Corporate Governance and Leadership- a Case of Infosys and TATA
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Vol-1, Issue-2 Amity Journal of Strategic Management May 2018 Corporate Governance and Leadership- A Case of Infosys and TATA B. S. Hothi, Professor and Head, Gitarattan International Business School, New Delhi, India Mamta Shah, Assistant Professor, GNIM, New Delhi, India Abstract India hasn’t had a great reputation with regard to corporate governance. Nevertheless, it has been ranked higher than some other Asian countries such as South Korea, China, the Philippines and Indonesia by Asian Corporate Governance Association. But recent cases of Tata and Infosys, the companies which were popular for their high reputation for governance, now lie in tatters. The corporate battle of big business houses in India have triggered the need for transparency and safeguarding that interest of minority shareholders. There is a need for regulators to come out with regulations after considering market participants opinion on overhauling of the way listed firms carry out their duties. It is very fateful that companies which have image of good governance are in a leadership tussle. Both of them known for their ethical values and their leaders for their strong decision making are in media. Key Words: Corporate Governance, Regulations, Audit, Disclosure, Crisis, Company Law Tribunal, Standards. JEL Classification: H83, G34, G38. Introduction The Tata group and Infosys Ltd, which were spotless examples of corporate governance in the past, have had ill-famed image in public due to recent issues. The high-profile board room battle of big two corporate in India have triggered the need for transparency and ensuring that interest of minority shareholders is safeguarded. There is a need for regulators to come out with regulations after considering market participants opinion on overhauling of the way listed firms discharge their duties. The case of TATA is of questioning or reversing the decisions of the erstwhile chairman who continues to be as the controller of the shareholding trusts, and lack of clear board processes to address the issues reasonably and transparently. There doesn’t seem to have been an agreed formula at the board level for addressing situations that would involve reversal of decisions or even changing decision criteria between economic and social. In the Infosys case, the so- called founder believes that the established values were not followed in certain significant decisions. About the Company The case is about two leading groups TATA and Infosys in India. Infosys established in 1981, Infosys is a NYSE listed global consulting and IT services company with more than 200,000 employees. it is started with a capital of US$ 250, and now grown to become a US$ 10.9 billion (FY 18 revenues) company with a market capitalization of approximately US$ 39 billion. Infosys was co-founded in 1981 by CEO Narayan Murthy, Nandan Nilekani, N. S. Raghavan, S. Gopalakrishnan, S. D. Shibulal, K. Dinesh and Ashok Arora all of whom were former emplyees of Patni Computer Systems. They started off as Infosys Consultants Pvt Ltd. in Pune, Maharashtra. TATA is founded by Jamsetji Tata in 1868; the Tata group is a global enterprise, headquartered in India, comprising over 100 independent operating companies. The group operates in more than 100 countries across six continents, with a mission 'To improve the quality of life of the communities we serve globally, through long-term stakeholder value creation based on Leadership with Trust'. Each Tata company or enterprise operates independently under the guidance and supervision of its own board of directors and shareholders. There are 29 publicly-listed Tata enterprises with a combined market capitalisation of about $130.13 billion (as on March 31, 2017). Tata companies with significant scale include Tata Steel, Tata Motors, Tata Consultancy Services, Tata Power, Tata Chemicals, Tata Global Beverages, Tata Teleservices, Titan, Tata Communications and Indian Hotels. Many Tata companies have achieved global leadership in their businesses. For instance, Tata Communications is #1 international wholesale voice provider and Tata Motors is among the top ten commercial vehicle manufacturers in the world. Tata Steel is among the top fifteen best steelmakers and TCS is the second largest IT services company in the world by market cap and profit. Tata Global Beverages is the second-largest tea company in the world and Tata Chemicals is the world’s second-largest manufacturer of soda ash. Employing a diverse workforce in their operations, Tata companies have made significant local investments in different geographies. 67 Background of the Case Infosys: The company has struggled in finding strong leadership for nearly a decade now, and its board will do well to bring about a quick resolution to the current crisis Infosys, which is considered as one of the top IT firm situated in Bengaluru, founded in 1981 With Me. Narayan Murthy and Seven Engineers, pooled $250, which is mostly borrowed from their wives. Now the things has changed due to escalating public war of words with its founder and former executive, which has accused them for lapse of corporate governance in their company board. Tata: It was 24th October 2016, when, Ratan Tata-Cyrus Mistry boardroom battle was started. It was a big shock to the entire corporate and others, when Tata in a surprise and unexpected move, dismissed Mistry as the chairman of Tata Sons. Cyrus Mistry was appointed as the chairman of the Tata group holding company in December 2012. Ever since the ouster, the Tatas and the Mistrys of the closely held Shapoorji Pallonji group have been cut and thrust in the public. While the Tatas have said Mistry was expeled, as the board of the company lost its confidence in him, Mistry has maintained that the Tatas were afraid of his clean-up drive which resulted in his dismissal. Mistry has also raised various corporate governance issues in the Tata Group since his expulsion. The Tatas also called up extraordinary general meetings of the shareholders of the listed group companies to expel Mistry from their boards. However, Mistry himself resigned from the boards after TCS and Tata Steel shareholders voted him out. However, a day after resigning from the boards of six listed Tata firms, he took the legal route by filing a suit in the National Company Law Tribunal against Tata Sons. Impact of the problem What happened in Infosys-? The main issues of the problems are as below: Mr. Narayan Murthy’s who own 12.75% of the firm, have questioned the pay of chief executive Vishal Sikka and severance payouts given to others, including former finance head Rajiv Bansal. The founders have also questioned the appointment of an independent Sikka, a former member of the executive board at German software firm SAP, took the top job at Infosys in 2014, becoming its first non-founder CEO. The board has backed Sikka, and has brushed aside concerns over CEO compensation, appointment of independent directors and severance pay relating to former employees, saying those were old issues and that full disclosures had been made. Infosys’s main issue lies an unusually high severance payment made to former chief financial officer Rajiv Bansal. While it’s fair to question N.R. Narayana Murthy’s wisdom in going to the press, especially with insinuations the payment may include “hush money”, it’s also naive to brush the issue under the carpet. The payment amount of Bansal’s pay is amounted to . 24 month of salary. Even security and Exchange board of India consider that the amount is excessive. The above clash and several other reasons include an unfavorable outsourcing climate and potentially damaging moves on US immigration. US President Donald Trump Policy, which was associated to H-1B visas that are key to serving American customers are the key reasons which hurting the brand image of the company. Infosy’s audit committee commissioned Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas to investigate certain allegations about the payment. The law firm found that the severance pay was “not with the intention of silencing him from disclosing any impropriety”. Impact It was observed by many former associates of Infosys that company may have been known for good corporate governance standards in the past, but it was also because of poor standards elsewhere. Under Murthy’s watch as executive chairman, the company followed poor disclosure standards when it came to a significant profit warning that sent its stock down by over 8%. Similarly, a number of analysts and industry experts had raised eyebrows when Murthy decided to bring his son along when he was appointed executive chairman in 2013. So, while the corporate governance watch by the founders is generally welcome, they must realize going over the top comes across as extremely hypocritical. In like manner, the company’s former CFOs who are demanding that the company returns a larger proportion of cash back to shareholders seem to have forgotten that Infosys has had a long history of holding on to hoards of cash, even under their watch. Finally, those who defend Sikka point to the improvement in the company’s performance since he joined as chief executive officer in 2014. Some investors and analysts point out to this as well, also 68 suggesting that the new CEO must be given room to function freely and not bogged down by needless accusations. But being given freedom to function shouldn’t be used as a sanction for transactions that raise red flags. .Besides, it’s not like Sikka has had an outstanding run as CEO. He’s certainly done better than the previous CEO, but that’s not saying much. As the chart at the top shows, Infosys shares are only marginally better off since Sikka’s appointment was announced, especially when seen in the backdrop of enormous erosion in value (relative to peers) post the financial crisis.