We accept

Causes of Enron Collapse



Enron Corporation, a power company based in Houston, Texas, was involved in one of the most devious financial scandals of the 20th century. The company was also a goods and services organization that served a lot of the country. Multitudes of the financial reviews that the business submitted were found to be grounded in a organized structure that can be boiled right down to simply accounting scams (Wikipedia). Through the entire 1990's, Enron had been challenged many times on its romantic relationship with the accounting organization Arthur Anderson. Doubtful accounting techniques were brought to light, and many suspected that the stench of fraudulence was lingering around the business. During the profitable years Enron's stock price was above $90 per share. However, the scandal that eventually was uncovered toppled the business enterprise in an instant (Bottiglieri, Reville, and Grunewald 1). The stock sealed on November 30, 2001 at an ultimate low of 26 cents a share. Furthermore, December 2, 2001 hosted Enron's inescapable declaration for personal bankruptcy (Thomas 4).

Kenneth Place, the founder of Enron, marketed the importance of high stock prices most of all. He pressed employees to give attention to growing rates of go back by trading possessions and borrowing more money. A secured asset free balance sheet designed that new resources could come in and key the public into thinking that the company was greatly successful (Tonge, Greer, and Lawton 6). Lay down essentially commenced the trend for high income, an obsession that cost his company its life. Eventually, it was Lay's role that set in place the collapse of Enron.

Jeffrey Skilling, Leader, COO, and CEO (from February-August 2001), was the driving a car make behind Enron Fund Corp. , a business that became the middle man in gas series contracts. The firm would buy large amounts of gas from vendors and then sell it for a profit with a big aggregate of fees on both ends for the associated risks. The genius behind this notion was that it not only created a fresh product, but also a totally new standard for the trade (Thomas 1). Skilling led his company with intense goes that often traded belongings that they didn't actually own at that time.

Andy Fastow, Enron's CFO, was a get good at at manipulating liabilities. He used a technique common among energy corporations that used special purpose entities to relocate liability from Enron. He made it so the stock price per share would regularly increase, which allowed it to continuously hold a higher investment score (Wikipedia). Fastow was the reason that Enron acquired away with the scandal for such a long time. He enabled the business to cover up behind fake information and easily take good thing about the system.


Four management truisms explain the Enron collapse. The company ignored solid business tactics and the result was a tragedy that can have easily been prevented.

The first truism is simple: people do what they know will encourage them, and refrain from activities that invite consequence (Crews 5). Skilling only wanted the smartest, most completed individuals doing work for him. He sought after them in the best MBA universities and challenged the most notable competing companies for the kids. As the work was difficult and the hours long, Enron committed to providing the luxurious amenities that maintained their employees working hard. There weren't caps on these rewards, which pressed Enron employees even more (Thomas 1). Skilling setup a host that was cut-throat and only cared about earnings, which fostered an unsafe work place that was tolerant of professional wrongdoing. Non-standard accounting techniques and package inflation became common practice, which induced Enron to collapse when these were found. Enron employees recognized what was expected of them predicated on what actions rewarded them.

Even the professionals of Enron were pressured to maintain with the expansion from the overdue 90's. They knew that this kind of growth had not been sustainable, but continued the same tactics never the less. These executives were rewarded for the regular growth and recognized that if it didn't continue, they would be punished by credit agencies and trading lovers (Sims and Brinkmann 245). This type of thinking ultimately resulted in major corner cutting during the exercise of very dubious and misleading practices. This corner trimming then proceeded to plunge the company into massive arrears without a reliable backup option. Unfortunately, many people are shaped by bonuses, even executives associates. In fact, once they tasted success these were even more affected by the rewards and punishments.

The Performance Review committee fueled a dog-eat-dog environment that increased up the very best employees and axed the low ranking ones. People were harshly discouraged to ask questions about the business enterprise dealings with the business. Very few individuals were willing to improve objections in this environment (Tonge, Greer, and Lawton 12). The obligated group-think resulted in a shattered system of assessments and amounts. If employees increased concerns they were punished by demotion or firing, that was a nonstop cause for the business's cracked moral compass. Left unchecked, illegal discounts were made and accounting fraud became rampant. The complete system was fueled by rewards, punishments, and dread. Everyone in the company was subject to it. Even the honest people in the company were misled, pressured, or scared into doing things that the company wanted these to do.

The second truism expresses that all organizations don't have the same moral standard (Crews 8). Enron's risk manual backed the theory that reported profits were merely the actual accountant published down rather than a solid and reliable technique for continual growth. The business fostered the beliefs that corporate and personal prosperity could be captured by trimming sides and creating false accounting information (Stewart 119). There was a culture about risk management and riches progress techniques that searched to the accounting records as a fairly easy scapegoat to projects that were not actually profitable. This type of thinking quickly resulted in the utilization of non-traditional and against the law accounting procedures and then the collapse when the documents were understood to be deceptive. It created a system where the firm relied on money that was never actually theirs. Employees were educated by the risk tolerance practices that this wasn't essential to share the ethical standards of other organizations. That which was important to them was a positive quantity on the total amount sheet and nothing at all else, a stark compare to others.

Some companies address the issue of underperformance with restructuring positions or relocating employees. Another methodology is to open fire workers without any second chances or support from the organization. Enron believed in punishing the cheapest fifteen to twenty percent with dismissal, an function that was maintained by peer reviews. Therefore, the culture of Enron was one of distrust and paranoia (Sims and Brinkmann 251). Peer reviews caused mistrust and management could get away numerous unethical techniques with little to no concern with being challenged. Management's arrogance then led to unregulated procedures that fostered credit debt creating strategies rather than earnings creating ones like they reported. This also resulted in poor decision making and unsavory business methods that eventually imploded Enron. Honest companies handled worker issues with value and valued an employee's point of view. Enron completed its problem by creating fear in its business and removing the ones that stood against them. The blatant disparity between these kinds of companies depicted a definite image of the variations in moral code.

When officers, both external and internal, opt to ignore essential honest practices anticipated to personal greed, it will most likely business lead to investor loss if laws are enforced. This greed does not benefit the organization, but instead simply damages those interested get-togethers that spend money on the business (Cunningham and Harris 29). The greed of high located professionals never was intended to actually help the company by any means. Greed induced the downfall of both corporation by creating a system where no one was actually shopping for the good of the business. The craving for food fueled professionals to make decisions in their own private interest, at the sacrifice of the company, which resulted in the Enron collapse. The continual chase for additional money set Enron aside from other more honest companies and it became noticeable where their priorities were. The corporation clearly was not like many others.

The third truism areas that folks and the organizations are not the same (Crews 1). Both Jim Alexander and Sherron Watkins, employees of Enron, enlightened Lay that they were going to find yourself in trouble for the ethics break. Lay ignored these announcements and ongoing business as common and even refused that there were problems with accounting, trading, or reserves (McLean, Birnbaum, and Kahn). Both Alexander and Watkins tried out to speak to the top professionals and tell them that things were being found, however the culture at Enron was to look the other way and keep working. By disregarding the indicators, Lay doomed the business to eventually are unsuccessful anticipated to disregarded malpractice and unchallenged against the law activity that soon became understood by the general public. In this example the business clearly acquired a different way of thinking than both people that experienced concerns. They wanted to do the right thing, but the organization's mentality was completely different.

Partnerships easily and successfully elevated money for Enron, but emerged at the price tag on setting up claims that can later not be held. For example, Project Braveheart was an idea created with Blockbuster to provide movies over mobile line. Enron recorded $110. 9 million in revenue shortly after the partnership was made. The task fell apart not long after its creation, however the gains were never seized (Prindle). The assets that Enron made were essentially fictional and hardly ever actually profitable. They might promise partners money that possessed also already been guaranteed to a new partner. This eventually came crashing down as traders called in what was owed to them, leading to the Enron collapse. The companions had become area of the organization, but in no way performed they need the same things that Enron truly sought. The partners sought a profitable romance for both companies, but the corporation just cared about itself. Hence, Enron and its associates were very different.

Skilling obsessed over the business and had no problem doing whatever it got to be the best in the industry and consistently lied about financial numbers (McLean and Elkind "The Guiltiest"). His strong personality, which often was referred to as arrogance, resulted in terrible ethical choices and when he thought that he previously to improve fiscal numbers he'd. These compromises, influenced by his reckless personality, crashed the organization into the earth. This example works backwards set alongside the other third truism illustrations. In cases like this it was actually the average person that negatively influenced the organization. Skilling shaped the business how he wanted it to be, despite what it cost.

The fourth truism concentrates on how ethical scandals are often not stopped due to pointless in-house and exterior oversights (Crews 10). Deregulation laws in Dec 2008 gave energy stock traders too much ability over prices. Subsequently, Enron encouraged power blackouts in California in order to improve the price of reliable energy by up to 20x its normal value (Wikipedia). The deregulation of energy stock traders led to overconfidence in opportunities that Enron made because they thought they were in charge. Arrogance caused these to risk more than they could manage, and when the market didn't end up that they thought, it brought on the collapse. The issue with the deregulation was that Enron was trusted to respond ethically. This oversight by officials offered Enron the perfect opportunity to take advantage of the situation and its own customers.

Internal and external auditing must be done be separate corporations in order to be moral. Arthur Anderson acted as both assignments for Enron and in turn allowed those to partake in many practices that would normally not be appropriate. Anderson ignored the unethical business procedures and instead backed a corporation payed for their massive consulting fees (Cunningham and Harris 43). Anderson wanted the streamline of money that arrived within Enron's collaboration and it surely got to the point that these were fine breaking guidelines if it designed they could continue steadily to generate profits. The accounting shortcuts they used to satisfy Enron were unlawful and once found out, induced the Enron collapse. Anderson was obviously in a conflict of interest and should not have been permitted to do the financial assertions of Enron. If there were better restrictions set up the ethics scandal wouldn't normally have been able to occur.

Enron strategically stacked its home with political associates, well-connected up-and-comers, and well-known open public figures. They positioned folks of similar state of mind in the board of directors and audit committee in order to acquire someone in their nook when they needed them (Chandra 107). By hand picking the folks of importance in their environment, Enron could break the rules when they had a need to. Having their people on the plank of directors and audit committee allowed them to essentially do what they needed to provide results, which straight led to many illegal activities, and consequently the breakdown of Enron. Regulations should have halted Enron from inserting their own people in external positions of electric power. The turmoil of interest begged for mistreatment of the guidelines.


Enron, as a company, completely fell apart following the collapse. It was obligated to renounce revenue with multiple partnerships such as Chewco Purchases and JEDI. Then your company was pressured to recall earnings completely back to 1997, which only summed to $586 million and was only 20% of what have been reported. The stock prices dropped to mere pennies and everything consumer and financial buoyancy was lost. Soon after, Enron declared bankruptcy (Prindle).

Enron's shareholders didn't benefit from the greed of the professionals. Those that experienced their pension cash financed in the business lost almost everything. Therefore, the SEC and Congress functioned swiftly to commence immediate restructuring to reduce deficits like those experienced, in the foreseeable future (Cunningham and Harris 29). A $40 billion lawsuit used the collapse, requiring compensation for the shareholders' worthless stock. The collapse damaged more than $2 billion in pension programs (The New York Times).

The employees of Enron also greatly experienced and generally lost exactly what they had committed to the business (McLean and Elkind "The Guiltiest"). One worker, Charles Prestwood, lost $1. 3 million in the Enron collapse. Money entrusted in the company in retirement savings or investment funds disbanded overnight. Following the collapse, the SEC mentioned that they might try and recover as a lot of the lost money as they could in their judicial system (THE BRAND NEW York Times).

Enron executives also felt the results of the collapse. Paula Rieker was recharged with insider trading when she sold slightly below $1 million worth of shares only a week prior to the collapse. Skilling was costed with 24 years in prison due to largely charges of securities fraud. Lay was charged with 45 years in prison, but died prior to the sentence was slated. Fastow was sentenced to a decade in prison without parole (Wikipedia).

Creditors involved with Enron struggled to receive all of the money that was owed to them. Enron sold CrossCountry Energy for $2. 45 billion to be able to address a few of the credit exceptional. When its last business was sold, it still left Enron without any assets. In 2007, the company's name was modified and set an objective to completely pay off all creditors and end all its activities (Wikipedia).


The first lessons that I discovered was that there needed to be significant reforms in the accounting techniques that corporations utilize. It is not enough to expect they are doing the right thing which is important to be skeptical (Crews 1). Conflicts of interest are an extremely damaging crutch in accounting and it made the Enron collapse essentially imminent. By restricting which accounting organizations can offer services to an organization and also managing how those businesses are receiving paid is a good step in removing conflicts of interest.

The second lesson is that the ethical selections of corporations need to be more closely monitored. If an organization is remaining unchecked, it has the capacity to abuse the machine and do whatever it would like. I believe due to the Enron collapse people will pay more attention to how firms operate even if they cannot directly control the ethics of the business (Silverstein). At least in cases like this there will be significant pressure to do what's right.

The final lessons that I discovered was organizations can be as honest or unethical as they need. They'll treat their workers, shareholders, associates, and creditors however they want. Sometimes organizations will work in their best short-term interest, but additionally, there is the choice to act properly and look at the long term goals. Risk tolerance can be a positive thing, but it is up to the organization to decide how much risk they will take with what cost are they going to take chances (Crews 8). We are able to do our better to control and criticize, however in the end it's their call. We can only hope they certainly the right things.

More than 7 000 students trust us to do their work
90% of customers place more than 5 orders with us
Special price $5 /page
Check the price
for your assignment