Alleged Quebec financial fraud - Montreal-area planner Earl Jones

It is A CONSTANT in our global society today to read articles about FINANCIAL-PLANNERS AND FRAUD, these two seem to be somehow inseparable. In a recent investigation into one of Quebec’s investment brokerages, and the whereabouts of a broker, as much as $50 million that was entrusted to him seem to have disappeared into thin air. Peter Tzanetakis, vice-president of regulatory affairs at Advocis, the association representing financial advisers in Canada said "The financial advice industry is extremely regulated, financial advisers are typically licensed for insurance purposes and registered for securities and mutual fund purposes, but additional regulation for financial planning would not have any impact on someone who is intending to run a fraudulent scheme."
Please read my blog space:

http://corporategovernanceconcerns.blogspot.com/2008/07/dr-rookmin-maharaj-corporate-governance.html

and my article written in June 2008 about this very serious epidemic that is plaguing not only Canada, but is prevalent around the globe.

The only advise our regulatory bodies can offer include unhelpful remarks as follows:
1) there are plenty of strict guidelines in place already to keep them in check
2) it's a reminder clients need to ask hard questions and avoid blind trust, especially when their life savings are involved
3) The financial advice industry is extremely regulated; financial advisers are typically licensed for insurance purposes and registered for securities and mutual fund purposes
4) additional regulation for financial planning would not have any impact on someone who is intending to run a fraudulent scheme
5) Investors have learned through authorities that Jones, a self-proclaimed financial planner operating in an office tower in a Montreal suburb, was never licensed to handle their money
6) The Financial Planners Standards Council, a not-for-profit organization that raises awareness about financial planning and enforces professional standards through certification, says it's important for consumers to do their homework because anyone can call themselves a financial planner
7) The regulatory environment allows anyone to hold themselves out as a financial planner," said Tamara Smith, vice-president marketing. So it becomes incumbent on the consumer to verify credentials and ask to see certification and references, she said. "It is so important to find a planner you can engage in conversation, that you can trust
8) Sylvain Theberge (representing Quebec's securities regulator - the Autorite des marches financiers )said more inspectors may not be a foolproof solution. "We don't have the ability to be at every door in Montreal, to look at every office," Theberge said, adding more inspectors wouldn't necessarily have led them to Jones. "It's knowing the unknown," Theberge said. "In Mr. Jones' case, he worked for years and years on the basis of a confidence link from generation to generation."
SO WHAT ARE THE ROLES OF THESE SO CALLED REGULATORY BODIES (ABOVE), IF WE, AS EVERYDAY INVESTORS HAVE TO DO THE GROUND WORK FOR THESE SO CALLED REGULATORY BODIES?
REGULATORY BODIES OFFER NO REMEDIES for the average investors, this is a crying shame!
One year ago I wrote about this epidemic. Again, one year later I say the same thing:

It is imperative to note that this fraudulent, unethical behaviour is ALLOWED TO CONTINUE in our society by the pertinent ‘powers’ that be. This fraudulent, unethical behaviour affects families, individuals, and generations to come.
This fraudulent, unethical behaviour may also establish that failures within these companies' corporate cultures and management systems ARE ACTULAY allowed, if not encourage, by key individuals.
Dr. Maharaj argues that:
COULD IT BE THAT THE CONTINUATION OF THE OLD BOYS/GIRLS CLUB may be the fundamental reason for the blatant disregard for humanity? COULD IT BE THAT THERE IS A perception of invincibility/groupthink mentality by these crooks.

COULD IT BE THAT ONCE AN EMPLOYEE IS INCREASING THE PROFITS AND BOTTOM LINE OF AN ORGANIZATION HE/SHE IS SHELTERED BY TOP EXECUTIVES, WHO MAY TURN A BLIND EYE TO UNETHICAL PRACTICES?

And to date we have no remedies from the so called pertinent authorities, whether these watch dog bodies are for-profit or not-for-profit. They have been established to do a job, they are being compensated with some sort of financial consideration. Yet, whenever there is an investigation these ‘so called’ competent authorities’ throw the blame elsewhere. Their only advise to investors include:
“buyer beware” , they take no responsibility!
THE ONLY SOLUTION TO THESE BLATANT INJUDICIOUSNESS include:
changing the behaviours, the regulatory bodies must take responsibility and ensure that they conduct their monitoring duties. Perhaps, the reasons that this is not being done is that the regulatory bodies are not:1) the regulatory bodies are not ‘INDEPENDENT MINDED’
2) the regulatory bodies do not have the knowledge that is required to regulate
3) the regulatory bodies do not have the skills to regulate
This can be achieved by recruiting ‘new regulatory bodies’ in contrast to nominating ‘friends’ and continuing the tradition of the old boys/girls club.
Dr. Maharaj argues that, and has tangible evidence, that what should be done is a forensic audit on 'the people that are hired to these regulatory bodies' What is your opinion? Does your opinion change with this update?


Dr. Rookmin Maharaj’s research on: Corporate Governance on organizations and investigates corporate governance issues from a behavioural viewpoint. It makes a distinction between strict adherence to formal rules and regulations and investigates informal characteristics of regulatory bodies, their knowledge, values, and groupthink mentality.
There are three main conclusions from this research and corporate experience:
1. Proves that formal rules and regulations are inadequate; they have little effect upon decision making.
2. Informal characteristics must be considered in unison with the formal system when incorporating any of these so called watch dog regulatory bodies
3. Similar values and groupthink can contribute positively to corporate decision making. However, there is a high possibility for groupthink and values to become redundant, masking members’ and managements’ knowledge thereby, affecting these regulators decision making process.
4. Skills matrices that include questions related to values, knowledge and groupthink should be considered by corporations to ensure the nomination of well-rounded members, management and employees. Changes to these regulatory bodies, are seminal in preventing future fiascoes.

View from the top: what directors say about board process

View from the top: what directors say about board process- Dr. Rookmin Maharaj
Title: View from the top: what directors say about board processAuthor(s): Dr. Rookmin MaharajJournal: Corporate GovernanceYear: 2009Volume: 9 -Issue: 3 -Page: 326 - 338Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing LimitedAbstract:Purpose – This paper aims to use the argument that formal regulations alone may not be the defining factor in improving corporate governance and the decision making process of the BOD. Design/methodology/approach – Based on 20 semi-structured interviews with board chairs, members of corporate boards, CEOs, and upper/executive management at 12 Canadian companies, a bird's eye view is taken from the top. A content analysis of the interviews was performed. a clear picture about the interaction and behaviour of directors emerged. Subsequently, three objectives that are required for effective decision-making were developed: knowledge; motivation; and transmission channels/internal control. The analysis offers three critical objectives, which all boards should endeavour to accomplish. Findings – These interviews demystify board process and provide the bases for three critical objectives for effective corporate governance: ascertain and embellish the knowledge base of directors; motivate directors to share and gather information; and ensure clear and fluent transmission channels exist. Practical implications – The usual board measures such as CEO duality, insider and outsider ratio, number of board members and directors' share ownership may not be the only critical determinants of board effectiveness. Originality/value – Conventional notions of decision making have neglected key human faculties and individual characteristics that combine to determine organizational outcomes. This paper fulfils a need for research in the area of board processes and board decision making and provides a roadmap to improve corporate governance within organizations.Keywords: Corporate governance, Decision making, Senior management board decision makingArticle Type: Research paperArticle URL: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14720700910964370
Posted by Dr. Rookmin Maharaj at 7:11 AM
Labels: Corporate governance; Decision making;Senior management; board decision making;

Corporate governance decision-making model: How to nominate skilled board members, by addressing the formal and informal systems

Article may be viewed in its entirety at:

http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jdg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/index.html#08012009

Dr. Rookmin Maharaj's research study focuses on the problems involved in nominating board members based solely on rules and regulations, which neglect the affective dynamics of board behaviour and board process. For example, choosing board candidates who are independent (not part of a company's management), a rule imposed by the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) guidelines, may ensure that an organisation remains listed on this lucrative exchange. However, it does not ensure that the candidates have the necessary knowledge or are well versed in the company's business activities to effectively serve on a particular board. Having independent board members does not ensure that they ask tough questions of themselves or of management or that they have an extensive network from which to draw for advice on strategic issues. These are equally important areas of board governance that cannot be ignored when choosing candidates for the board, and these questions should not be suppressed in favour of concentrating solely on formal concerns such as independence.

Information about board characteristics can provide management theorists with a broader range of 'informal' variables that can contribute to the decision-making process. Board characteristics assist the board in operating as a team, improving the efficiency of the board. Selecting board members with the most suitable and effective characteristics for a particular board ensures that directors are spending their limited time on the company's most important challenges. This research was carried out in several stages in order to gather both qualitative and quantitative data. In this research there was a significant relationship for values and decision-making and no relationship for TSXFormal and decision-making, which is consistent with the literature, suggesting there must be a change in executives' values to ensure changes in behaviour.

A corporate governance model was developed. This model helps in ensuring that boards populated with board members who have knowledge and values (skills matrices) are more aware of the detrimental effect that groupthink can have on the decision-making process. Several executives mentioned the ability of board members 'to apply due diligence' to strategic decision-making. This means that directors apply their experience and expertise to better understand issues and bring these to bear upon the decision-making process. Additionally, knowledge, values and groupthink (skill matrices) may be used both when nominating new board members and as an annual evaluative tool.

Businesses are continually diversifying and board members need to continuously embellish their skill set and knowledge in order to adapt. However, the finding and the development of this corporate governance model are significant as they mark the start of how board characteristics can be operationalised. What is needed is more balanced research that looks at both the formal and the informal system. In doing so, more articulate measures of board decision-making process will evolve.
The business environment is ever changing and dynamic; research in these areas will convey the interrelationship between the formal and informal system. Nevertheless, this research is unique as it has investigated the formal and informal system using both primary qualitative and quantitative data analysis and therefore provides much needed information about the characteristics requisite for nominating board members.

Dr. Rookmin Maharaj's Model can help US President Barack Obama get the United States back on track!!contact Dr. Maharaj : maharajl@netzero.com

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Tim Hortons

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tim Hortons - just the beginning of this sort of behaviour in Canada where manager (s) are acting a bit overzealously (http://www%20.theglobe%20and%20mail/. com/servlet/ story/RTGAM. 20080507 .wt im bit0507/ CommentStory /National/home/). Perhaps there may be another side to this story, the managers side, however,

Universities, Superstore, Canadian Tire, the police force the Energy Sector are just a few sectors that are bringing foreign workers into Canada without thought about the ramifications of bringing workers (executive staff or lower rank employees) without the proper orientation into Canadian culture.

'So called' Canadian companies are now hiring (in an uncontrollable manner) mangers and senior staff from the United States.

(Calgary has 10% UK bobbys- “But now that expat officers account for roughly 10 per cent of Calgary's police service, forces in the provinces want to slow down foreign recruiting programs and instead redouble efforts to find more home-grown…………..”talent(http://www.thesudburystar/ .com/ Article Display .aspx?e=974170Alberta flooded with bobbys; Calgary, Edmonton look to England to solve police shortage)

PLEASE NOTE CEOs, BOARD MEMEBERS AND MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE, THAT OUR CULTURE IS DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF THE US, UK for example. PLEASE TRAIN, EDUCATE AND TAKE THE TIME TO RECRUIT WITH CARE.

Please remember that good governance can prevent ‘value’ destruction.

Dr. Rookmin Maharaj research integrates the disciplines of Political Science, Education, and Business in the area of corporate governance/Sarbanes Oxley (SOX). Dr. Maharaj has developed a unique model that can be used as a compass by corporations, educational, healthcare, and political institutions to build better boards, management and employees. Her method improves and increases the bottom line/profits of organizations. She is currently consulting with companies in Alberta, Canada on Corporate Governance. She has worked in the energy sector in Alberta Canada for over fifteen years. She has a master’s degree in Higher Education and has taught in France, the Caribbean and in Canada at the University of Calgary and Mount Royal College on Environmental Management and Business.

Visit Dr. Maharaj blog and read her research papers to review a tested Corporate Governance Model that reduces the risk of losing ‘organizational reputation.’ Contact Dr. Maharaj for advice on hiring the ‘right’ employees for the ‘right’ positions

http://corporategovernanceconcerns.blogspot.com/

Dr Rookmin Maharaj has developed a unique Corporate Governance Model increasing the bottom line profits for organizations

Dr. Rookmin Maharaj has developed a unique and revolutionary model that can identify the characteristics requisite for effective Corporate Governance within an organization that strikes the ideal balance between the formal and informal rules and regulations. Dr. Maharaj has researched with the top oil and gas, mining, chemical, and pipeline companies in North America. She continues to transform ideas into actions, ultimately increasing the bottom line for organizations.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, GROUPTHINK AND BULLIES IN THE BOARDROOM Dr Rookmin Maharaj

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, GROUPTHINK AND BULLIES IN THE BOARDROOM

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This research study discusses corporate governance issues from a behavioural viewpoint. It makes a distinction between strict adherence to formal rules and regulations: CEO/Chair separation, independence of board members and board size and informal characteristics of board members: knowledge, values and groupthink.There are three main conclusions:1) This research clearly proves that formal rules and regulations are inadequate; they have little effect upon decision making by board members. Informal characteristics must be considered in unison with the formal system when nominating board members in order to restore shareholder confidence and to rebuild trust in board governance.2) Similar values and groupthink can contribute positively to board members' decision making. There is, however, a high possibility for groupthink and values to become redundant, masking board members' knowledge.3) Skills matrices that include questions related to values, knowledge and groupthink and three behavioural characteristics should be considered by boards to ensure the nomination of well-rounded members.

Changes to board process, and board decision making, are seminal in preventing future Enron and WorldCom fiascos. It is only by changing the behaviours of the board of directors, through adopting skills matrices, that sweeping changes can occur.

In the past, boards have asked: who are our board members? The most important question a board can ask today, however, is: how can the skills and knowledge of our board members be used in service of the strategic direction of the corporation? This can be achieved by recruiting new board members who fill the needs of an organisation, in contrast to nominating 'friends' and continuing the tradition of the old boys club.

It should be noted that out of the 100 of the largest economies in the world, 57 of these are corporations and 49 are countries. Corporations are powerful entities in our society, operating in a manner similar to representative governments. Like heads of government, at the top echelon of each corporation is the board of directors; their decisions have enormous ramifications for everyone.

Although most citizens have a limited or a passive interest in corporate governance, we each depend on these corporations for jobs, salaries and as investors. Governance of these gargantuan corporations, which wield considerable economic power in the world, concerns each and every citizen.

My research draws novel conclusions about the state of governance today, and presents practical solutions for corporations to consider when selecting board members. The detailed discussion about what happens in the boardroom demystifies board process and provides the bases for three critical objectives when selecting new board members or evaluating current board members performance:

1) ascertain and embellish the knowledge base of directors;

2) motivate directors to share and gather information to ensure personal values are congruent with organisational values; and

3) ensure clear and fluent transmission channels exist to reduce the potential of having groupthink on board.view Dr.Rookmin Maharaj's full journal article at:
http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jdg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/2050074a.html

Posted by Dr. Rookmin Maharaj at 8:21 AM

Labels: behavior, boards, corporate governance, decision making, directors, Dr. Rookmin Maharaj, oil and gas, SOX
3 comments:
Anonymous said...
nice job
January 13, 2008 6:42 PM
Anonymous said...
What's happening in the different areas in society? Financial? educational? governmental? Just look at the housing market in the US? What impact would this Corporate Governace Model you talk about have on improving the system in these sectors?
January 31, 2008 10:52 AM
Anonymous said...
No one wants to take responsibility when things go bad in a corporation......but when things seem to be going good it is always "I was responsible for implementing this or that." I think that corporations are being run by a bunch of crooks, what do you think?
February 7, 2008 7:57 AM
Post a Comment
Newer Post Older Post Home
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)