Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Edward Tufte put forward a series of principles for visualisations Essay
Edward Tufte put forward a series of principles for visualisations - Essay Example There is an importance of ensuring that such visual graphics are presented in a way that attracts and not repels the audience. There are various ways in which this might be achieved, and may include ensuring that the graphics are captivating to the eye and proper arrangement of the graphics is attained systematically in the graphical representation. The important aspects of presenting these visual graphics was investigated and presented by Edward Tuft, who presented an influential, approach of presentation of visual graphics through several principles. Tuft argues that graphical excellence in statistical graphics for example, must have complex ideas that are communicated with clarity, efficiency and precision (Seintra, Adriaansen & Liere 2009, 163). Therefore, tuft put forward a few principles that any graphical excellence has to abide with. ... These principles by tuft have to guide the design and presentation of any graphical presentation that effectively serves its purpose as was designed for. According to (Seintra, Adriaansen & Liere 2009, 163), Tuft further considers visualizations that have cluttered graphics, that are incomprehensible as tempting to remove the data. Cluttered information is therefore an aspect of poor design and cannot be considered as being affected by the data presented by such design. (Source: http://www.shadedrelief.com/world/) Fig. 1 example of a well designed geovisualization The geovisualization to be investigated against the Tuft principles of visualization is a man showing the physical features of the globe that is found in the following link (http://www.nacis.org/data/world_map/map1/world1/world_map1.html. ). This geovisualization has been selected due to its unique presentation aspects that the designer of this map incorporated and the different perspectives in which the map can be viewed a t. This geovisualization also portrays contrasting features as presented the designer and offers a good model through which Tuft principles of visualization can be well understood. The geovisualization portrays aw old map with all the important physical features visible and with descriptions well embedded in the map. It is an informative geovisualization that can be used to make decisions concerning this subject. One of the conditions as given by Tuft in designing visualization is that such visualization has to be clear and present the graphics and data with precision (Seintra, Adriaansen & Liere 2009, 163). The geovisualization in question has well portrayed these conditions in that the maps as representing the continents are clear and well visible with precision, it is
Sunday, October 27, 2019
The inter relationship between firm growth and profitability
The inter relationship between firm growth and profitability Abstract There is a widespread presumption that there is a close relationship between firm growth and firm profitability. However, most of the past studies on firm growth and profitability have been conducted without mutual associations. Only a few studies, thus far, have examined the inter-relationship between firm growth and profitability and the results have been inconsistent. The reason for the inconsistency is mainly due to the lag structure of the models in each study. To address the issue, this study conducted panel unit-root tests on firm growth and profitability separately and then made appropriate models using dynamic panel system GMM estimators. Through the analyses of the models, this study found that in restaurant firms the prior years profitability had a positive effect on the growth rate of the current year, but the current and prior years growth rates had a negative effect on the current years profitability. This outcome implies that profit creates growth but the growth impede s profitability in the restaurant industry. More implications are also discussed in this paper. Keywords: Firm growth; Profitability; Panel unit-root test; Dynamic panel system GMM 1. Introduction The dynamics of firm growth and profitability (or profit rate) is an important issue for industrial practitioners as well as academic researchers (Goddard, McMillan and Wilson, 2006). Theoretically, if firm growth rate is unrelated to firm size and prior growth rate, then firm growth follows random walk and the variance of firm size can increase indefinitely. This is known as the Law of Proportionate Effect (LPE). This stochastic growth process implies unlimited industry growth in the long run. However, if growth rate is inversely related to firm size, firm growth would converge in the long run. On the other hand, Mueller (1977) claimed that firm profitability converges at a certain level due to market competition, which is referred to as Persistence of Profit (POP). The POP literature argues that firm entry and exit are sufficiently free to quickly eliminate any abnormal profit and that the profitability of all firms tends to converge toward the long-run average value. However, Goddard, Molyneux and Wilson (2004) stated, even though it is generally presumed that firm growth and profitability effect each other, that firm growth and profitability are not necessarily connected. Overall, the impact and direction of this relationship remains ambiguous. The ambiguity is associated with various econometric issues. First, due to the endogeneity it is difficult to capture a clear causality and direction between them. Further, if firm growth and profitability time lags are incorporated into the models the endogenous relationship becomes more complicated due to the unknown effects of different time lags. Recently, there have been a couple of attempts to investigate the inter-relationship between firm growth and profitability (Coad, 2007; Davidsson, Steffens, and Fitzsimmons, 2009). Although it is worth exploring the relationship, the results of the studies turned out to be inconsistent. In the previous studies, two types of methodologies were used: panel unit-root test and dynamic panel system GMM estimator. The panel unit-root test is appropriate for testing the convergence hypotheses of firm growth and profit rates. It is also useful for finding the significance of the lag term in a simple autoregressive model, but it is difficult to control the endogenous effect in the model. Moreover, the panel unit-root test cannot directly examine the inter-relationship between firm growth and profitability. Dynamic panel system GMM estimator can control for endogeneity and test the inter-relationship, but determining the number of lag terms remains ambiguous. Thus, in order to address the analysis problems in the previous literature, we first employed the panel unit-root test and subsequently made a testable model for the dynamic panel system GMM estimator. Through those analyses, we intended to investigate the inter-relationship between firm growth and profitability under various time lags. More specifically, the objectives of this study were: 1) to examine the panel unit-root test on the series of firm growth and profitability separately and to find an appropriate lag structure; and 2) to make an appropriate model to investigate the inter-relationship between them through a vector autoregression (VAR) model via dynamic panel system GMM estimator. We used restaurant firms for the study sample and, thus, the results are useful for understanding the dynamics of firm growth and profitability in the restaurant industry. In the following section, we summarize prior LPE and POP literature and present the potential inter-relationships between firm growth and profitability. Next section outlines the details of the study methodology. The following section shows the results of panel unit-root test and dynamic panel system GMM regarding the inter-relationship between firm growth and profitability. Finally, we conclude this study with managerial implications and suggestions for further studies. 2. Literature Review 2.1. Law of Proportionate Effect (LPE) and Persistence Of Profit (POP) The notion that firm growth rate is independent of firm size and past growth rate is known as the Law of Proportionate Effect (LPE) (Gibrat, 1931). According to the LPE, firm growth happens by chance and thus past growth is not a reliable predictor of future firm growth (Goddard et al., 2006). Hence, deterministic factors of firm growth (i.e., managerial capacity, innovation and efficiency) are randomly distributed across firms. However, recent empirical studies have claimed that there is an inverse relationship between firm growth and firm size, rejecting the LPE (Hall, 1987; Evans, 1987; Dunne and Huges, 1994; Geroski and Gugler, 2004). Most empirical studies of LPE used cross-sectional regression models through a simple autoregressive model (for example, AR(1)), but the models were criticized due to their arbitrariness in choosing lag terms. Recently, Chen and Lu (2003) and Goddard et al. (2006) tested the LPE using panel unit-root models because the LPE assumes non-stationarity i n the time series analysis. The benefit of the panel unit-root test on LPE lies in its ability to test a long series effect in non-stationarity, while the weakness of the test is its inability to include control variables that may affect firm growth (i.e., prior profitability, leverage, and market competition). Conversely, researchers on persistence of profit (POP) argue that firm profitability converges at a certain level across all firms and no firms could achieve an above average profit rate in the long run. Mueller (1977) developed the deterministic time-series model for testing the POP and subsequently (Mueller 1986) demonstrated profit rate convergence through an autoregressive model. Since Mueller (1986), most studies on POP have adopted the autoregressive model. However, Goddard et al. (2006) stated that the typical methodology for POP estimated individual effects and autoregressive coefficients for each firm, so the estimated coefficients were often unreliable and the testing power was low. Hence, Goddard et al. (2006) tested the profit rate convergence hypothesis using a panel unit-root test in order to find the stationarity in a profit rate time series. 2.2. The inter-relationship between firm growth rate and profitability (or profit rate) As noted earlier, it is widely believed that firm growth and profit rates are related to each other (Goddard et al., 2004). Some prior studies have suggested that profit rate has a positive impact on growth rate. Alchians (1950) theoretical study argued that fitter firms survive and grow, but less viable firms lose their market share and exit through the evolutionary selection mechanism. Thus, if profit rate reflects the degree of fitness, it is possible to predict that profitable firms will grow. Further, according to the financing constraint hypothesis retained profits can be readily used for investment, whereas firms with low profitability could not grow even if they have positive growth opportunities. This is also consistent with the pecking-order theory, which claims that managers prefer internal capital to external capital, such as debt and equity financing. However, the influence of growth rate on profitability is inconsistent in theories and empirical studies. A Classical Ricardian perspective claims that if a firm shows high profit rates it would grow to exploit additional growth opportunities that are less profitable but still create additional profits. This notion implies three things. First, the profit rate is converges at zero from a long-term perspective. Second, high profit rates have a positive impact on growth rates until the profit rate is zero. Finally, firm growth has a negative influence on profit rate. Along similar lines, the Neoclassical view argues that firms first exploit their most profitable growth opportunities and then consider less profitable opportunities until the marginal profit on the last growth opportunity is equal to zero. Consequently, profitable firms maximize their overall level of profits through profitable growth opportunities but experience a decrease in profit rates. Even though this argument exclud es market competition, it theoretically explains the relationship between firm growth and profit rates. However, managerial growth-maximization hypothesis under market competition (Marris, 1964; Mueller, 1972) claims that the managerial objective of a firm is to maximize growth rather than profit. Thus, this hypothesis proposed that growth and profits are in a competitive relationship with each other, which suggests the possibility that growth victimizes profit. Nevertheless, there are a number of theoretical claims that growth rate has a positive impact on profit rate. First, the Kaldor-Verdoorn Law in economics (Kaldor, 1966; Verdoorn, 1949) claims that growth increases productivity and in turn the enhanced productivity increases profit rates. This notion is consistent with scale economies (Gupta, 1981). Thus, because firm growth contributes to an increase in firm size, the larger size could gain benefits from an economy of scale and in turn this affects profit enhancement. That is, growth can help increase profitability. However, empirical studies on the effects of growth rate on profit rate have not always been supportive. Capon, Farley and Hoenig (1990) reported that firm growth is related to high financial performance, but it was significant only in some industries. Chandler and Jansen (1992) and Mendelson (2000) reported a significant positive correlation between sales growth and profit rates, whereas Markman and Gartner (2002) found no significant relationship between growth and profitability. Furthermore, Reid (1995) claimed growth had a negative effect on profitability. The relationship between growth and profit rates are more complicated when time lags of the two variables are considered. Only a few empirical studies have considered the link between growth and profit rates using various time lag terms. Goddard et al. (2004) found profitability to be important for future growth in European banks. Conversely, through panel data estimates of French manufacturing firms Coad (2007) found that the opposite direction of causation (i.e., growth to profitability) might be true. Both Goddard et al. (2004) and Coad (2007) investigated the relationship between firm growth and profit rates with vector autoregressive models using dynamic panel system GMM estimators. The difference between the two studies was that Goddard et al. (2004) used a one-year time lag but Coad (2007) incorporated three-year time lags in the analysis. More specifically, Goddard et al. (2004) found that a one-year lagged profit rate had a positive significant effect on the current-years gr owth rate, but a one-year lagged growth rate did not have a significant impact on the current-years profit rates. However, Coad (2007) showed that two- and three-years lagged profit rates have a positive significant influence on the current-years growth rate and that the current-years growth rate was positively significant in terms of the current-years profit rates. As noted, Goddard et al. (2004) and Coad (2007) reported opposing empirical results, which could be attributed to the difference in lag length. Considering the scarcity of past studies on the growth-profitability relationship and the problems with analytic methods, there is a need for a study that can verify this important relationship in a more holistic way. Hence, we intended to address the above research need in this study. A detailed outline of how the study was conducted follows in the next section. 3. Data and methodology The data used in the analysis was collected from the COMPUSTAT database using SIC 5812 (eating places). The data covers fiscal years 1978 to 2007 for U.S. restaurant firms. Profit rate (or profitability) was measured as net income divided by net sales and growth rate was gauged as the difference between the current and prior years net sales divided by the prior years net sales. After deleting severe outliers in the two main variables, growth rate and profit rate, this study used 2,927 firm-year observations for the analysis. As previously indicated, this study first conducted panel unit-root tests on growth and profit rates separately. The Dickey-Fuller unit-root test was set up for testing the stationarity of a time series. For example, if à †1 is equal to a unit in equation (1), the series is non-stationary. Equation (1) could be expressed as equation (2) by subtracting Yt-1 on both sides. Yt = à †1Yt-1 + ÃŽÂ µt (1) ΆYt = ÃŽÂ ³Yt-1 + ÃŽÂ µt (ÃŽÂ ³ = à †1 1) (2) Equation (2) above is a simplified Dickey-Fuller unit-root test (DF test). The null hypothesis of a DF test is that ÃŽÂ ³ equals zero and the alternative hypothesis is ÃŽÂ ³ p ΆYt = ÃŽÂ ³Yt-1 + à ¢Ã‹â€ ‘à †iΆYt-i + ÃŽÂ µt (ÃŽÂ ³ = à †1 1) (3) i=1 However, the data structure of this study was an unbalanced panel. Thus, equation (3) could be expressed as a panel setting following equation (4): p ΆYi,t = ÃŽÂ ³Y i,t-1 + à ¢Ã‹â€ ‘à †iΆY i,t-i + ÃŽÂ µ i,t (ÃŽÂ ³ = à †1 1) (4) i=1 Equation (4) is the testable model for the panel unit-root test in this study. A few studies have developed panel unit-root tests (Im, Pesaran and Shin, 2003; Levin, Lin and Chu, 2002; Maddala and Wu, 1999). However, in the case of an unbalanced panel setting, the Fisher test is the only one available. It combines the p-values from N independent unit root tests, as developed by Maddala and Wu (1999). Based on the p-values of individual unit root tests, Fishers test assumes that all series are non-stationary under the null hypothesis against the alternative that at least one series in the panel is stationary. Unlike other panel unit-root tests, Fishers test does not require a balanced panel. Thus, this study conducted Fishers test on the growth and profit rates and selected an appropriate lag length in ADF formula. After selecting the proper lag length in ADF formula, it was transformed as follows: p ΆYi,t = ÃŽÂ ³Y i,t-1 + à ¢Ã‹â€ ‘à †iΆY i,t-i + ÃŽÂ µ i,t i=1 = ÃŽÂ ³Y i,t-1 + à †1ΆY i,t-1 + à †2ΆY i,t-2 + à †3ΆY i,t-3 + à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ + à †pΆY i,t-p + ÃŽÂ µ i,t = ÃŽÂ ³Y i,t-1 + à †1(Y i,t-1 Y i,t-2) + à †2(Y i,t-2 Y i,t-3) + à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ + à †p(Y i,t-p Y i,t-(p+1)) + ÃŽÂ µ i,t = (ÃŽÂ ³ + à †1) Y i,t-1 + (à †2 à †1) Y i,t-2 + (à †3 à †2) Y i,t-3 + à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ + (à †p à †p-1)Y i,t-p à †pY i,t-(p+1) + ÃŽÂ µ i,t (5) Consequently, equation (5) could be expressed as follows: Yi,t = (1 + ÃŽÂ ³ + à †1) Y i,t-1 + (à †2 à †1) Y i,t-2 + (à †3 à †2) Y i,t-3 + à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ + (à †p à †p-1)Y i,t-p à †pY i,t-(p+1) + ÃŽÂ µ i,t (6) Thus, if the panel unit-root test chooses p lags in ADF formula, it could be transformed to AR(p+1) model. This AR(p+1) model was then used for the dynamic panel system GMM estimator. Also, since the purpose of this study was to investigate the inter-relationship between firm growth and profitability, this study adopted the vector autoregression (VAR) model to find the reciprocal relationship between growth rates and profit rates. p+1 q+1 p+1 SGi,t = ÃŽÂ ²0 + à ¢Ã‹â€ ‘Π·iSGi,t-i + à ¢Ã‹â€ ‘à ₠¬iPRi,t-i + ÃŽÂ ²1Salei,t-i + ÃŽÂ ²2LEVi,t-i + à ¢Ã‹â€ ‘Π¶iΆDMAi,t-i i=1 i=1 i=0 + DYeart + ÃŽÂ µi,t Model 1 q+1 p+1 PRi,t = ÃŽÂ ²0 + à ¢Ã‹â€ ‘à ₠¬iPRi,t-i + à ¢Ã‹â€ ‘Π·iGRi,t-i + ÃŽÂ ²1Salei,t-i + ÃŽÂ ²2LEVi,t-i + ÃŽÂ ²3MarketSharei,t-i i=1 i=0 + DYeart + ÃŽÂ µi,t Model 2 SGi,t is the sales growth rate and PRi,t is the profit rate at time t for firm i. Salei,t is the net sales at time t for firm i. We also included control variables in both models. In the LPE literature, recent studies showed that prior firm size is inversely related with current growth rate (Evans, 1987; Hall, 1987; Geroski and Gugler, 2004). On the other hand, Baumol (1959) provided evidence that firm profitability increases with firm size, while Amato and Wilder (Kwangmin!!, Year and reference?) showed that no relationship exists between firm size and profit rate. Finally, Samuels and Smyth (1968) stated that profit rate and firm size are inversely related. Thus, we included the prior years net sales as a firm size variable in both models to control for size effect. Debt leverage (LEVi,t) was also incorporated in both models as a control variable, which was calculated as total debt divided by total assets. Theories of optimal capital structure based on the agency costs of managerial discretion suggest that the adverse impact of leverage on growth increases firm value by preventing managers from taking on poor projects (Jensen,1986; Stulz, 1990). Opler and Titman (1994) empirically found that sales growth is lower in firms with higher leverage. Thus, the influence of debt leverage on growth could be negative. However, the prior literature on the relationship between debt leverage and profit rate, has shown mixed results. Debt affects profitability positively according to Hurdle (1974), but negatively according to Hall and Weiss (1967) and Gale (1972). Debt could also yield a disciplinary effect under the free cash flow hypothesis (Jensen, 1986; Stulz, 1990). Firms with high debt leverage can reduce wasteful investment opportunities and increase f irm performance, suggesting a positive relationship between debt leverage and profit rates. However, using debt can increase conflicts between debt and equity holders. Equity holders encourage managers to undertake risky projects because the benefits are transferred only to equity holders (Stiglitz and Weiss, 1981). Thus equity holders tend to support the use of debt. However, high uses of debt could deteriorate firm profitability by taking on overly risky projects. The effect of leverage on profit rate may not be uni-directional. Consequently, we incorporated leverage as a control variable due to its important potential effects on profitability. In the growth rate equation (Model 1), we incorporated mergers and acquisitions (MA) dummy variables from time t to t-(p+1) because MA execution abnormally increases growth rates. MA executions were identified from the SDC Platinum database. In the profitability equation (Model 2), we included a market share variable, which was calculated as the net sales of firm i at time t divided by the sum of net sales at time t. According to Buzzell, Gale and Sultan (1975), market share had a positive impact on firm profitability. Because a larger market share means stronger market power, firms with large market shares could have the power to control market prices and be in a better position to negotiate with their suppliers. Thus, a positive relationship between market share and profit rates is expected. Because the current years growth could affect the current years profit rate, following Coad (2007), we included the current years growth rate in Model 2. Statistically, ordinary least square (OLS) regression requires that the right-hand side variables should be independent of the error term. However, if there is a bi-directional causation between dependent (left-hand side) variables and explanatory (right-hand side) variables, this condition is not satisfied and thus OLS regression produces biased and inconsistent estimates. This endogeneity problem could be solved by choosing appropriate instrumental variables, which are correlated with the explanatory variables but not the error term. This means that the instrumental variables should be exogenous but if they are endogenous, the equation would be over-identified. However, if the instrumental variables are weakly correlated with the explanatory variables, which is called a weak instrument, the estimates are biased and inconsistent. Arellano and Bond (1991) proposed the GMM estimator for panel data, which could control the potential endogenous explanatory variables. This method uses the first difference model, which eliminates the time-invariant firm-specific effect, and instrumental variables for the endogenous variables were generated by lags of their own level. However, if the lagged level instruments are weakly correlated with the endogenous explanatory variables, there could be a finite sample bias in estimators. In particular, if the variable series tends to show a highly persistent profit rate series (Mueller, 1977), this weak correlation between lagged level instruments and endogenous explanatory variables is problematic. Arellano and Bover (1995) and Brundell and Bond (1998) developed a dynamic panel GMM estimator that estimated with level-equation and difference equation, which is called a system GMM. Consequently, the dynamic panel system GMM estimator has better asymptotic and finite sample propertie s than the one used by Arellano and Bond (1991). Thus, this study analyzed the proposed models using the dynamic panel system GMM estimator, which produces unbiased and consistent estimates after controlling for endogeneity and firm-specific effects even when the sample period is short. Even though the full sample period of this study is 30 years, the panel structure is not balanced due to the entry and exit of firms. Bludell and Bond (1998) suggested the minimum requirement for panel length as T à ¢Ã¢â‚¬ °Ã‚ ¥ 3. Thus, we excluded firms which did not exist at least three years in the sample period. Another requirement was that there is no serial correlation of the second order error terms. We conducted the serial correlation test for panel GMM estimators developed by Arellano and Bond (1991). In order to test the exogeneity of instrumental variables, we used the Hansen test instead of the Sargan test because the Sargan test is not robust enough to detect heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation (Roodman, 2006). Finally, as Roodman (2006) suggested, we included year dummies in the models and estimated the system GMM by two-step estimator because the two-step estimator is robust enough to detect the heteroskedasticity. For comparisons with the dynamic panel system GMM estimator, we conducted ordinary least square (OLS) and fixed-effect regression. 4. Results 4.1. Panel unit-root test for firm growth and profit rates As indicated, we conducted the panel unit-root test developed by Maddala and Wu (1999) using Fishers test, which assumes that all series are non-stationary under the null hypothesis. Equation (4) was tested on both growth and profit rates. The results are presented in Table 1. For the series of sales growth and profit rates, lag(4) was justified. Thus, the law of proportionate effect hypothesis was rejected but the persistence of profit hypothesis was validated. The results indicate that the growth rates are serially correlated and the profit rates are convergent. The purpose of the panel unit-root tests on growth and profit rates was to examine the stationarity of the two series and to make an appropriate model for the dynamic panel system GMM estimator. As shown earlier, if the panel unit-root test justifies p lags, the ADF formula could be transformed to AR(p+1) model. Consequently, the testable model is AR(5) for both growth and profit rates. Based on the lag length from the pane l unit-root test, we excluded any firm that existed less than five years in testing the dynamic panel system GMM estimator. Then, we tested the proposed models using AR(5) in order to identify the inter-relationship between firm growth and profit rates in various time lag structures. (Insert Table 1 Here) 4.2. Descriptive statistics and scatter plots of growth and profit rates Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics of the major variables of this study. The average sales of the sampled restaurant firms was 541.8 million dollars and the average growth rate in sales was 16.3%. The average profit rate (return on sales) was 1.3% and total debt rate (debt leverage) was 61.3%. Thus, the figures show that the restaurant industry has a high growth rate, but its profitability is not positive and it uses more debt than equity. (Insert Table 2 Here) Before conducting the dynamic panel system GMM estimator, we checked the scatter plots between growth and profit rates using various time lags. As Coad (2007) indicated, the non-parametric scatter plots of growth and profit rates gave us a visual appreciation of the underlying phenomenon. Thus, before testing the quantitative relationship, we can obtain useful information via scatter plots. Figure 1 shows the scatter plots of growth at time t (Y-axis) and growth rates at time t-1 to t-5 (X-axis) for all samples. Except for the first plot (growth rate time t versus t-1), all other plots seem to show no relationship. The plots, excluding the first plot, look like a cloud shape but are a bit scattered horizontally. Based on the plot for growth rate time t and t-1, the current and prior years growth rates are positively correlated. However, Figure 1 represents all firms, including MA firms. Apparently, firms with MA can experience abnormally high growth rates compared with non-MA firms. Thus, we checked the same scatter plots after excluding MA firms, as presented in Figure 2. The relationship between current and prior years growth rate is clearly positive and growth rate at t-2 also looks positive on current years growth rate. However, the earlier years growth rates (i.e., t-3, t-4 and t-5) appear to have no relationship with the current years growth rate. Figure 3 shows scatter plots of profit rate at time t (Y-axis) and profit rates at time t-1 to t-5 (X-axis). Interestingly, clear heteroskedasticity is detected in the relationship between them. Thus, the usage of the two-step estimator in the dynamic panel system GMM estimator is justified by Figure 3. In all of the scatter plots there is a tendency toward a positive relationship between current and prior profit rates. (Insert Figures 1, 2, and 3 Here) Figure 4 shows scatter plots of profit rate at time t (Y-axis) and growth rates at time t-1 to t-5 (X-axis). In all plots, points were spread horizontally. It seems that there is no effect of growth rate on profit rate. Surprisingly, the scatter plot of current growth rates appears to have no relationship with current profit rate. On the other hand, Figure 5 shows that profit rates clearly have a positive influence on the current growth rate. The majority of the points were spread vertically. The scatter plots show that prior profit rates seems to have a positive influence on current growth rates, but the influence of prior growth rates on current profit rates was not found. (Insert Figures 4 and 5 Here) 4.3. Results from Dynamic panel system GMM estimator Tables 3 and 4 show the results of the proposed models explained in the methodology section. Even though yearly dummies were not reported in Tables 3 and 4, they were included in the models. As shown in Table 3, the prior years growth rate at time t-1 was found to be positively significant on current growth rates in all three regressions (OLS, fixed-effect and system GMM). However, the directions and significances of the coefficients of the other prior growth rate terms varied across the three models. As explained earlier, however, the system GMM is the most appropriate model for this study due to the endogeneity and time invariant firm-specific effect and the results of the OLS and fixed-effect regression models were used simply for the purpose of comparison. Goddard et al. (2004) reported that the prior years (time t-1) growth rate was positive but not significant. It is difficult to directly compare their results with ours due to the difference in the lag length structure. Interestingly, our study showed that growth rates at time t-1 and t-5 were positively significant on current growth rates, but growth rates at time t-2 and t-4 were negatively significant. These results suggest that short-term and long-term prior growth rates have a positive impact, but mid-term prior growth rates have a negative influence on current growth rates. Our primary interest in Model 1 was the effect of the prior years profit rates on current growth rates. The system GMM results show that profit rates at time t-1 and t-5 were positively significant. The magnitude of the coefficient of profit rate at time t-5 was small, meaning that the positive impact of long-term prior profit rates on current growth rates is small. However, the prior years (time t-1) profit rate has a positively significant effect on current growth and the magnitude of the coefficient is large. Coads (2007) study showed that profit rates at time t-1 to t-3 were all positive but the prior years (time t-1) profit rate was not significant. Coad (2007) used an AR(3) model and thus a direct comparison of ours to Coads (2007) is not possible. Yet it is clear that the direction of the coefficients were very similar. Overall, our study results provide evidence that recently profitable firms may grow faster. In terms of the relationship between prior years firm size and current growth rate, all three results show a negative coefficient but the negative effect was significant only in OLS. Also, debt leverage had a negative effect on current growth rates but the system GMM result was not significant. Additionally, all serial correlation tests were not significant, showing that there was no serial correlation problem. Also, the over-identification tests were not significant, meaning that our instruments were not endogenous and the estimates were reliable. (Insert Table 3 Here) Table 4 shows the results of the profitability equation (Model 2). The results of the system GMM shows that profit rates at time t-1, t-2 and t-5 were had positively significant effect on current profit rates. However, profit rates at time t-3 and t-4 were negatively significant. The results suggest that short-term and long-term prior profit rates have a positive impact on current profit rates, but mid-term prior profit rates have a negative influence on current profit rates. Similarly, Goddard et al.s (2004) results showed that the prior years (time t-1) profit rate was positive and significant in its AR(1) model. Table 4 also presents the effect of the prior years growth rates on current profit rates were negatively significant in time t and t-1. Unlike our results, Goddard et al. (2004) found that the prior years growth rate was posi
Friday, October 25, 2019
Liberals :: Liberalism Politics Political Philosophy Essays
Liberals Ronald Beiner, Professor of Political Science at the University of Toronto investigates liberalism by considering the communitarian critics of it and different opinions of liberalists. He describes the critics of liberalism of Michael Sandel, Charles Taylor, Michael Walzer, and Alasdair MacIntyre. These community defenders think that all experiences of communtiy aren’t so morally desirable, but if people are looking at the world only in an individualistic way, they find themselves on a narrow horizon of experiences. Beiner also makes us understand the difference between left and right liberalists. Beiner is against the opinon that the liberalism refers to a particular relation between the state and the individual and he thinks that it’s a view of human life, which leaves people alone to do what they want freely, and in that sense the one in which society doesn’t guide people to give meaning to their life. He gives the painting example stating ‘the world without furniture’ as the main point. I believe that Beiner’s understanding of liberalism is wrong and I will tell you what a liberal is, what liberals wa nt and what they expect from the government. Liberal means ‘favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection ofcivil liberties’ (Kennedy, pars. 3-4). John F. Kennedy states that â€Å"liberal is not someone against the government and who is uncorned with the taxpayer’s dollar. It means someone who looks ahead not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of people†(pars. 1-2). Liberals want to change things to increase personal freedom and tolerance, and are willing to empower government to the extent necessary to achieve those ends. This is against the idea of Beiner about what liberalism is. They want to help individuals to take more control over their own lives. This requires environment where choices are not arbitrarily removed. Also enough information should be offered so that choices can be understood and made intelligently. Alan Brinkley states that â€Å"this also requires giving people responsibility and encouraging self-reliance within a social framework†(par. 8). Liberals see the role of government as providing a framework within which individuals can develop their lives and contribute to society.
Thursday, October 24, 2019
Does Globalisation of the media offer more or less opportunities for democracy? Essay
We live in society today where the media plays an alarmingly big part in how we see the world, and how our opinions are formed, whether it is from what we watch on television to who we vote for. The media has helped to make our society a democracy by placing emphasis on issues that at one stage in time would have been considered strictly private issues such as child birth, homosexuality, child care, domestic violence, and sexual harassment. Due to this democracy we now look differently at politics, and are more active in whom we want in office, and how we want our children to be raised. The globalisation of the media has increased our access to information about people and events around the world, but in the process it has also shifted issues on what should or should not be in the public domain.1 The media performs an essential part in our democracy socially, politically, economically and culturally. It is the main source of political information and allows us to access political debate. It allows us as an audience to be informed and to participate in how we should perceive things. Democracy needs the media to provide people with a wide range of opinions, analysis and debates on important issues. It needs the media to be able to reflect on the diversity of the audience, and it needs the media to be accountable for what is going on around them, and to be diverse and deliberate in how they communicate these issues to audiences. 2 The increased information given to audiences has a ‘democratising effect’, mobilising audiences into action, which in turn has significant implications for governments and businesses. International relations and events in our democracy are more visible and transparent, have more domestic policy ramifications and involve the public more often. While the globalised media plays a big part in our democracy, and has been characterised by the massive economic expansion and technical innovation it has also caused many problems for democracy. There is an increase in inequality, cultural and social tumult and individual alienation. The digital revolution and introduction of new technologies are redefining our notions of politics yes, but they are also redefining the structuring powers in society. Increasingly power resides in the hands of those that can produce, control and disseminate information the most effectively. This goes back to Marx’s theory that those who control the world govern it. While the proliferation of communications and increased global interdependence might create global understanding, equality and harmony it doesn’t necessarily mean that there is an increase in human communication and co-operation. If anything it is leading to the replacement of traditional structures, such as family religion, and the community with one that are supposedly more relevant.3 There are too few transnational media conglomerates dominating the world media, and fewer than 24 media conglomerates account for the majority of our newspapers, magazines, films, television and radio. With only a few big conglomerates running the show the media has become a vehicle used for commercial exploitation. There has been a steady increase of commercialisation of sports, arts, and education. This is disturbing when audiences are turning to the media to tell us how to vote, and how the government is being run. The media is constantly used by these conglomerates to spread existing structures and values, which are dominant globally and emphasise the free-market economy and the capitalist liberal democracy. The spread of the media has in fact broken down barriers to communications and international commerce, and makes it more difficult for governments and regulatory bodies to protect their cultures and societies from commercialisation and advertising.4 The main conglomerates have made the media very concentrated. Companies such as Times-Warner, Disney and Viacom have such diverse media holdings that they own both the means of production and distributing, further concentrating the media outlets and the information that we receive through the mass media. The media is vertical where production and distribution companies are allowed to own various types of networks, channels, and television stations. The media is supposed to be neutral yet how can they be so neutral when companies seem to ignore the important role that culture and social values play in shaping information. How can they be neutral when only a few conglomerate companies run them? The choices made everyday by government officials, media producers and distributors determine what topics are covered, what they want us to know and what they don’t want us to know, what information is selected and how it is portrayed. The simple choice of one story over another is not just economical and professional but also political.5 The choices that the media makes in presenting stories determines what becomes part of its audiences natural consciousness and what values and ideas take precedence to the general public. But these choices are not made by what they think the public wants but based on their own beliefs, and reflect cultural, social and national values and identity. The mass media is viewed as a means to increase diversity, democracy and the power of the individual. Yet more and more it seems that the media is a vehicle being used by the government and the producers to manipulate the community and advertise. It is assumed that the more television channels we have, the more diverse the information we receive. But this is a misconception, as Western Products, Hollywood values and advertising dominate nearly all of the media. More often now than not the information that is transmitted by the media is infotainment and advertising. The media is used so that audiences find it more difficult to have an impact on policies, goals and directions of their own social, economic and political institutions. As mentioned the media is owned by transnational corporations that command huge economies, run from the top and are interlinked in various ways. Their first interest is profit, and to construct an audience of a particular type. One that is addicted to a certain life-style with artificial wants. Their primary function is selling audiences to advertisers. They don’t make money from their subscriptions. They make money when an advertiser pays them. They believe in free market principles for others, but not for themselves. The major corporations in every society rely very heavily on state subsidy and state intervention.6 Making a profit from their advertising fees means that media outlets are influenced by various corporate interests. News coverage and other media content is therefore affected. Stories can end up being biased or omitted so that they don’t offend their advertisers or their owners. Corporate media is not a good thing for democracy when there is a risk of an increased economic and political influence that becomes unaccountable for. That is a great concern in democracy. Companies such as Newslimited and Times-Warner are so big that they have the power to stop other companies setting in on what they consider their turf. Times-Warner owns everything from Cable TV to sports teams and smaller companies that don’t have these options find that they can not compete in the media market. The problem with this is that with so few companies in complete power they are the ones making the decisions to what information is disseminated to the public, and this is done but what they think will make them a profit, and what will be beneficial to them. Companies such as News Corp wrote about the heroics of the War on terrorism, and the Iraq War because it was beneficial for them to support the U.S Government. The information filtered through to audiences was biased because it wasn’t telling people why there was a war, but that we should be supporting it. This was done because it would make them profit, and work in their favour. This was also shown in 1998 when Rupert Murdoch personally intervened to prevent one of the companies that he owned, HarperCollins, from publishing the memoirs of former Governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patton. He alleged that it was because he didn’t want the memoirs to offend the Government, but it was in fact because it might jeopardise plans by News Corp to have future expansion in China.7 Firms in the media industry compete with each other, but they also work together to reduce competition and in fact the nine largest American firms have joint ventures with nearly six of the other eight giants. Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp has at least one joint venture with every other of his competitors. This is not an appealing notion for we, as the audience has little say in what is produced. It also sadly it indicates that the main purpose to our media is only to make money for those huge companies in charge. If this is the case then how can Journalists be protected from the commercial interests of their owners? And how can information be filtered out evenly without bias when media owners wish to sell their space to the highest advertiser. Journalists claim to give readers the news that they think is important to their lives, but in fact tend to be assisting in the process of converting Journalism into the type of consumer news and information that advertisers want.8 Global conglomerates such as Times-Warner, News Corp, Sony, Viacom, Bertelsmann, and AT & T have an impact on our culture, especially when they are entering nations that have been tightly controlled by an already corrupt media system or nations that have significant censorship over media such as China. The Global companies don’t have respect for tradition or custom especially if it stands in the way of profits. Another problem with having such a globalised media in our democracy is that the media produces so much knowledge, information, dissemination of everything and that produces an absence of everything too, and in doing so produce a situation that causes too many images. The mode of production is then affected. The media has introduced us to a world with no fixed territory, a world increasingly without limits. This can cause us, as an audience to have a loss of sensibility, a loss of limits. This affects the mode of production. One does not produce what is absent, or what is invisible. It affects the production of culture, by mixing them with different cultures.9 If anything the consolidation of ownership across the various media remains a threat to democracy. The public’s right to information and ideas from the widest possible range of sources means little in a world dominated by a handful of interlocking media giants. The news programs that people see, and the advertisements that accompany them are dominated by the success of white, wealthy westerners and the examples of the dangers posed to them are poor, black, non-westerners. Women are also represented in the media by glamorous models, actresses and news presenters. The problem with a globalised media in a democracy is that it can ruin the public infrastructure and that in turn means the demise of the public sector, which results in privatisation and more commercialism. Media ownership and media concentration becomes a problem when audiences are not becoming well informed because the audience or public can not act as an authoritarian. The danger of living in such a world means that while there is an increase in the mode of communication, new forms of identity and community there is an equal loss in political sovereignty, economic opportunity and cultural diversity. 1 Healey, Justin Mass Media and Society, Spinney Press, 2000 2 McChesney Making Media democratic, Boston Review issue 23 3 Mowlana, Hamid Globalisation of the mass media, London-Sage Publications, 1997 4 Tunstall, Jeremy The new Hollywood Network Cartel and Europe, Carleton University Press 1998 5 Chomsky Noam Media and Globalisation Third World Network, 1996 6 OECD Globalisation: challenges and opportunities OECD Publishing 2000 7 Wiseman, John Global Nation, Cambridge University Press, 1998 8 Kortin, David, The mythical victory of Market Capitalism Goldsmith, Edward and Mender, San Francisco 1996 9 McChessney, Robert Global media, neoliberalism, and imperialism, Monthly review, volume 52 issue 10 2001
Wednesday, October 23, 2019
Gufax Mf Bank Profile
GUFAX MF BANK www. gufaxmfbank. com COMPANY PROFILE GUFAX MICROFINANCE BANK LTD OUR VISION To be the leader in Microfinance Banking Services in Nigeria. OUR MISSION To reduce poverty and build smiles on the faces of our esteemed customers by transforming them into economically active population with full access and integration into the formal financial system. INTRODUCTION Gufax Microfinance bank Ltd. s licensed for operation in Akwa Ibom State by the Central Bank of Nigeria for the provision and administration of microfinance services, loans, advisory services, poverty alleviation programme-partners with Government or its agencies as well as other financial services. It was incorporated on 04 April, 2008 with the Corporate Affairs Commission and Licensed by CBN in September 2008. The Bank has an Authorised Share capital of N250million out of which the paid up is N120million and total asset base of over N500million, approximately $3. 2Million as at December 31st, 2011.We also have to tal employee/staff strength of seventy one (71); and our present customer base is approaching twenty thousand individuals and groups comprising mainly the market women, cooperative groups, transport unions and other small and medium business operators within the state and a percentage of government employees. OUR ADDRESS Corporate Head of is at FADUK HOUSE, No. 3 Udotung Ubo Street, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State. Presently, the bank has seven meeting points within Akwa Ibom State as follows: Akpan Andem Entrepreneurial Market Uyo in Uyo Local Government. Nung Udoe Ibesikpo,in Ibesikpo Asutan Local Government.Ikot Ekpene in Ikot Ekpene Local Government. Oku Iboku in Itu Local Government. Ishiet Uruan Beach Market in Uruan Local Government. Ibaka Beach Meeting Point, Mbo Local Government Area. Onna Meeting Point, Ikot Abasi Road, Abat. It is part of the strategic expansion plan of the bank to open a minimum of one meeting point every quarter. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS The bank has a board members hip of 4 distinguished persons as shown below: Engr Nsikanabasi Ibanga – Chairman Engr. Ibanga Engr. Nsikanabasi Ibanga is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Gufax Microfinance Bank Ltd. He is an experienced Civil Engineer.Engr. Ibanga served as an Executive Engineer with ENPLAN Group of Consulting Engineers Nigeria Ltd, EBASCO Consulting Engineers and Zeal Nigeria Limited for over 10years. He has been involved in many private and public building designs over the years and is still very active in current practice. He is a member, Nigeria Society of Engineers (MNSE) and also a registered member of the Council for Regulation of Engineering (COREN). He has attended Engineering Management Workshop and other courses within and outside the country. His experience has been brought to bear in his leadership of the Bank.Mr. Uduak Effiong Udo – Managing Director/CEO * MD/CEO Mr. Uduak Udo is the Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer of Gufax Microfinance Bank Ltd. He is a seasoned Banker with over Ten (10) years of experience in Retail, Consumer and Public Sector Banking. Uduak had stints with Citizens International Bank Limited (now Enterprise Bank Ltd) from where he left for Zenith Bank Plc. He grew to a management position in Zenith Bank and subsequently left and co-found a group of financial service companies which Gufax Microfinance bank Ltd is one of them.He holds an MBA Degree in Business Administration from University of Calabar. He is a fellow of Portfolio and Debt Management Institute (PDMI), a member of the Risk Management Association of Nigeria (RIMAN), and a member of Institute of Strategic Management (ISMN) and also a member of chartered institute of Bankers of Nigeria. He is also an Alumnus of World Prestigious Harvard Business School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, where he has been exposed to world class management Education and Entrepreneurship. A serious minded and successful entrepreneur, Uduak has interest in Finance and Invest ment.He has attended courses within and outside the country. The experience of the MD/CEO is a springboard for successful service delivery to our clients. Engr Bassey A. Iton – Director QUALIFICATIONS: M. Sc Petrochemical Engineering, Moscow Institute of Petrochemical and Gas Industries, Moscow, (1977). Member Nigerian Institute of Chemical Engineers. Member Nigerian Society of Engineers. Associate Member AIChE (1978). General Manager, Process Engineering; NNPC H/Q. Abuja. Working experience covers the underlisted areas and companies:Federal Superphosphate Fertiliser Company Ltd. (FSFC), Kaduna†¦August 1977 – June 1978 Warri Refining and Petrochemical Company Ltd. (WRPC), Ekpan-Warri†¦October 1978 – January 1980 Kaduna Refining and Petrochemical Company Ltd. (KRPC), Kaduna†¦January 1980 – December 1990 National Engineering and Technical Company Ltd. (NETCO), Lagos†¦January 1991 – January 2006 NNPC Investment, Engineering & Techn ical Divisions. Abuja†¦February 2007 – November 2009 Top Manaagement Duties in NNPC Headquarters Abuja. General Manager Upstream Investment in Commercial and Investment Directorate. .General Manager Process Engineering in Technology Directorate. Project Engineering and Management Services: National Engineering and Technical Company. January 1991 to December 2006. Managed underlisted projects: Strategic Management Training for world class managers. (June 2008) Mini –MBA for Oil & Gas in Houston TEXAS October 2009 Engr Iton is amiable & hardworking and is a very discipline Board member of Gufax MFB Mr Mbobo E. Mbobo (ACA) – Director * Mr Mbobo Mr. Mbobo Mbobo is a Director of Gufax Microfinance Bank Ltd. He is a seasoned Accountant. Mbobo has worked as an Accountant with A.C. T Nigeria Ltd, Lagos for 3years before moving on to Federal Mortgage Bank where he worked as a State Accountant for 10years and then another 3years as an Audit Manager with Eddy Ette & C o (Chartered Accountants). He is presently working with the University of Uyo as a part time Lecturer and an Acting Director of Finance with Akwa Ibom State University of Technology. He holds an MBA Degree in Accounting and is working on getting his Ph. D. He is an Associate of Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN), an Associate, Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria (ACTI).He has attended courses within and outside the country. He has served as a Resource person at Seminars and Workshops. The experience of this Director is a great boosts to our service to customers. CORRESPONDENCE BANKS First Bank of Nigeria Plc Access Bank Plc EcoBank International Plc Diamond Bank Plc United Bank for Africa Plc Zenith Bank Plc Skye Bank Ltd OUR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES: CURRENT ACCOUNT: Gufax MFB offers current account services. The account is necessary as most other cash management services are provided through the current account.VOLUNTARY SAVINGS ACCOUNTS: We provide a number of savings products. These include 1. Regular savings accounts: This is the regular savings account operated for a customer for his personal reason. 2. Gufax Heritage Account: This account is for Children under the age of 18years. Benefits include scholarships. 3. Gufax Daily Contribution: This is for traders who are desirous of saving a pre-agreed amount daily till month end. 4. Gufax Acquired Account: This account is for persons who have specific targeted items to acquire at a specific time 5. Gufax Festivity Account:This account is for savings for festivity such as Christmas, Easter, Salah, Marriages etc 6. Gufax Real Life Savings Scheme: This is an open ended Asset acquisition scheme for civil servants. Regardless of what you want the Bank buys it for you and your salary is deducted for repayment over a period not exceeding one year after you would have saved 50% of the total cost of the asset. COMPULSORY SAVINGS ACCOUNT 1. GROUP COMPULSORY SAVINGS : All group members benefiting from Gufax Group Loan operates a compulsory savings account expected to assist them to build wealth and instil a saving culture in them. . TRICYCLE SAVINGS ACCOUNT: All beneficiaries of the Gufax Tricycle Transport Scheme are made to do a weekly compulsory savings for themselves as part of the condition for being a beneficiary of the scheme. SPECIALISED CREDIT PRODUCTS Gufax Tricycle Scheme: This product is targeted at the former Motorcycle riders in the city of Uyo whose business has been band by the government and replaced with taxi and tricycles. It requires the beneficiary to save 25% of the product cost and the bank will acquire such for the person with a tenor of 8months. Gufax Reallife Scheme:This is targeted at low and medium income government and private sector employees. It is meant to make life meaningful to this class of people by making them have easy access to any asset that will add value to their lives and pay from their salary for a tenor not exceeding 18months. Gu fax Quick Loan: this product is a temporary overdraft facility granted to traders which must be liquidated at the close of work on the last work day of every month. It is targeted at traders who makes daily repayments and with clear potentials to liquidate on or before end of month. FIXED DEPOSIT ACCOUNT:GUFAX MFB has a unique fixed deposit regime that encourages growth in asset and accumulation of wealth with minimal risk. The rates are competitive and attractive but within the Financial and Fiscal Policy Framework of the Central Bank of Nigeria. From as low as a Hundred Thousand, You can own a fixed deposit account with Gufax. SALARY ACCOUNT: Salary account can be opened for employees of companies/organization at no cost. You only need to send us a letter indicating the names of those that need the account and the rest is for us to do. CO-OPERATIVE AND SMALL GROUP ACCOUNT:This account is opened for formal and informal groups and organizations who are engaged in small and medium bu sinesses targeted at poverty alleviation and wealth creation. CREDIT-RELATED SERVICES: The credit-related services of our bank include: 1. Advances and Overdraft 2. Group & Individual Loans 3. Short term facility against staff salaries. 1. Projects development financing 2. Small scale business finance 3. Asset acquisition Financing 4. Property/Household equipment Lease. 5. Micro-insurance 6. Co-operative and Small Group (Formal & Non-formal) lending 7. Bridge Finance/LPO financingFINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES Gufax MFB also offers a wide range of financial advisory services on optimal financial structure involving a mix of equity/debt financing, investment risk management and strategic finance options. CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES GUFAX’s Faduk Care Trust This is the philanthropic organ of Gufax MFB and is saddled with the responsibility of making sure that the Bank gives back to the society. Amongst the programme so far handled by the department includes: 1. Scholarships Scheme totalling over a million naira to over 50 beneficiaries from different Educational institutions in Nigeria. . Library Project in Collaboration with ICAN, Uyo District and Society. 3. Sponsorships of programmes, seminars and workshops. 4. Gufax Help. Com Tansport scheme for the frustrated Okada Riders affected by Government band of their operation within Uyo Capital City. PREVIOUS STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS We have handled many micro credit programs amongst which are i. FADAMA III Programme in Akwa Ibom State still ongoing. ii. Shell Development micro credit for Uruan (LGA) Community iii. Akwa Ibom State Action Committee on Aids (SACA) in their ongoing micro credit programme. iv.Participating MFB for FGN/CBN/IFAD Rural Finance Institution Building Programme (RUFIN) for Akwa Ibom State. STRATERGIC BUSINESS PLAN FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF MICRO-CREDIT FOR THE RURAL ACTIVE POOR IN ONNA LGA. Our strategy of poverty alleviation partnership is a collaborative approach where the Local governm ent provides a counterpart fund and a guarantee for microcredit to be extended by the bank to the rural active poor within the Local Government Area; Pre-disbursement training, disbursement, monitoring, performance evaluation, recovery, refinancing planning, rendition of report, compulsory savings mobilisation are part of this partnership. Pre-disbursement Training: Each of the beneficiaries of our micro credit will be trained on the basic cash management technique to ensure that there is no diversion of these credits for other purposes. Small and medium enterprises will be duly examined to ensure the commitment of the promoters. We will organize trainings and workshops for the beneficiaries of the loans in line with their trades to help them keep simple books of accounts as well as exercise financial disciplines. These and other awareness seminars/workshops keep our beneficiaries on top performance. †¢ Selection/Disbursement:We engage the beneficiaries of loans/credits through a thorough and diligent selection /screening process. We disburse funds to groups (formal and informal) and organizations with proper co-ordinations and organization; skilled small and medium entrepreneurs as well as individuals with quality business plans for small and medium enterprises. †¢ Monitoring : We will monitor them through our well trained credit/field officers divided into teams and assigned to specific groups/communities and special products of the bank such as group fund management (Government and donor redit scheme funds). †¢ Recovery: Each group or individual is qualified for the loan with at least two guarantors which one of the following must sign: Village head of the beneficiaries/group; clan Head, Paramount ruler, councillors, House of Assembly member or any prominent member of the community with a net-worth over and above the loan amount. †¢ Repayment Plan: At the commencement of the programme, we shall draw up a repayment plan to enable them kno w the duration of the loan and the repayment period. Rendition of Report: We shall keep a chart (ledger) to monitor daily, weekly and monthly performances and shall constantly present monthly report on the performance of the scheme to the Board and Management for Assessment and Policy formulation. †¢ Our Charges: Our charges will be on commission basis which is negotiable or a subsidized interest rate. ORGANOGRAM: GUFAX MICROFINANCE BANK ORGANISATIONAL CHART [pic] MANAGEMENT STAFF PROFILE: Gufax Microfinance Bank stands out from among its peers because of our uniqueness and personalized services to customers.We parade a team of highly motivated and well trained staff, who will not rest until a customer is satisfied. MD/CEO – please see as in Director’s profiles Mgr-Business Development & Strategy(BDS) * Mr Ubong Udoh is an MBA student of ESUT, Holds B. Sc in Mathematics and Statistics from the University of Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria. He is also a member of the Statistical Association of Nigeria, Member of the Chattered Institute of Bankers of Nigeria, He has working experience with reputable companies, such as Zenith Bank, Intercontinental Bank and the Central bank of Nigeria spanning over 10 years.He is a a Certified Microfinance Banker(MCIB) of CIBN. He is involve in many Humanitarian services including, Action Aid Int’l, Society Against Malaria, SACA, ACOMIN and the UNHCR. He is hardworking and goal oriented. He is friendly but disciplined. * CHIEF FINANCE OFFICER & HEAD OF AUDIT: As Head of Internal Control/Audit Department of Gufax (MF) Bank, Ubon Akpan has over 20 years experience in Banking, Accounting, Finance, Auditing and General Management traversing both Public and Private Sector Establishments.He started his career at Mercantile Bank Plc, where he rose to the post of a Supervisor. He later joined A. T. Asikpo & Co (Chartered Accountants) as Audit Supervisor, from where he moved to Frank & General Associates (A f irm of Financial & Management Consultants) as Finance & Admin Manager. Thereafter, he got an appointment at ACCESS Group of Schools as Head of Accounts/ Bursar for 2 years and later as Head of Audit for 3 years, before taking up another appointment as the General Manager of Grafen Enterprises Ltd – a Human Resources Management Company in the Oil Services sub sector.He also worked with Ekondo (MF) Bank, Calabar, as a Manager before he joined Gufax (MF) Bank. A Cost and Management Accountant (ACMA), he holds a Higher National Diploma (HND) in Accounting, a Post Graduate Diploma in Management (PGDM) and Masters in Business Administration (MBA) from the University of Calabar. * MANAGER,BANKING OPERATIONS: ADEYANJU LANSEBE is a graduate * MANAGER,BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT: This department is managed by Ugomma Udonsi who is a highy skilled banker with over 10 years of experience in the banking sector.She started her banking career with Mutual Alliance Savings & Loans Ltd where she worke d as Head, Branch Operations/Treasury. She holds HND in Estate Management from Federal Polytechnic Nekede, Owerri. CONCLUSION: At Gufax, we pride ourselves in focusing on the individual customer because we appreciate the fact that each customer is unique. GUFAX MFB is an engine room and hope for economic growth and development of the devastated lower class of our society.As our vision and mission clearly states, we are committed to the evolution of a society where every active poor can smile, please come along. UDUAK UDO MD/CEO www. gufaxmfbank. com â€â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€œ MD/CEO Board of Directors COO/SA to the MD M Head, Banking Operations Head, Admin/ Human Resource Head, Audit /Compliance Head, IT Unit Legal Department Head, Business Development Credit & Marketing Executive / Debt Recovery HR/Admin Cashiers/Customer Service Officers/Funds Transfer Internal Audit Officers Internal Ctrl Officers IT Officers and Trainees Transports / Securit y
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)