LIFE AFTER THE FINANCIAL CRISIS

The recent financial crisis has been humbling for manydisconnect. When Peter Norris, former head of
stakeholders. It has been particularly embarrassing forBarings, was asked by the House of Commons
regulators who failed to learn from past mistakes orTreasury Committee if there were members of the
even heed their own warnings.board of Barings who were knowledgeable about
Case in point is former US Fed Chairman Alanderivatives trading, Mr. Norris responded with an
Greenspan. The man who coined the phraseastounding, “No.” That basic lack of
“irrational exuberance” in a speech to theknowledge and understanding was a key contributor
American Enterprise Institute in December 1996 notto the failure.
only failed to act on his own concerns butIt was widely believed at the time that the Barings
encouraged the conditions which allowed the techfailure would send a clear warning to the industry to
bubble to grow and then burst.improve on its risk assessment and management
Later, on July 16, 2002, giving evidence to US Senateprocedures. This has turned out to be a forlorn hope.
Banking Committee in the aftermath of the EnronFast forward to Lehman Brothers. Its risk committee
and Worldcom scandals, Greenspan said:reportedly only met twice annually in 2006 and 2007
“Why did corporate governance checks and– the years when Lehman’s crisis was
balances that served us reasonably well in the pastbrewing. Not unusually, few of the board members
break down? … An infectious greed seemed to griphad any actual financial industry experience.
much of our business community.”For far too long, boards have simply acted as
Greenspan clearly had not seen the link between thesounding boards and rubber stamps for management
two factors. He compounded matters furtherwith little accountability to shareholders. One of the
through his belief that the new derivativemore extreme examples was the meteoric rise of
instruments, becoming more widespread, wouldthe now deposed CEO of the Royal Bank of
reduce risk overall. In 2004, he said: “Not onlyScotland (RBS), Sir Fred Goodwin. An accountant
have individual financial institutions become lesswith no formal banking qualifications, Goodwin grew
vulnerable to shocks from underlying risk factors, butRBS from a middling UK bank to one of the
also the financial system as a whole has becomeworld’s top five in the space of only eight or
more resilient.”nine years. This was achieved by an acquisition spree
The writing was on the wall long before thein which RBS bought some 26 banks in seven years
sub-prime mortgage meltdown, but few bothered toand ruthlessly cut costs through staff reductions.
read it. When banks, mortgage companies and othersConsequently, Goodwin earned the nickname
realized how much they could make, they created“Fred the Shred” and lamentably the uncritical
specialty products to “help” people achievetrust of his board. The wheels came off at the
the “American Dream” of home ownership,height of the boom in 2007 when he led a
fuelling the housing boom. We ended up with aconsortium (RBS, Fortis and Santander) to acquire
situation where even the financial professionalsABN Amro. His main target was La Salle bank in the
didn’t fully understand what they had created orUS, which would have consolidated RBS’ position
the risks inherent therein. More dangerously, many ofas one of the largest banks in the States. When this
these new financial products were so complicateddeal was thwarted by the ABN Amro board, he
that government regulators did not understand them,pushed ahead in any event, undeterred by any
didn’t have the resources to investigate themopposition.
and left it to the market to police.The consequence was a record loss of £24 billion
It is now widely recognized that the current crisis hadfor 2008 of which, £16.8 billion related to write
much to do with excessive risk taking spurred bydowns arising from the ABN-Amro acquisition
inordinate compensation in the form oftogether with huge losses on CDOs via RBS
multimillion-dollar bonuses. When the lure of big profitsGreenwich Capital. RBS had to be bailed out by the
is too great, senior executives are liable to act inUK government and is now 86% owned by the
ways that are not completely rational – theyBritish taxpayer.
disregard internal warnings and only hear what theyThe worm has turned
want to hear, a common human failure.There is some evidence that the bankers are
“The fish rots from the head”beginning to “get it”. In February 2010
While regulators round the world (with the honorableMarcus Agius, Chairman of Barclays, said that the
exception of Canada) have been much criticized forbond of trust between banks and their stakeholders
their failings, others equally if not more culpable, havehas been significantly weakened by the events of
got off more lightly. What is abundantly clear (again)the last three years and that the vital task of
is that there were serious failures of board oversightrebuilding that trust will be based on banks
in the financial institutions involved.acknowledging the mistakes they have made.
Where were the boards of directors who wereThe focus of attention is swinging towards the
supposed to be guarding the shareholders’excessive levels of senior management remuneration,
interests? All too often, the answer is that the boardand not only in banks. Aviva, a very large UK
was supporting the company’s CEO rather thaninvestment manager, announced on February 26,
asking the hard questions. The boards of financial2010 that they expect executive salaries and
giants such as Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns andbonuses to be “prudent, aligned to business
AIG were paid large sums to oversee the activitiesstrategy and performance over the long term”.
of their firms and protect the interests of theThe sorry episode of Wall Street in 2008 was more
shareholders. Instead, they looked on while the CEOsthan just a massive failure of common sense,
ran these companies into the ground.regulation and leadership. It was a failure of corporate
Stories abound about incompetent board members.governance. There is a great need for boards to be
When Barings Bank, the oldest merchant bank inheld accountable for the overall risk control, and for
London, collapsed on February 27, 1997, after lossesthose who fail, to pay an appropriate penalty. As
in its future trading business in Singapore of $830Warren Buffett said in his 2010 Shareholders letter:
million, it had lost an amount equal to more than“CEOs and, in many cases, directors have long
twice its capital base. Until the collapse, Baringsbenefited from oversized financial carrots; some
management in London believed that the tradingmeaningful sticks now need to be part of their
conducted by Barings Futures Singapore wasemployment picture as well.
essentially risk free and very profitable, a staggering