal financial advantage, such as embezzlement or insider trading. They may also engage in unethical or unlawful behaviour to conceal poor business decisions or to achieve financial objectives. This behaviour may involve manipulating financial data or fraudulent accounting practices.

Poor governance and accountability structures within the organisation are frequently the underlying causes of corporate scandals and forgeries. This may encompass a culture prioritising profits over ethical behaviour, lacking transparency, and having ineffective oversight mechanisms. Additionally, unethical behaviour and decision-making within a company can be influenced by external factors, including economic pressures and market competition.

Ultimately, companies must prioritise the interests of all stakeholders, not just short-term financial gains, and establish robust governance and accountability structures. This includes promoting transparency and ethical behaviour. Companies can contribute to the prevention of corporate scandals and forgeries and guarantee the long-term success and sustainability of their organisations by doing so.

Introduction to the Lehman Brothers Case Study

The 2008 financial crisis was marked by the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, which is considered one of the most significant and catastrophic occurrences. It revealed the widespread Corporate Governance practices that were flawed in the financial sector. This case study is a classic illustration of how a company's leadership, culture, and risk management practices can lead to its demise. The case study of Lehman Brothers is a widely debated topic in the business community, and it is imperative to comprehend the events that transpired and the lessons that can be taken from them.

The following are a few insights that detail the Lehman Brothers case study:

1. The failure of Corporate Governance at Lehman Brothers : Understanding the factors that contributed to the collapse of Lehman Brothers is crucial. There was a lack of transparency and accountability, and the company's leadership failed to manage risks effectively. Adequate supervision was not provided by the board of directors, and the company's culture fostered excessive risk-taking. In addition, the organisation's compensation framework prioritised transient profits over long-term sustainability.

2. The Function of Regulators: The collapse of Lehman Brothers ignited a discussion regarding the role of regulators in preventing such catastrophes. Critics criticised the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for its lack of proactive regulation of the banking sector. While some experts contend that the regulatory framework was insufficient, others argue that the regulators possessed the necessary tools to prevent the crisis but could not effectively employ them.

3. Effect on the financial system:  Lehman Brothers' insolvency significantly impacted the financial system. The crisis of confidence caused many investors to lose faith in the financial sector. The credit market was frozen, and numerous banks were on the verge of collapse. The crisis resulted in a global economic recession, and the financial system did not fully recover for years.

4. Lessons Learnt:  The Lehman Brothers case study offers a variety of lessons for regulators and companies. It emphasises the significance of transparency, accountability, and effective risk management. It reminds us of the necessity of a strong regulatory framework to avert such catastrophes. It also emphasises companies' need to maintain a long-term perspective and avoid excessive risks.

The Lehman Brothers case study is a cautionary tale regarding the potential far-reaching repercussions of defective Corporate Governance practices on the financial system and the company's demise. It underscores the significance of transparent and accountable risk management and offers lessons for regulators and companies to prevent similar catastrophes in the future.

An overview of the Corporate Governance structure at Lehman Brothers

One of the best examples of Corporate Governance gone wrong is Lehman Brothers, whose 2008 bankruptcy set off the global financial crisis. Lehman Brothers' Corporate Governance framework was deficient and did not effectively tackle the pervasive conflicts of interest and underlying dangers within the organisation. This section will summarise Lehman Brothers' Corporate Governance structure and emphasise the major mistakes that ultimately contributed to the company's demise.

1. Board of directors:  Lehman Brothers' board of directors monitored the company's operations and ensured that they were conducted in the shareholders' best interests. However, the board's lack of effective supervision and willingness to let senior management take unwarranted risks ultimately caused the business to fail. The board, for instance, did not object to the business's aggressive risk management or accounting techniques.

2. Risk Management : Lehman Brothers needed to thoroughly understand the risks it was taking and revise its risk management structure. Due to senior management's dominance over the risk management committee and its lack of independence, there was insufficient oversight and an inability to recognise and reduce risks.

3. Remuneration:  The compensation plan of Lehman Brothers encouraged excessive risk-taking and a focus on the near term. Because senior management received bonuses based on short-term profitability, they were incentivised to make riskier investments that might have high short-term returns but could harm the company in the long run.

4. Audit : Ernst & Young, Lehman Brothers' external auditors, reported no accounting errors and found the company in good standing. In addition to being ineffectual, the audit committee needed to supervise the auditors adequately.

5. Inadequate regulatory monitoring:  Because of insufficient regulatory oversight, Lehman Brothers avoided regulatory scrutiny by employing off-balance-sheet accounting techniques. Inaction by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and other authorities prevented Lehman Brothers from collapsing because they could not recognise the risks connected to the company's operations.

Numerous systematic Corporate Governance errors occurred at Lehman Brothers. The underlying risks and conflicts of interest that ultimately contributed to the company's death were overlooked and unaddressed by the board, risk management, compensation, audit, and regulatory oversight of the organisation. This story shows how crucial it is to have excellent Corporate Governance and efficient oversight to prevent business failures.

Corporate Governance Failure at Ricoh India: Rebuilding Lost Trust

The case of  Corporate Governance Failure at Ricoh India: Rebuilding Lost Trust  delves into a significant governance crisis faced by Ricoh India, a subsidiary of the Japanese multinational Ricoh. In July 2016, the company disclosed severe irregularities in its financial reporting, revealing falsified accounts and violations of accounting principles. This resulted in a staggering loss of INR 11.23 billion for 2016. This revelation dramatically eroded over 75% of the company's market capitalisation (Financial Express, 2016).

This case is a critical educational tool for understanding the fundamental elements of Corporate Governance and the profound consequences of governance failures. It underscores the pivotal roles of the board of directors, the audit committee, and external auditors in maintaining corporate integrity and transparency and highlights the urgent need for robust Corporate Governance reforms to prevent such failures in the future.

A key focus of the case is the complex issue of governance in multinational corporations, specifically the challenge of balancing control between a parent company and its subsidiary. It explores the classic dilemma of how much power a parent company should exercise over its subsidiary versus allowing the subsidiary board the necessary independence to operate effectively. This dilemma is a recurring challenge for multinationals striving to establish effective governance structures across diverse subsidiaries.

Study Level/Applicability

The case is designed for MBA courses covering Corporate Governance, business ethics, and strategic management, particularly in multinational corporations. It is valuable for developing a comprehensive understanding of Corporate Governance principles, emphasising the roles and responsibilities of the board of directors, audit committees, and external auditors. The case provides insight into inadequate Corporate Governance's severe consequences and costs. Additionally, it addresses governance challenges inherent in the parent-subsidiary relationship, making it a pertinent resource for executive training focused on Corporate Governance, leadership, and business ethics.

Case Overview

The case presents the predicament of Noboru Akahane, the newly appointed Chairman of Ricoh India. After disclosing significant financial discrepancies, Akahane faced the daunting task of addressing the fallout from falsified accounts and accounting violations that severely impacted the company's financial standing. The crisis, unfolding over 18 months, involved delayed financial reporting, auditor warnings about irregularities, a forensic audit, the suspension of senior officials, and a police complaint by Ricoh India against its own employees.

Akahane's mandate was to stabilise Ricoh India's operations, manage the ongoing crisis, and implement measures to restore confidence and ensure that such governance lapses would not recur. This case encapsulates the challenges of crisis management and governance reform in the wake of significant corporate failures.

Expected learning outcomes

The case teaches students about the major components of the Corporate Governance framework and the repercussions of inadequate Corporate Governance. More specifically, the case addresses the following objectives: provide an overview of Corporate Governance structure; highlight the role of the board of directors, audit committee, and external auditors; appreciate the rationale behind mandatory auditor rotation; appreciate the consequences of poor corporate structure; explore the interrelationship between sustainability reporting and transparency in a corporation's financial disclosures; understand management and governance.

The Volkswagen Emissions Scandal: A Detailed Analysis

In 2015, Volkswagen (VW) became embroiled in a significant scandal known as "Dieselgate," which revealed the company's use of illicit software to manipulate emissions tests on its diesel vehicles. This software, designed to deceive emissions testing protocols, allowed VW to present its diesel cars as more environmentally friendly than they were. The scandal had profound consequences, including extensive vehicle recalls, substantial financial penalties, and significant damage to the company’s reputation.

Discovery and Mechanism

The deception came to light through research conducted by West Virginia University and the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT). Their findings demonstrated that VW's diesel vehicles emitted nitrogen oxides (NOx) far exceeding U.S. regulatory limits. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) subsequently discovered that VW had installed "defeat devices" in its vehicles. These devices were engineered to detect when the cars were undergoing emissions tests and temporarily reduce emissions during testing, only to revert to higher levels during regular driving conditions.

Motivations and Consequences

The primary motivation behind the fraud was to gain a competitive advantage in the highly competitive automotive market. By falsely portraying its diesel vehicles as environmentally friendly and meeting stringent emissions standards, VW was able to attract customers and enhance market share. However, the scandal led to extensive repercussions, including:

 Global Recalls: Millions of vehicles were recalled worldwide.

 Financial Penalties: VW faced multi-billion-dollar fines and settlements.

 Reputational Damage: The scandal severely harmed VW's brand and market position.

Leadership and Accountability

Martin Winterkorn, Volkswagen's CEO at the time, was implicated in the scandal. Although Winterkorn announced his resignation shortly after the scandal became public and faced legal charges, including accusations of fraud and violations of environmental regulations, he denied personal involvement in the fraudulent activities. The scandal led to significant changes in Volkswagen's corporate governance and management, including legal actions against several executives involved in the fraud.

Reforms and Long-Term Impact

In response to the scandal, Volkswagen undertook several corrective measures, including:

Customer Compensation: VW paid compensation to affected customers.

Vehicle Fixes: The company recalled and repaired the impacted vehicles.

Investment in Green Technology: VW invested in electric and hybrid vehicles to transition towards greener technology.

The scandal also prompted tighter regulations and enhanced scrutiny of emissions testing within the automotive industry.

Lessons Learned

The Volkswagen emissions scandal underscores several key lessons in corporate governance:

1. Lack of Transparency:  The company’s deceptive practices demonstrated a failure to disclose its environmental impact to investors and regulatory bodies fully.

2. Weak Board Oversight : VW's board lacked independence and effective oversight, failing to hold management accountable and approving excessive executive compensation.

3. Conflicts of Interes t: VW's relationship with its auditors, KPMG, involved conflicts of interest that compromised audit objectivity.

4. Inadequate Regulatory Supervision:  The regulatory framework at the time failed to prevent or detect VW's misconduct, highlighting the need for stronger oversight.

5.  Ethical Leadership : The scandal highlighted the importance of ethical leadership. CEO Martin Winterkorn's and other officials' actions undermined the company's integrity.

6. Reputational Damage:  The scandal had a lasting impact on VW’s reputation, affecting investor and customer confidence and leading to stricter industry regulations.

7. Enhanced Disclosure:  The need for improved environmental impact reporting and transparency in corporate practices became evident, emphasising the necessity for accurate and comprehensive disclosure.

The Volkswagen emissions scandal is a critical case study in corporate governance. It illustrates the consequences of unethical behaviour and the importance of maintaining robust governance frameworks.

Ramalinga Raju and the Satyam Computer Services Scandal: 2009

In 2009, a major accounting scandal rocked Satyam Computer Services, a prominent multinational IT services firm based in India. The crisis unfolded when Ramalinga Raju, the company’s founder and CEO, confessed to manipulating its financial records and inflating its earnings.

The scandal came to light when Raju disclosed his fraudulent activities in a letter addressed to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and Satyam’s board of directors. The letter revealed that Raju had been engaged in financial misconduct for several years, employing techniques such as creating fictitious bank accounts to exaggerate the company's cash position, overstating sales, and understating liabilities.

Raju’s actions aimed to misrepresent Satyam as a flourishing, financially robust enterprise to attract investors and sustain the company's stock price. This deception ultimately led to a severe decline in the company’s value, resulting in significant financial losses for investors and thousands of jobs. The scandal forced Satyam to restate its financial statements and had a broader impact on the Indian IT sector, prompting stricter Corporate Governance regulations and increased regulatory scrutiny.

In the aftermath, Raju and several other senior executives were arrested and charged with various crimes, including conspiracy, forgery, and cheating. Raju was convicted and sentenced to seven years in prison, along with substantial fines.

Following the scandal, Tech Mahindra acquired Satyam and rebranded it as Mahindra Satyam. Under new management, the company implemented stringent Corporate Governance reforms, regained investor confidence, and gradually stabilised. Nevertheless, the scandal left an enduring impact on the organisation and its stakeholders, serving as a crucial lesson on the importance of ethical business practices and transparency in financial reporting.

Key Lessons from the Satyam Scandal:

1. Lack of Ethical Leadership: The Satyam scandal highlighted the absence of ethical leadership, as Ramalinga Raju and other senior executives engaged in greed-driven, unethical practices. They manipulated financial statements and engaged in insider trading to benefit personally at the expense of shareholders.

2.  Weak Board Oversight: The board of directors at Satyam failed to provide effective oversight and lacked objectivity. They allowed excessive executive compensation and neglected to hold management accountable for their actions.

3. Inadequate Financial Reporting:  Satyam's financial reports were falsified to hide losses and inflate profits, revealing significant financial reporting and oversight deficiencies.

4. Conflicts of Interest:  The company’s relationship with its auditors, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), was marred by conflicts of interest. PwC’s dual role as auditor and consultant compromised its objectivity, allowing aggressive accounting practices and off-balance-sheet entities to go unchecked.

5. Regulatory Failures:  The regulatory framework was inadequate to detect and prevent Satyam’s fraudulent activities. The failure of regulatory bodies, including the SEC, to identify and act upon the company's dishonest accounting practices underscored the need for stronger regulatory oversight.

6.  Corporate Culture:  The scandal revealed a corporate culture at Satyam that prioritised aggressive accounting practices and short-term profitability over ethical behaviour and long-term sustainability. This environment fostered unethical conduct and financial fraud.

7. Reputational Damage: The scandal severely damaged Satyam’s reputation and eroded investor trust. Its repercussions extended to the broader IT sector and the Indian economy, leading to stricter regulations and oversight of Corporate Governance practices.

The Satyam scandal underscored the importance of an independent and effective board of directors. To ensure accountability and transparency, companies must establish a robust board that exercises rigorous control over management.

Furthermore, the scandal highlighted the necessity of implementing effective whistleblowing mechanisms. Organisations must develop and enforce robust procedures to support and protect whistleblowers who report unethical behaviour and financial irregularities.

Principal Domains of Corporate Fraud and Scandals

Corporate scandals and fraud can arise from a variety of factors, with key domains including:

1. Accounting and Financial Reporting:  This domain encompasses manipulating financial data, such as inflating asset values, understating liabilities, or falsifying financial performance. Scandals in this area often involve the misreporting of financial information to investors and stakeholders, employing fraudulent accounting practices, or creating fictitious financial statements.

2. Insider Trading: Insider trading involves the illegal trading of securities based on confidential, non-public information. This practice often includes executives, directors, or other insiders leveraging their knowledge of a company's financial status or upcoming events to make personal gains.

3. Embezzlement: Embezzlement refers to the misappropriation or theft of corporate funds by individuals in positions of trust, such as executives or directors. This can include diverting business funds for personal use, falsifying invoices or vendor information, or misusing company credit cards.

4.  Bribery and Corruption:  Bribery and corruption involve offering or accepting valuable incentives in exchange for undue influence or unfair advantages in business transactions. This can include bribing officials, falsifying contracts, or engaging in other corrupt activities to gain a competitive edge.

5. Mismanagement and Poor Governance:  This domain highlights inadequate accountability, weak procedures, and insufficient oversight. It encompasses a culture that prioritises short-term financial gains over ethical behaviour and long-term sustainability, including poor board oversight and a lack of transparency in decision-making.

6. Cybersecurity Breaches:  Cybersecurity breaches involve malicious actors gaining unauthorised access to sensitive data, such as financial and personal information. These breaches can lead to financial losses, reputational damage, and regulatory and legal consequences.

7. Environmental Scandals : Environmental scandals involve violating laws and regulations designed to protect the environment. These can include actions that harm the environment, such as non-compliance with environmental regulations or releasing hazardous substances.

8. Product Safety Scandals: Product safety issues involve the manufacturing or distribution of unsafe products that pose risks to public health or safety. This can include mislabeling products, distributing defective items, or failing to disclose potential hazards associated with a product.

9. Discrimination and Harassment : Scandals in this domain involve incidents of workplace discrimination, harassment, or retaliation. Examples include sexual harassment, discriminatory hiring practices, and other forms of workplace inequity.

10. Supply Chain Abuse:  Supply chain abuse refers to unethical or illegal practices by suppliers or vendors. This can include unethical business practices, environmental violations, forced labour, child labour, or other forms of labour exploitation.

Lessons from High-Profile Governance Failures

Exploring high-profile Corporate Governance failures underscores the critical importance of robust governance structures, ethical leadership, and rigorous oversight. Through detailed case studies such as Enron, Lehman Brothers, and Satyam Computer Services, we gain valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of governance breakdowns and their far-reaching consequences.

Key Takeaways from Governance Failures

Importance of Ethical Leadership:  Ethical leadership is foundational to sound Corporate Governance. Failures often stem from leaders who prioritise personal gain over organisational integrity. Effective boards must ensure that leaders adhere to high ethical standards and foster a culture of honesty and accountability.

Robust Board Oversight: A well-functioning board of directors is essential for preventing and addressing governance issues. The cases illustrate that boards must be independent, active, and vigilant in overseeing management actions and financial reporting. Weak or complicit boards are often central to governance failures.

Transparent Financial Reporting: Accurate and transparent financial reporting is crucial for maintaining stakeholder trust and ensuring financial stability. Manipulated or fraudulent financial statements mislead investors and can precipitate catastrophic failures. Regular audits and transparent reporting practices are essential safeguards.

Regulatory Compliance and Reform:  Regulatory frameworks are pivotal in governing corporate behaviour. Failures reveal that regulatory bodies must continually evolve and enforce standards effectively. Rigorous enforcement and timely intervention are necessary to address and prevent governance malfeasance.

Whistleblower Protections:  Effective whistleblower systems are vital for uncovering and addressing unethical practices. Protecting and incentivising whistleblowers helps organisations identify issues early and take corrective action before they escalate into larger problems.

Corporate Culture and Accountability:  A culture that prioritises ethical behaviour and long-term sustainability over short-term gains is crucial for preventing governance failures. Companies must cultivate an environment where ethical behaviour is rewarded and misconduct is not tolerated.

Impact on Stakeholders:  Governance failures have profound and often devastating effects on various stakeholders, including employees, investors, and the broader economy. The consequences extend beyond financial losses, including reputational damage and decreased stakeholder trust.

Moving Forward

The lessons drawn from these high-profile governance failures serve as a guide for organisations striving to enhance their governance frameworks. Companies must commit to implementing strong governance practices, maintaining rigorous oversight, and upholding the highest ethical standards. By learning from past mistakes and continually evolving governance practices, organisations can mitigate risks, restore stakeholder confidence, and achieve long-term success.

In conclusion, the study of governance failures is not just an exercise in understanding what went wrong but a proactive approach to building more resilient and ethical organisations. Through vigilance, accountability, and commitment to best practices, the lessons of the past can pave the way for a more transparent and trustworthy future in Corporate Governance.

Our Directors’ Institute- World Council of Directors  can help you accelerate your board journey by training you on your roles and responsibilities to be carried out efficiently, helping you make a significant contribution to the board and raise corporate governance standards within the organization.

Recent Posts

Corporate Governance in Emerging Markets: Challenges and Opportunities

The Intersection of Corporate Governance and Intellectual Property

Private Equity and Corporate Governance: How PE Investors Influence Governance in Their Portfolio Companies