管理层收购与创业机会【外文翻译】

本科毕业论文（设计）外文翻译原文：Management buyouts and entrepreneurial opportunities Introduction: A management buyout (MBO) occurs when a company is purchased by its incumbent man agreement. These purchases are often the result of the sale of a division by a parent company. The MBO may be regarded as providing the new management team with unexpected opportunities and a change in circumstances, the key change being that the team members no longer fulfill the role of employee but are now the risk takers. The managers become the providers of some, or all, of the capital. However, in return for the financial stake, they gain the incentive of sharing directly in the profitability of the firm.There is no single definition of an entrepreneur, but a generally accepted starting point is to regard the entrepreneur as someone who perceives an opportunity and initiates actions in pursuit of that opportunity. That someone may be an individual or a group of individuals acting together. An MBO clearly falls within this interpretation, since the opportunity being presented is that of becoming the new owner of a business.The MBO also provides interesting insights into the ownership-control performance debate. Large firms tend to have diffuses hare ownership which, it is claimed, permits managerial discretion. One possible consequence of this is poorer performance. How-ever, alternative models, for example the markets and hierarchies (or the internal organization model), argue that adopting the appropriate internal structure prevents discretion and boosts performance. However, there is only limited evidence to support this view. The MBO is one method of solving this potential problem by concentrating ownership within a small number of clearly defined groups.This article looks at the reasons behind MBO and discusses how the concept of entrepreneurship is a helpful framework within which to analyze the MBO market.The market for MBOAn MBO involves the transfer of ownership in such a way that the original owners now have either very little or no ownership of the newly formed company. Normally, the man-agreement team provides part of the value of the purchase from its own personal funds. In some circumstances the MBO team provides all of the funds, in others significant share-holdings are taken by venture capitalists.The presence of the venture capitalists or other financial institutions is important because the management team has to ensure an adequate return to those who helped fund the MBO; thus they would be expected to provide effective monitoring of the manage ment’s actions.The market for MBO consists of three elements: companies willing to sell, management teams willing to buy and mechanisms for financing deals. In terms of the supply of companies available for MBO, the following are the main sources: Buyouts from independent companies in receivershipAt first glance, MBO from companies in receivership do not appear to have much chance of success given that the same management will be in place after the buyout. However, it is probable that prior to receivership, the MBO team would have had neither the authority nor the freedom to manage in the way it thought best.Buyouts from parent companies in receivershipThese would provide the same opportunities as above in that the managers would now be able to make their own decisions.Buyouts from parent companies by means of divestmentDivestment occurs for a variety of reasons. Some of these are: activities making insufficient profit; operations may be either loss making or only marginally profitable; assets may be sold to raise capital for projects perceived to be more profitable, or the parent may wish to cease producing specific goods or services.Buyouts as a result of the retirement of the ownerBuyouts as part of the privatization processIn a number of areas, for example buses, freight and rail, he UK Government’s pol icy of transferring assets from the public to the private sector has resulted in theincumbent management successfully tendering for the right to manage the business. Entrepreneurs and entrepreneurshipThere is no single definition of the term“entrepreneur”.However, an entrepreneur may be thought of someone who undertakes a variety of activities. For example an entrepreneur may start a business, change a busines s’s direction, acquire a business or be involved in innovative activity.Explicit in this is that the entrepreneur is a risk taker and has the opportunity to initiate and implement decisions which deal with the uncertain business environment within which the firm operates. The business environment consists of many complex interrelated elements including:Customers;Competition;Economic factors;Social and demographic trends;Government policy–both macroeconomic and microeconomic;TechnologyWithin the overall environment, the entrepreneur is responsible for identifying and meeting market needs.Entrepreneurs are often discussed in terms of starting a business. Osborne identifies five strategies necessary for successful entrepreneurial start-ups:1 identifying unmet demand;2 developing new products which meet changing market conditions;3 producing marketing and financial plans;4 weighing up risks and rewards;5 having the necessary resources to launch the businessAlthough the emphasis is on start-ups, the strategies apply equally to MBO. This is because, although trading has previously taken place, the business is effectively starting a new with a new set of owners and a different senior management team.The process itself opens up continuous opportunities for entrepreneurial activity, notwithstanding the ever-present uncertain operating environment. Usually theprocess begins with an innovative idea which requires the subsequent setting up of an appropriate organizational framework. This in turn permits the implementation and development of the innovation into the final good or service to be provided. Finally, the success of the process is measured by the growth of the organization in terms of strategies, structures, culture, products and performance.Entrepreneurship requires more than just the identification of new opportunities. Additional qualities such as imagination, commitment, decisiveness and self-confidence are also important elements of the entrepreneurial process.The researchIf MBO are driven by entrepreneurial motives, we would expect post-MBO performance to be better than pre-MBO performance. This premise is supported by a number of UK studies. Wright and Coyne found that 38 percent of their sample of MBO experienced substantial, steady growth in profits, with 72 percent experiencing at least some improvement in profits. Similar significant improvements to profitability were found in other studies. Bannock showed that 37 percent reported substantial increases in profitability, with a further 29 percent experiencing a modest increase. In contrast, two of the studies also found that quite large minorities of MBO experienced reductions in profitability after the MBO, 24 percent and 16 percent.Thus, the evidence indicates that MBO generally result in measurable improvements in performance. The overall result is consistent with the view that MBO present entrepreneurial opportunities for the management involved and that they exhibit the determination and dedication to grasp the opportunities offered.The hypothesesThe general proposition being made is that MBO provide entrepreneurial opportunities for management which had previously operated within organizations which had had an adverse effect on managerial decision making. This leads to the following hypotheses:H1: Performance will improve in the post-MBO period.H2: The effect on jobs is unclear, but wide-spread job losses would not be expected given that the management would be trying to gain the support of the work-force.H3: Improved financial management would occur.H4: Management efficiency, as measured by net assets turnover, will increase.The data and methodologyA sample of 37 private sector MBO was collected from three sources: first, EXTEL, which is a database that provides a list of companies subject to MBO; second, The Investor’s Chronicle, which publishes occasional surveys on MBO; and third, a CSO printout of merger activity which includes MBO. The sample covered a wide range of industries and covered MBO which occurred between 1989-1992.The performance data compared the situation at the time of the MBO with that of two years after the MBO. Data were collected on profit per employee, profit margins, creditor days, debtor days, net asset turnover, employment and sales.The resultsMBO sourcesBy far the most common source of MBO, 87 percent, occurred as the result of parent divestment. Receivership accounted for 8 per cent and retirement the other 5 per cent. The high incidence of divestment may be explained by the widespread strategy of moving back towards a core business. This strategy is likely to have been encouraged as the economy moved into recession during the period being analyzed. Performance indicatorsIn terms of cash management, the post-MBO period has seen the vast majority of firms, 76 percent, paying their bills more quickly than before. This may be because the suppliers regarded the new firm as exhibiting a higher risk than before and so they insisted on more rapid payment. Although this may improve relations with suppliers, it also means that cash has to be generated more quickly so that the payments can themselves be made. In addition, paying more quickly means that interest is being forgone since the cash is no longer on deposit. However, a more rapid payment may save money if the policy enables the firm to take advantage of discounts available for prompt payment.MBO size and performanceOne of the key arguments behind the growth of MBO is that it frees the newmanagement from the stifling bureaucratic and institutional frameworks previously experienced. Implicit in this is an assumption that smaller, more cohesive units are more likely to provide the necessary impetus to realize the available entrepreneurial opportunities. Thus, the impact of size on the performance variables is an important issue in the assessment of the success of MBO.There is some evidence that the larger MBO firms increased the length of their payment periods. In contrast, the smaller firms tended to make payments earlier. This suggests that suppliers regarded the new firms as a higher risk than before because they were no longer part of a larger, more financially secure organization.As far as employment is concerned, it shows that there is a clear positive relationship between job creation and firm size with almost one-third of the firms increasing jobs occurring in the largest MBO category. In contrast, the smallest firms had the smallest proportion of increases in employment, (only 18 percent), and the largest proportion of firms shedding workers (some 38 percent). The employment changes highlight some of the conflicts faced within the entrepreneurial process. However, the action may be in response to the business environment in general, and trading conditions in particular. Given that the period under discussion included a recession, the business environment point may be more relevant.ConclusionsMBO are an important element of the market for corporate control. They represent an opportunity for managers to become risk takers by accepting a financial stake in the business. The MBO may also be seen as part of an entrepreneurial process which is triggered by the MBO. Thus MBO conform more closely to the management idea of entrepreneurship as opposed to concepts based on innovative behavior, personal drive or intuition. These types of entrepreneur are more likely to be associated with the conception and start-up phases of a business.The results of the study provide evidence to support the view that MBO activity is driven by the entrepreneurial process. The majority of firms experience increased profitability, with the increase being more common for smaller MBO. A less clear picture emerges when cash management changes are assessed. It may be expected thatfirms would increase the number of creditor days and decrease the number of debtor days. It has been shown, however, that debtor days were reduced as were creditor days. One explanation of the latter is that suppliers perceived the new firm to be a greater risk and so demanded earlier payment. Alternatively, the reduction may have been part of a strategy to improve relations with suppliers. Once this had been decided (or imposed) a reduction in debtor days becomes vital. Of the nine firms which did increase time taken to pay bills, six also reduced the time in which customers were expected to settle their debts. Thus only 16 percent of the sample behaved in the way originally anticipated.Source: Charlie Weir, (1996) "Management buyouts and entrepreneurial opportu nities", Management Decision, V ol. 34, pp.23-28.译文：管理层收购与创业机会简介：管理层收购即是一家公司被它现有的管理层购买。