International Financial Management by Jeff Madura 11th Edition

Click the link below to download the file

International Financial Management by Jeff Madura 11th Edition

Slide of Business and Competitive Analysis; Effective Application of New and Classic Methods by Craig S. Fleisher and Babette E. Bensoussan

Click your desired chapter to get the slide

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Chapter 10

Chapter 11

Chapter 12

Chapter 13

Chapter 14

Chapter 15

Chapter 16

Chapter 17

Chapter 18

Chapter 19

Chapter 20

Chapter 21

Chapter 22

Chapter 23

Chapter 24

Chapter 25

Chapter 26

Chapter 27

Chapter 28

Chapter 29

Lehman Brothers Scandal

Lehman Brothers Scandal:

The collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LEH) had a crippling effect on the global economy with the financial crisis escalating to other parts of the world. In the aftermath of this event, financial institutions froze lending activities thereby creating liquidity problems in the shadow banking financial system. In 2003 and 2004, Lehman acquired five mortgage lenders, including subprime lender BNC Mortgage and Aurora Loan Services, which specialized in Alt-A loans (made to borrowers without full documentation).The giant investment bank succumbed to the sub-prime mortgage crisis that has rocked the United States and the global economy. Lehman was strangled by a massive credit crisis and fast plummeting real estate prices. The gargantuan $60 billion loss in bad real estate loans forced the bank to file for bankruptcy. This collapse was done by Chief Executive Officer Richard Fuld.

Reason behind the scandal:

• ·        Asset-backed securities (ABS) and Collateral debt obligations (CDOs)
• ·        Lehman underwrote mortage-backed securities more than any other firm, accumulating an $85-billion portfolio, or four times its shareholders' equity
• ·        Leverage levels up to 20-35 percent of their equity capital in order to invest on securitized products using debt capital
• ·        Excessive risk-taking
• ·        Passing the investment risks through unregulated ‘credit default swaps’ (CDS) where they didn’t have any adequate capital behind them.(AIG case)
• ·        Weakness of the FED to recognize the economic catastrophe that Lehman Brothers bankruptcy would cause.

Enron Scandal

Enron Scandal

                Jeff Skilling, the president of Enron’s trading operations, convinced federal regulator to permit Enron to use an accounting method known as “mark to market”. It is a method where price or value of a security is recorded on a daily basis to calculate profits and losses. Using this method allowed Enron to count projected earnings from long-term energy contracts as current income. This was money that might not be collected for many years. It is thought that this technique was used to inflate revenue numbers by manipulating projections for future revenue.

Enron had been buying any new venture that looked promising as a new profit center. Their acquisitions were growing exponentially. Enron had also been forming off balance sheet entities to move debt off of the balance sheet and transfer risk for their other business ventures. These SPEs were also established to keep Enron's credit rating high, which was very important in their fields of business.

When the telecom industry suffered its first downturn, Enron suffered as well. Business analysts began trying to unravel the source of Enron's money. The Raptors would collapse if Enron stock fell below a certain point, because they were ultimately backed only by Enron stock. Accounting rules required an independent investor in order for a hedge to work, but Enron used one of their SPEs.

Reason behind this scandal:

• ·         A substantial fraction of Enron’s reported profits over a 4 year period (1996-2000) had been the result of accounting manipulations.
• ·         Unable to spot bad accounting practices and company’s overstatement of profits.
• ·         The multiple conflicting roles of auditor.
• ·         Automatic renewal of auditing contracts.
• ·         Although a professor of accounting and a dean for monitoring the company, but they all fail in their profession.
• ·         Disastrous loss in employees’ retirement fund, but the ex-CEO has cashed his own stock much earlier.
• ·         Managers tend to build up their own empires and scarify the profits of the organization.
• ·         Enron’s board of directors fails to control and oversee the management.
• ·         The board had been benefited in various relationships with the company.

Research on Student Motivation IV

Chapter eight

Findings and discussion: By research questions

1. What motivates students to study?

Among the top reasons for studying among all students were interesting course and Professor. Fifty-one percent student respondents claimed to study for courses that are “Interesting”. Fear of family comes third as a reason to study. To study for upcoming exams, self-learning and good grades are much more prominent factors among the juniors than the senior batch. Seventy-one percent male students say that their main motivator to study is an interesting course while forty-two percent of female think grades is the main one for them.

The males were more motivated than females by an easy course & fear of disappointing family. Females, on the other hand, were more motivated by the presumed applicability of getting good grades and the possibility of self- learning.

The differences between the motivational forces of senior and junior students uncovered in this survey confirm the existing literature on adult learners. Tweedell (2000), for example, wrote of differences between adult learners and adolescents significant enough to require completely different learning structures between the two groups. It is unreasonable, therefore, to presume that a factor that motivates the senior group would have a similar effect on the junior ones.

The differences between male and female students in having different preferences for motivational factors might have arisen from true gender differences, but could also be a function of the differences in their CGPAs.

Because the females in the study academically outperform the males, it is impossible to draw conclusions about their different motivations based on their genders alone. While it appears that the female students were motivated more by achievement and male students more by fear, these results are most likely driven by their differences in academic performance, not their different genders. Further research should be done with a larger population that could be normalized for grades before analyzed by gender.

2. Are there differences between the motivating factors of high performing and lower performing students?

The samples show that the greater differences between high CGPA and low CGPA students that in the motivating factors of Grades, Interesting course, Professor and the Fear of failing. Where the students holding CGPA above are mostly motivated to study because of grades, interesting course and professor; lower CGPA holding ones study mostly because of the fear of failing.

Overall, the high achievers appear to thrive on the positive reinforcement that comes with their success, while the lower performers are driven largely by fear and competition.

As the study showed that students with high GPAs are different in their motivations than those with low, this conclusions offer little guidance for faculty members trying to create a full class of high CGPA holders. A “one size fits all” motivational tool will fail in this case and a course instructor can hardly motivate all the students of his/her by using a same strategy.

3. Do the factors that motivate students to study align with the motivational theories of Abraham Maslow, Douglas McGregor, and/or Frederick Herzberg?

Past theories of motivation are tremendous indicators of factors that influence people to be motivated in different settings or different purposes. The study shows what influence student motivation aligned with theories like Abraham Maslow’s (1968) hierarchy of needs, McGregor’s (1985) theory X and theory Y & Frederick Herzberg’s (1984) two-factor theory of motivation.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

According to Maslow, motivation arises from different needs in different individuals. Needs, he argued, can be arranged in a hierarchy and individuals progress from one level of the hierarchy to another once the needs on the lower level are satisfied. The hierarchy consists of five levels – physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization.

To apply this model and to identify need levels in this study the survey questions were categorized as complying with social, esteem, and self-actualization motivators and the samples show that different students appear to operate at different levels of Maslow’s hierarchy.

High CGPA holders and female students are more motivated by social needs (professor, family). The males are more inclined towards esteem needs like grades. Self-actualization needs like self-learning also motivates a good percentage of students.

Here “one size fits all” pedagogy will not motivate a mixed group of students within a class.

Motivation in the classroom needs to be customized according to need levels.

McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y

Douglas McGregor (1985) developed two complementing theories of motivation. His theory X implies that people see work as burdensome and they must be forced to get to work. Theory Y on the other hand implies that people see work as a natural part of their lives and they do not really get coerced to work.

For this study, several questions on the motivation survey were earmarked as “Theory X” compliant (Theory Y was not directly measured, but was presumed instead to be confirmed by the negation of Theory X.) to see if really In the academic arena, a Theory X student would be one motivated only by the fear of failure.

The study shows that both senior and junior batches are affected by the X factors like fear of failing or family pressure. The majority of males study mostly because of the fear of failing where the females put more importance on family pressures. The motivational force of fear is strongest among students. Fear, therefore, may be considered a “last resort” motivator.

Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory

According to Frederick Herzberg (1984), the factors that motivate employees are not the exact opposite of those that do not. His classic separation of factors such as pay, work conditions, and supervision (hygiene factors) from work-content factors (motivators) was clear: in order to motivate employees, give them interesting and fulfilling work in which they can take pride.

To test Herzberg’s theory in this study, survey statements were separated into hygiene factors (grades, low-course average, and fear of failing) and motivators (interesting courses, self-learning). The biggest percentage of students reveals that the professor instructing the course is the major hygiene factor in motivating them to study. Interesting course and the fear of failing come next.

However, the agreement with many of the statements classified as hygiene factors, particularly those related to grades, demonstrates that students are also motivated to study by factors Herzberg claimed could not motivate. The mixing of hygiene factors into motivators that come across in this study is not necessarily a negation of Herzberg’s theory, though.

Chapter nine

Recommendation

1.      Many students are thriving by professor and interesting courses, so teachers can motivate students by making the classes more interactive.

2.      Grade point is another factor that motivates students; authority can run session how the students can get high grade points.

3.      Competition might help in this consideration; classes can be divided into small groups then they can compete each other to get good grades.

4.      Low course average de-motivates students; session can be arranged to find out their problems.

5.      Strict control should exert on supplementary exam so that student take their exams seriously and have fear of failing which eventually help to improve grades.

Research on Student Motivation III

Chapter six

Research methodology

This study is for finding out the factors that are driving student motivation at the university level. For doing the research a questionnaire should be developed that contains questions relevant to the research’s objective. Then the data would be collected from the students and the students giving data should be selected from both senior and junior batches. The research questions require answers from students having all kinds of backgrounds, gender, seniority level or CGPA status. So collecting samples through a relevant questionnaire is the best option here.

This research is conducted on the Department Of International Business, University Of Dhaka. The survey instrument used consisted of 17 questions on motivation to study and 5 questions on student background. The background information compiled included gender, age, GPA, and residential status. The surveys are administered by the researchers during the month of May, 2014 in classes that were offered in the department during that semester. The students surveyed in the accelerated program were chosen by convenience (they were available during the survey period).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter seven

Data Analysis

After all of the surveys were complete, the data were compiled for the 37 student participants.

The data for each question on motivation were first correlated with the data for student GPA to seek significant relationships between motivating factors and academic performance. Strong correlations were calculated between GPA ranges and responses to each of the questions on the survey. High GPAs (over 3.0) were significantly correlated (at α = .05) with the motivating factors of grades and self -learning. Low GPAs (under 2.5) were correlated significantly (at the .05 level) with concerns over family obligations or fear of failing. Taken on their own, these results might imply that the high-performing students are driven by the need to achieve academic success and the lower-performing students by fear of failure. This connection might be spurious.

However, since the students responding to the questions already had either high or low GPAs, their responses to the survey questions could have been driven by their current placement in the academic pecking order – not the motivators affecting the study habits that caused the GPAs in the first place.

Finally, the questions on motivation were clustered according to how well they aligned with classical motivational theory. Questions were tagged as either corresponding to McGregor, Maslow or Herzberg. The discussion of the results of this analysis appears in the later chapter.

 

 

 

 

Research on Student Motivation II

Chapter four

Literature review

This study was conducted at the University of Dhaka, Bangladesh; was designed to explore the factors that drive students to study, to identify differences between successful and less-successful student in terms of their study behaviors, and to connect student study motivation to the larger realm of theories related to motivation. The critical review of the literature focuses on the following past studies.

Traditional survey based approaches in measuring student motivation to learn such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (1968) measured the gap between students’ desire to study and actually giving effort to do so by arguing that needs drive behavior, and that the academic motivation is driven by the level of needs hierarchy at which the student is operating.

Bandura’s (1986) view of human behavior depicted the beliefs of people about themselves as critical elements in the exercise of control and personal agency. For him the capability that is most "distinctly human" is self-reflection, hence it is a prominent feature of social cognitive theory. The social cognitive theory is based on the belief of self-efficacy. The limitation is, it stands in clear contrast to theories of human functioning that overemphasize the role of environmental factors in the development of human behavior and learning.

Bandura's (1986) key contentions regarding the role of self-efficacy beliefs in human functioning are that, peoples’ level of motivation depends mostly on what they believe, rather than what is objectively true. However, no amount of confidence or self-appreciation can produce success when requisite skills and knowledge are absent. It is important to remember that students envision their grade before they begin an examination or enroll in a course.

Murray and others (1990) reported that undergraduate students rated instructors as more effective when they displayed sociable and extroverted personality traits. The studies conducted by Erdle (1985), Murray and their associates (1990) also indicate that an instructor displaying extroverted nature increases perceived instructor effectiveness. Surely a good course instructor can pursue students to study but the main criticism of this study is that, a student’s personal longing to learn in a particular course along with a structured course plan from the instructor motivate more than the extroversion does.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter five

Contextual Framework

This study is based on the settings of the university students. To meet the objectives of the research in finding out the factors affecting the students’ motivation to study, issues like the background of the students, their residential and family status along with their level of seniority, all work as important indicators. Also, some renowned theories of motivation can contribute to answer the research questions thus meeting the research objective rationally.

Simply finding out what motivates the students to study is not enough. Faculty members need to understand the implicit factors also to apply the findings in reality.

To find out if really some factors motivate the students at university level in terms of that student’s current CGPA status and seniority, past motivational theories offer logical explanations.

So some renowned motivational theories related to like Maslow’s hierarchy of needs are being related to find out what are the real reasons that are making the students to study (or not to study).