In the given report, the issue concerning the recent insolvency problem which gripped the global business world in 2008 is being discussed. According to Pozen, the root of all evil in the give case was a cadence of unreasonable decisions undertaken by Enron.
After the Sarbanes-Oxley Act had been passed, solid improvements were anticipated. However, the results proved quite unpredictable. In the given report, the reasons for the inefficiency of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act are investigated.
In a rather unique way of researching business problem, the author suggests his own business model as the key means to investigate the causes of the economical decline. According to Pozen, with the help of the model of professional directorship, not only the reasons for the entrepreneurship to sink in 2008 will be found, but also new methods of boosting business will be found.
Among the innovations which Pozen includes in his model of the professional board, a smaller size is highlighted in an especially graphic manner. Indeed, according to the author, numerous industrial companies with smaller boards survived the crisis of 2008, while the companies with larger boards did not.
It is also quite peculiar that the author of the article compares the notorious reform of 2008 with its more successful analogue. What Pozen called “additional governance standards for public U. S. companies” (54) proved quite efficient. Comparing the given reform to the one of 2008, Pozen offers a couple of important ideas.
To start with, Pozen emphasizes that the CEO of the company should not necessarily supervise every single issue that takes place in the company. According to Pozen, a leader can reach maximum efficiency once (s)he gives the company some air and allows the management handle the company affairs on their own for once.
Finally, the author offers his ideas concerning the role of the company director and what the latter should be like for the company to prosper. According to Pozen, the role of a director has changed over the past few years considerably and now demands far more devotion and commitment than it has ever had.
Back to the above-mentioned reform, Pozen explains that it will not have any tangible effect in the U. S. economics, as well as the major functions of the board. Finally, Pozen offers his vision of a perfect company with a perfect leader at helm.
Along with the explanations of what caused the decline of the entrepreneurships all over the world in 2008, the author also outlines the strategies which can lead an employer to efficient leadership and considerable progress, as well as great revenues.
Hence, it can be concluded that the report offers an honest and detailed account of the causes of the economical problems of the 2008. Offering an exhaustive explanation of why the SOX Act did not change the situation for the better, the author of the report made it obvious that the people who developed the SOX Act clearly tried to solve the then economical problems.
However, the problem of the plan which the developers of the SOX were trying to implement was that it offered an even more complicated plan for the chairmen of the boards to comply with. Thus, the author makes it obvious that, for better strategies, it is necessary to make the plan outlines as simple as they can be.