Browse by Tags

KnowNOW!

Global Economic Watch

Syndication

Recent Posts

Tags

Archives

  • McKinsey: Strategies for Lasting Cost Cutting Measures

    The recovery may be underway, but that does not mean that companies that instituted cost-cutting measures over the last 2 years are ready to look the other way and just let their expenditures return to pre-recession levels. They have their work cut out for them, according to McKinsey 's Ankur Agrawal, Olivia Nottebohm and Andy West , who argue in the McKinsey Quarterly that most cost-cutting measures have limited lasting power. They write: Many executives expect some proportion of the costs cut during the recent recession to return within 12 to 18 months —and prior research found that only 10 percent of cost reduction programs show sustained results three years later. On either schedule, any programs initiated in the early months of the downturn are already beginning to fail—just as savings would be most useful to finance growth. Sales, general, and administrative (SG&A) costs prove to be particularly intransigent. While manufacturing efficiencies have enabled an average S&P 500 company to reduce the cost of goods sold (COGS) by about 250 basis points over the past decade, SG&A costs have remained at about the same level (Exhibit 1--below). So to fight the erosion of cost-cutting gains, the authors argue that leading executives need to be involved, but since the most effective cost cutting measures take place at "very small, very practical" levels, companies need to utilize clear benchmarks. And most important, efforts to reduce costs must be tied to larger strategic initiatives. Read Five ways CFOs can make cost cuts stick here .
  • Ten Questions to Help CFOs Prepare for Recovery

    Top Chief Financial Officers have earned their keep through this recession as the credit crunch has put a lot of companies in tight spots. IF the recession does end in the coming months, CFOs will have to shift gears and help steer companies through a whole new set of challenges. McKinsey Quarterly offers up ten questions to consider for this next phase. For example, question 2: Have you restructured enough? A weak economy makes it easier to implement unpopular operational changes and divestitures: companies have more leverage over suppliers, unions and regulators are more cooperative, and employees understand the need for change. When the economy strengthens, these advantages will quickly vanish. CFOs should challenge their colleagues to examine how much more restructuring might be undertaken to secure a company’s cost position for the medium term. And question 9: Do you know what risks a recovery might bring? Risk management and contingency planning are typically better at highlighting day-to-day issues than at anticipating major shifts. Yet an economic turnaround could bring a number of structural changes, some relatively predictable and with far-reaching effects. How well, for example, do you understand your company’s exposure to major currency or commodity price movements? Do you know whether the health of channels, customers, or suppliers might create substantial structural change or whether your company is prepared to deal with high levels of volatility that may continue even as a recovery builds? Read the full list and get into the conversation here .
  • The weak get weaker: Corporate liquidity, asset sales, and the extensive use of bank lines of credit at lower-rated firms

    Each quarter the Duke University / CFO Magazine Global Business Outlook Survey polls thousands of chief financial officers around the world. The most recent survey concluded February 27 and reflects the views of 1,268 CFOs in the U.S., Europe, and Asia. This entry by John R. Graham of Duke University's Fuqua School of Business draws on the February 2009 and November 2008 surveys. The credit crisis of late 2008 has spilled into 2009, and the lack of funding has hampered the ability of many corporations to make the ideal operating and investment choices. We recently completed an in-depth study of how tight credit is affecting corporate activity. When a company is able to invest in positive net present value (NPV) projects, this means that the project returns more than the company's cost of capital, thereby increasing firm value in the long run. When credit is tight, as it is now, companies are not always able to obtain the necessary financing to pursue positive NPV projects. Due to the current credit crunch, more than half (55 percent) of U.S. companies tell us that they have recently had to cancel or postpone positive NPV projects. European and Asian companies are in a similar situation. This is bad for the economy in the long run because it spreads the effects of the current credit crisis into the future - less cash flow will be produced one or two years from now due to the cancellation of good projects today. Limited liquidity can hurt any company, but the problems are most acute among firms with poor credit ratings. For these firms, credit markets have nearly shut down. When external borrowing is limited, a company must rely more on internal funds, such as profits, asset sales, or cash on the balance sheet. For low-rated firms, profits are often poor, further limiting options. In our analysis, we found that struggling U.S. firms started 2008 with cash and marketable securities on the balance sheet equal to about 15 percent of total assets but ended the year with cash and marketable securities amounting to only 12 percent of assets. These financially constrained firms burned through a startling one-fifth of their cash holdings in just one year's time. Again, similar patterns are observed in Europe and in Asia. On the bright side, companies that are stronger financially were able to maintain cash of about 15 percent of asset value. Ironically, this indicates that most financially strong firms should not need to borrow extensively from credit markets, even though these are the only firms for which credit markets remain fairly open. In contrast, low-rated firms are burning through their internal reserves, while at the same time finding limited access to external sources of funding. What can a poorly performing firm do if it has limited profits, shrinking cash reserves, and little access to external capital? One option is to sell assets in order to obtain funds. Among firms that tell us they have experienced problems accessing credit markets, an astounding 56 percent indicate that they have sold assets in order to free up funds for other uses. While it is possible that some companies are finally shedding underperforming divisions (which would be a good thing), when you consider the depressed state of asset markets, it is likely that many of these recent asset sales have occurred at fire sale prices. Thus, asset sales have provided little relief. Firms that are struggling to access new capital can also rely on previously established lines of credit. Normally, credit lines are used for temporary "bridge" loans or as a short term substitute for cash. Today, we find evidence that lines of credit are instead serving as a "last resort" source of funds. U.S. firms have lines of credit with maximum borrowing capacity equal to about 23 percent of total asset value on average. We also find evidence that credit lines do in fact substitute for cash in that firms that have less cash on the books have a tendency to maintain larger credit line capacity. What is most astonishing about our credit line analysis is the degree to which they are currently drawn down. The typical U.S. company has drawn about 38 percent of the maximum allowable borrowing on its credit line. Companies with credit ratings of A or higher have drawn down less than 30 percent of maximum on average, while companies rated BBB or BB have drawn nearly 40 percent of the maximum allowed by their credit lines. Notably, companies rated B or lower have drawn nearly 70 percent of their line of credit capacity. This is alarming because it indicates that poorly rated firms have nearly used all available debt capacity. This draw down on credit lines among poorly rated firms has been exacerbated by a "just in case" phenomenon at some companies. That is, many poorly rated companies are drawing on their credit lines now as a precaution, fearing that their banks will eliminate their credit lines in the future (if, for example, the...