The Missing Ingredient

In this part of the module I have learned ethics for the finance professional. This subject is relevant for myself in three areas which is why I am really interested in it. Firstly, over the past 6 months, I have been writing a dissertation on how there is hope that new audit regulation will improve audit quality and I have looked into accounting scandals and what it means to be ethical in the audit profession. Secondly, I am going to be an auditor (far flung from when I wanted to be a fireman when I was a child) when I leave university, so I need to understand that ethics are really important. And finally, in semester 1 of this year, we learnt about ethics and normative ethical theories (Kant, Rand etc) and it is interesting to be able to apply that thinking to real case studies.

I myself have been aware of a lot of ethical scandals and news reports over the past few years and further into the past which really bring to light a couple of things. After each scandal, new regulation is passed to stop it from happening again (but it always does) and that business leaders are not learning from past mistakes. I have noted a few scandals below:

In the table above, you can see that scandals will happen, then a series of regulation will be passed, then it will happen again. This will continue to go like this probably forever. I did some investigation and it was clear to see what I am talking about. So, in 2001 (Enron) and 2002 (Worldcom) scandals happened, then the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act 2002 was passed. Then in 2010 (Lehman Brothers), the financial crisis was happening, more regulation e.g. Financial Services Act (FSA), and then a few years later we have more scandals. When will it stop?

Many columnists and accounting professionals who look into scandals report that scandals are still increasing year-on-year, with one saying that there was an increase of 46% in account fraud from 2013 to 2014. This is worrying because new regulation such as SOX was passed to try and protect stakeholders from accounting errors and fraud. I would like to ask a question to whether any regulation could be passed to stop it? or will businesses just try and find new loopholes?

What I found when doing my dissertation and which I have also learned from the lectures is that there are certain reasons to why accounting scandals happen between businesses and financial professionals. I have learned about the PIPCO acronym (Professional Behaviour, Integrity, Professional Competence, Confidentiality and Objectivity) which shows a few reasons (I am sure there are more) why finance professionals may fail their duty. The one thing I find when conducting my research was that Objectivity was the main reason into why finance professionals did a poor job. If they become to familiar with the client (known as lack of independence, such as going on holiday together or being 'mates' at the pub) then they are more likely to let things'slide' as it is said. I do believe that this is the biggest risk and probably the reason why a lot of scandals happen. 

For example, I read an article about how Arthur Andersen auditors of Enron were treated 'as if they were employees of Enron' and they were invited to company picnics and so on. If this is not a lack of independence then I do not know what it; and we all know how that turned out.

My belief is that being ethical in your role as a finance professional is the most important factor in being successful, and not about how much money you earn or how big your bonus is. If you cannot be ethical, you may be jepardising someones pension or rainy day fund which could cause a lot of harm and unhappiness. In relation to ethics being the missing ingredient, I think that the finance professional (a minority rather than a majority) sometimes misses thinking about ethical considerations.

One final note that I was really interested in when listening to this lecture was a question the lecturer mentioned was "should white collar crime be punished as harshly as murder?". This was interested and provoked a lot of thought because of a video of Dennis Kozlowski (former Tyco CEO) who for his crime may be in prison for 25 years (longer than some murderers). My thoughts to the question are that murders should obviously face more time in prison, but white collar crime can hurt people in different ways and can cause a lifetime a distress and suffering for some people, so definitely should be treated more harshly than it currently is. I feel CEOs of these companies are not put off because they see the rewards (bonus etc) outweighing the risk (prison).

Can I Spread the Risk for better Returns? Portfolio Theory

The most common phrase uttered when someone wants to invest in the stock market is one of ‘how can I get high returns guaranteed with low risk?’ (I could probably find a top Google search with something similar). To be honest, I have probably searched this myself before attending sessions on Efficient Market Hypotheses (EMH), learning about such things as ‘random walks’ and that investors irrational behaviour makes stocks difficult to predict for even seasoned investors never mind the average Joe.  


Those who (apparently) have….

Some new investors think that there is a way to have guaranteed returns after they see such people as Warren Buffett get a compounded annual rate of 19.7% from 1965-2012 (luck or skill?) or Bill Miller beating the market for 15 consecutive years, which is something we as investors could only wish for.

Some ways to hopefully get a better return….

Those famous words ‘Don’t put all your eggs in one basket’ (who doesn't love a cliché) could actually be the way to mitigate losses in your investment portfolio and come out with a not so bad return (well, you hope more than the risk free return rate of 1.44% (based on UK 10yr Gilt 9/2/16)). Spreading your portfolio will help in reducing your risk of putting all your money in one industry. If you had your entire portfolio in the banking sector (e.g. Barclays) when it collapsed in 2008, you may have seen up to a 40% loss. However, if you had part of your portfolio in banking and some in say, gold, then you would have been able to mitigate you loss and come out with a ‘zero sum’ at worst (the win may cancel out the loss, but at least you didn’t lose which is good, right?). I think sensible people don't invest all of their money in shares anyways, even Markowitz (the creator of modern portfolio theory) said that he puts at least 50% in 'safer' bonds.

An interesting article appeared on the FT (link here) about China and how their reliance on Saudi Arabian oil could lead them to become vulnerable to any instability and other factors in that region. The quote that really sums up what I am trying to explain with portfolio theory above and ‘not putting all your eggs in one basket’ is “it’s all about diversifying risk. It’s less about picking winners and more about modern portfolio”.

Correlation is key when trying to spread your portfolio, you do not want to invest in an industry that can be effected by another one as it will mean your return may increase in one, then decrease in another ('zero-sum'). Let me give you an example:

• The Oil and Airline industry are quite closely correlated (planes use oil; therefore airlines are heavily reliant on the oil price). Between August 2014 and January 2015 the oil price went from $97.27 to $48.36 (a considerable drop), however, American Airlines share price in the same period went from $30.78 to $55.69 (there may be other reasons of course). What I am trying to say with this example is that if you had an oil company investment that would have gone down, but an airline investment would have gone up (probably giving you a low return as the decrease cancels out the increase).

As a final note, I believe the world is more unstable now than ever before so there is a low probability of being able to predict or beat the market, but diversification of your investment portfolio will at least help mitigate losses in my eyes.