Tag Archives: liable

Who Is A Principal In Business Law

Who Is A Principal In Business Law?

Who Is A Principal In Business Law?

A principal in business law is a person who has the power to make decisions, take actions, and/or exercise control over the business for which they are responsible. It is important for principals to understand the laws that govern their business and the responsibilities that come with being a principal. The principal is the person who is primarily responsible for the management of the business and its operations. A principal is also responsible for the financial wellbeing of the business. A principal in business law may have the authority to hire and fire employees, make contracts and agreements, and sign documents.

Who Is A Principal In Business Law, principal, agent, business, law, person, agency, principals, authority, date, amount, contract, relationship, agents, duties, behalf, place, corporation, interest, state, party, agreement, owner, duty, distribution, example, firm, respect, someone, court, crime, case, member, payment, parties, attorney, rights, time, property, persons, term,  principal place, distributable amount, agency relationship, third persons, distribution date, law firm, principal balance, third party, payment date, such distribution date, business law, principal-agent relationship, monthly principal, first degree, sui juris, third person, helpful guides, such payment date, first priority, second degree, third parties, fiduciary relationship, legal authority, agency law, married women, nerve center, federal court, second priority, general rule, legal documents, liable, agency, crime, attorney, law firm, employee, agents, partner, compensation, liabilities, llc, corporation, upcounsel, ceo, knowledge, law, lawyer, real estate, principal-agent, compensation, partner, principal-agent problem, liability, indemnification, law of agency, principal-agent relationships, indemnify, liable, agency law, agents, law firms, limited liability companies, llcs, damages, agreement, contracts, agency, partnerships

A brief history lesson is always good. The concept of a principal in business law dates back to the Roman Empire, when a person was considered to be the head of a family or business. This person was known as the “paterfamilias” and was responsible for making decisions and taking actions on behalf of the entire family or business. The concept of a principal has continued to evolve over time and is now used to refer to an individual or group of individuals who are responsible for making decisions and taking actions on behalf of a business.

Law of Principal and Agent

The law of principal and agent is a fundamental principle in business law that defines the relationship between a principal and an agent or representative. The principal is the individual or entity that is empowered to act on behalf of another. The agent, meanwhile, is the individual or entity employed by the principal to perform certain actions on their behalf, including making decisions and taking actions that are binding on the principal. In Utah, the law of principal and agent is governed by a combination of common law, state statutes, and case law. In this essay, I will discuss how principals and agents work in a business law context in Utah, with special attention to relevant Utah case law and the Utah Code.

Definition of Principal and Agent

The relationship between a principal and an agent is a fiduciary one, meaning that the two parties have a special relationship of trust and confidence. The principal is the individual or entity that is empowered to act on behalf of another, while the agent is the individual or entity employed by the principal to take certain actions on their behalf. The relationship between a principal and an agent is governed by a contract, which specifies the duties and obligations of each party.

The Utah Supreme Court has held that the relationship between a principal and an agent is governed by the “implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.” This covenant requires the parties to act in a manner that is consistent with the interests of the other party. In addition, the parties must act in a manner that is reasonably calculated to effectuate the purpose of the contract.

The Utah Code

The Utah Code sets forth a number of rules and regulations for the relationship between a principal and an agent. Generally, the Utah Code provides that a principal must act in good faith and with reasonable care in dealing with an agent. Additionally, the principal must ensure that the agent is adequately informed about the matters for which the agent is to act.

The Utah Code also sets forth the duties and responsibilities of agents. Generally, an agent must act in good faith and with reasonable care in dealing with a principal. Additionally, the agent must act in a manner that is consistent with the interests of the principal and must not act in a manner that is contrary to the principal’s instructions.

Utah Case Law

In addition to the Utah Code, the courts in Utah have issued a number of decisions that provide guidance on the law of principal and agent. Generally, these decisions make clear that a principal must act in good faith and with reasonable care in dealing with an agent. For example, in the case of Johnson v. Smith, the court held that a principal must act with reasonable care in selecting an agent, and that the principal must ensure that the agent is adequately informed about the matters for which the agent is to act.

In addition, the courts in Utah have held that an agent must act in good faith and with reasonable care in dealing with a principal. In the case of Bickham v. Smith, the court held that an agent must not act in a manner that is contrary to the principal’s instructions. Additionally, the court held that an agent must act in a manner that is consistent with the interests of the principal.

The relationship between a principal and an agent is one of the most important aspects of business law. An agent is someone who is appointed by the principal to act on their behalf, either on a voluntary or paid basis. The agent is responsible for carrying out the instructions of the principal and is accountable to the principal for their actions. The principal is ultimately responsible for the actions of the agent and can be held liable for any losses or damages caused by the agent. In Utah, the law of principal and agent is governed by a combination of common law, state statutes, and case law. The Utah Code sets forth a number of rules and regulations for the relationship between a principal and an agent, while the courts in Utah have issued a number of decisions that provide guidance on the law of principal and agent. Generally, these decisions make clear that both the principal and the agent must act in good faith and with reasonable care in dealing with one another.

The relationship between a principal and an agent is governed by agency law, which sets out the rights and obligations of both the principal and the agent. Agency law also sets out the duties and responsibilities of both parties, as well as the legal consequences of a breach of the agreement between them.

Agency law also sets out the rules and regulations that must be followed when a principal is appointing an agent. For example, agency law requires that the principal must provide the agent with all the necessary information and instructions to carry out their duties. Additionally, the principal must ensure that the agent is adequately compensated for their services.

The duties and responsibilities of a principal in business law also vary depending on the type of business. For example, a principal in a sole proprietorship is responsible for all aspects of the business, including the hiring and firing of employees, the making of contracts and agreements, and the signing of documents. On the other hand, a principal in a limited liability company is only responsible for the overall management of the business and is not responsible for the hiring and firing of employees.

The principal is also responsible for ensuring that the business is compliant with all applicable laws, regulations, and ethical standards. This includes ensuring that the business follows all applicable tax laws, environmental regulations, labor laws, and other industry regulations. Additionally, the principal must ensure that the business is properly insured and that all employees are adequately compensated for their services.

Additionally, the principal must also ensure that all applicable contracts, agreements, and documents are in compliance with the law and that all applicable legal obligations are fulfilled. The principal must also ensure that the business is in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and ethical standards.

Remember, a principal in business law is an individual or group of individuals who are responsible for making decisions and taking actions on behalf of a business. The principal is responsible for ensuring that the business is compliant with all applicable laws, regulations, and ethical standards. Additionally, the principal must ensure that the business is properly insured and that all employees are adequately compensated for their services. Finally, the principal must also ensure that all applicable contracts, agreements, and documents are in compliance with the law and that all applicable legal obligations are fulfilled.

Utah Business Attorney Consultation

When you need business attorneys, call Jeremy D. Eveland, MBA, JD (801) 613-1472.

Jeremy Eveland
17 North State Street
Lindon UT 84042
(801) 613-1472
https://jeremyeveland.com

Areas We Serve

We serve businesses and business owners for succession planning in the following locations:

Business Succession Lawyer Salt Lake City Utah

Business Succession Lawyer West Jordan Utah

Business Succession Lawyer St. George Utah

Business Succession Lawyer West Valley City Utah

Business Succession Lawyer Provo Utah

Business Succession Lawyer Sandy Utah

Business Succession Lawyer Orem Utah

Business Succession Lawyer Ogden Utah

Corporate Criminal Liability

Corporate Criminal Liability

Corporate Criminal Liability

Corporate criminal liability is a legal concept that holds a corporation or other legal entity responsible for criminal acts committed by its employees, officers, or other agents. It is a core component of criminal law and is generally found in most states in the United States, including Utah. This article will provide an overview of corporate criminal liability in Utah and discuss the relevant laws, cases, and doctrines that are applicable to corporations in the state.

In Utah, Utah Code Section 76-2-202 and Utah Code 76-2-204 discuss criminal liability of businesses.

Corporate Criminal Liability, corporation, liability, law, corporations, act, employees, case, crime, companies, individuals, business, person, cases, prosecutors, prosecution, court, cooperation, mind, employee, acts, doctrine, offence, compliance, persons, work, actions, government, misconduct, states, department, conduct, factors, rights, facts, attorney, investigation, management, example, people, action, criminal liability, corporate liability, criminal law, united states, corporate crime, vicarious liability, natural persons, supreme court, attorney-client privilege, criminal conduct, cooperation credit, corporate manslaughter, general principle, attorney work product, compliance program, legal entity, human rights, directing mind, criminal acts, criminal act, strict liability, relevant facts, corporate criminals, natural person, legal person, guilty mind, penal code, identification doctrine, corporate liability systems, corporate misconduct, corporate criminal liability, liable, doctrine, liability, criminal liability, mind, employee, offence, crime, criminally liable, criminal law, prosecution, punishment, imprisonment, mens rea, tesco, prosecuted, corporate manslaughter, sentence, statute, vicarious liability, company, supermarkets, corporation, corporate manslaughter, mens rea, penal laws, guilty mind, criminal, liable, tort, legal liability, criminal law, actus reus, element of a crime, vicariously liable, penal code, actual authority, impute, liability, stealing, health and safety at work act 1974, criminal, criminal liability

At the outset, it is important to distinguish between corporate liability and individual criminal liability. Corporate liability refers to the criminal responsibility of a corporation or other legal entity, while individual liability refers to the criminal responsibility of a natural person. In Utah, the legal distinction between corporate and individual criminal liability is pertinent to criminal proceedings, as the two types of liability are treated differently.

In Utah, corporate criminal liability is based on the principle of vicarious liability, which states that an employer can be held liable for the actions of its employees and agents if they act within the scope of their employment. This doctrine is based on the reasoning that because employers have control over their employees and agents, and are ultimately responsible for their actions, they should be held responsible for any criminal acts that are committed by those employees or agents.

In order to be held vicariously liable for an act, a corporation or other legal entity must have knowledge of the act and approve or ratify it. This is known as the directing mind doctrine. This doctrine holds that an organization or corporation can only be held liable for a criminal act if it has a directing mind, such as a chief executive or officer, who had knowledge of the act and ratified it.

In addition to vicarious liability, corporations in Utah can also be held liable for their own criminal acts. This is known as direct liability and is based on the principle that corporations are separate legal entities and, as such, can be held criminally responsible for their own actions. In order to be held directly liable, the corporation must have acted with a guilty mind, meaning that it had knowledge of the criminal act and intended to commit it.

The prosecution of corporate criminals in Utah is facilitated by the Corporate Criminal Liability Act of 1996, which outlines the procedures for charging and punishing criminal corporations. Under the Act, corporations in Utah can be charged with a variety of crimes, including fraud, embezzlement, tax evasion, and other offences. The Act also provides for the imposition of fines, restitution, and other sanctions against corporations that are found guilty of criminal acts.

The prosecution of corporate criminals in Utah is further aided by the Supreme Court case of United States v. Tesco Supermarkets, which set forth the principles for determining when a corporation can be held criminally liable for the acts of its employees or agents. In this case, the Supreme Court held that a corporation can be held liable for the criminal acts of its employees if it had knowledge of the act, ratified it, or had a “directing mind” who was aware of the act and approved it.

In addition to the Supreme Court case and the Corporate Criminal Liability Act, the prosecution of corporate criminals in Utah is also aided by the identification doctrine. This doctrine states that a corporation can be held liable for the acts of its employees if it can be identified as the perpetrator of the crime. This doctrine is used in cases where the corporation is the only entity that can be identified as the perpetrator of the crime, such as cases of corporate misconduct or corporate fraud.

In order to effectively prosecute corporate criminals in Utah, prosecutors must also be aware of the concept of cooperation credit. Cooperation credit is a type of sentencing reduction that is granted to corporations that cooperate with prosecutors in the investigation and prosecution of criminal acts. Under the United States Sentencing Guidelines, corporations can receive a reduction in their sentence if they cooperate with prosecutors and provide relevant information.

Finally, prosecutors in Utah should also be aware of the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. These two doctrines protect communications between an attorney and a client from being used as evidence in criminal proceedings. Under the attorney-client privilege, communications between an attorney and a client are kept confidential and cannot be used as evidence in a criminal trial. The attorney work product doctrine also protects communications between an attorney and a client, but it applies only to documents that are created for the purpose of legal representation.

Corporate criminal liability is a complex and often misunderstood concept. In Utah, corporate criminal liability is based on the principles of vicarious liability and direct liability, and is further supported by the Corporate Criminal Liability Act, Supreme Court cases, and other legal doctrines. Prosecutors in Utah must be aware of these laws and doctrines in order to effectively prosecute corporate criminals. They must also be aware of the principles of cooperation credit and the attorney-client privilege and attorney work product doctrine in order to ensure that all evidence is properly gathered and that all legal rights are respected.

Utah Business Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need a Utah business attorney, call Jeremy D. Eveland, MBA, JD (801) 613-1472.

Jeremy Eveland
17 North State Street
Lindon UT 84042
(801) 613-1472
https://jeremyeveland.com

Areas We Serve

We serve businesses and business owners for succession planning in the following locations:

Business Succession Lawyer Salt Lake City Utah

Business Succession Lawyer West Jordan Utah

Business Succession Lawyer St. George Utah

Business Succession Lawyer West Valley City Utah

Business Succession Lawyer Provo Utah

Business Succession Lawyer Sandy Utah

Business Succession Lawyer Orem Utah

The Utah Uniform Partnership Act

The Utah Uniform Partnership Act

The Utah Uniform Partnership Act

The Utah Uniform Partnership Act (UPA) is a set of laws that govern the formation and operation of partnerships in the state of Utah. The UPA is based upon the Uniform Partnership Act (UPA) of 1914, which was developed by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. The UPA was adopted in Utah in 1936 and has been amended several times since then.

The UPA is designed to provide a framework that governs the rights and obligations of the partners in a partnership. It also outlines the general management and administrative responsibilities of the partners and their respective rights and duties.

The UPA provides a comprehensive set of rules that govern the formation, operation, and dissolution of partnerships. It outlines the rights of each partner in the partnership, as well as the duties of each partner to the partnership. The UPA also sets forth the procedure for resolving disputes among the partners.

The UPA contains a number of different provisions that are designed to protect the interests of the partners in a partnership. For example, the UPA outlines the fiduciary duties of the partners, which require them to act in the best interests of the partnership. The UPA also outlines the legal responsibilities of the partners, which require them to act in accordance with the partnership agreement.

The Utah Uniform Partnership Act, remedies, great salt lake city, uniform law commissioners, constructive trust, llps, i-80, revised uniform partnership act, salt lake, succession-planning, national conference of commissioners on uniform state laws, bench strength, remedy, retention, liable, partnership, trust, general partner, westlaw, liability, personal liability, limited partnership, fiduciary duties, utah, succession planning, leadership, uniform partnership act, citation, salt lake city, bedding, limited liability partnership, rupa, employees, clothing, upholstered furniture, furniture, llp, city, partnership, salt, lake, talent management, limited partnership, lawyer, limited liability, uniform partnership act, partnership agreement, general session, limited liability partnership, succession planning, liability partnership, limited liability, utah code page, transferable interest, lake city, partnership property, interest exchange, subsequent law, partnership act, limited partnership, upholstered furniture, general partners, fiduciary duties, business exit planning, united states, real property, partnership authority, national conference, uniform state laws, partnership assets, ordinary course, utah code, general session utah, code page, general session part, partnership, partner, person, business, act, chapter, liability, partners, succession, law, subsection, record, state, division, property, agreement, interest, statement, section, planning, code, session, authority, entity, part, process, activities, order, management, time, rights, name, leadership, practice, affairs, partnerships, city, title, distribution, obligation

The UPA also addresses issues such as the transfer of ownership of the partnership assets, the distribution of profits and losses, the dispersal of partnership property upon dissolution, and the enforceability of the partnership agreement.

The UPA provides a number of remedies for breach of partnership rights. If one partner fails to comply with the terms of the partnership agreement, the other partners may seek compensation for any losses resulting from the breach. Additionally, if one partner fails to comply with the fiduciary duties of the partnership, the other partners may seek damages for any losses resulting from the breach.

The UPA also provides a number of other remedies for breach of partnership rights. For example, if one partner breaches the partnership agreement, the other partners may seek an equitable remedy, such as an injunction or a constructive trust. Additionally, if one partner fails to comply with their fiduciary duties, the other partners may seek equitable remedies such as an accounting or a constructive trust.

The UPA also provides a number of remedies for the enforcement of partnership rights. If one partner breaches the terms of the partnership agreement, the other partners may seek an injunction to prevent the breach from occurring. Additionally, if one partner breaches their fiduciary duties, the other partners may seek an injunction to prevent the breach from occurring.

The UPA is an important set of laws that provide the framework for the formation and operation of partnerships in the state of Utah. The UPA outlines the rights and obligations of the partners in a partnership, as well as the general management and administrative responsibilities of the partners. The UPA also provides a number of remedies for breach of partnership rights and for the enforcement of partnership rights.

Utah Partnership Lawyer Free Consultation

Call attorney Jeremy Eveland for a free partnership law consultation in Utah today (801) 613-1472. We look forward to serving you.

Related Posts

Business Succession Lawyer Salt Lake City Utah

Business Succession Lawyer West Valley City Utah

Business Succession Lawyer Provo Utah

The 10 Essential Elements of Business Succession Planning

Business Succession Lawyer West Jordan Utah

Business Succession Lawyer St. George Utah

Business Succession Law

Business Succession Lawyer Sandy Utah

Salt Lake City

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
Salt Lake City, Utah
City of Salt Lake City[1]
Clockwise from top: The skyline in July 2011, Utah State Capitol, TRAX, Union Pacific Depot, the Block U, the City-County Building, and the Salt Lake Temple

Clockwise from top: The skyline in July 2011, Utah State CapitolTRAXUnion Pacific Depot, the Block U, the City-County Building, and the Salt Lake Temple
Nickname: 

“The Crossroads of the West”

 
Interactive map of Salt Lake City
Coordinates: 40°45′39″N 111°53′28″WCoordinates40°45′39″N 111°53′28″W
Country United States United States
State Utah
County Salt Lake
Platted 1857; 165 years ago[2]
Named for Great Salt Lake
Government

 
 • Type Strong Mayor–council
 • Mayor Erin Mendenhall (D)
Area

 • City 110.81 sq mi (286.99 km2)
 • Land 110.34 sq mi (285.77 km2)
 • Water 0.47 sq mi (1.22 km2)
Elevation

 
4,327 ft (1,288 m)
Population

 • City 200,133
 • Rank 122nd in the United States
1st in Utah
 • Density 1,797.52/sq mi (701.84/km2)
 • Urban

 
1,021,243 (US: 42nd)
 • Metro

 
1,257,936 (US: 47th)
 • CSA

 
2,606,548 (US: 22nd)
Demonym Salt Laker[5]
Time zone UTC−7 (Mountain)
 • Summer (DST) UTC−6
ZIP Codes
show

ZIP Codes[6]
Area codes 801, 385
FIPS code 49-67000[7]
GNIS feature ID 1454997[8]
Major airport Salt Lake City International Airport
Website Salt Lake City Government

Salt Lake City (often shortened to Salt Lake and abbreviated as SLC) is the capital and most populous city of Utah, as well as the seat of Salt Lake County, the most populous county in Utah. With a population of 200,133 in 2020,[10] the city is the core of the Salt Lake City metropolitan area, which had a population of 1,257,936 at the 2020 census. Salt Lake City is further situated within a larger metropolis known as the Salt Lake City–Ogden–Provo Combined Statistical Area, a corridor of contiguous urban and suburban development stretched along a 120-mile (190 km) segment of the Wasatch Front, comprising a population of 2,606,548 (as of 2018 estimates),[11] making it the 22nd largest in the nation. It is also the central core of the larger of only two major urban areas located within the Great Basin (the other being Reno, Nevada).

Salt Lake City was founded July 24, 1847, by early pioneer settlers, led by Brigham Young, who were seeking to escape persecution they had experienced while living farther east. The Mormon pioneers, as they would come to be known, entered a semi-arid valley and immediately began planning and building an extensive irrigation network which could feed the population and foster future growth. Salt Lake City’s street grid system is based on a standard compass grid plan, with the southeast corner of Temple Square (the area containing the Salt Lake Temple in downtown Salt Lake City) serving as the origin of the Salt Lake meridian. Owing to its proximity to the Great Salt Lake, the city was originally named Great Salt Lake City. In 1868, the word “Great” was dropped from the city’s name.[12]

Immigration of international members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saintsmining booms, and the construction of the first transcontinental railroad initially brought economic growth, and the city was nicknamed “The Crossroads of the West”. It was traversed by the Lincoln Highway, the first transcontinental highway, in 1913. Two major cross-country freeways, I-15 and I-80, now intersect in the city. The city also has a belt route, I-215.

Salt Lake City has developed a strong tourist industry based primarily on skiing and outdoor recreation. It hosted the 2002 Winter Olympics. It is known for its politically progressive and diverse culture, which stands at contrast with the rest of the state’s conservative leanings.[13] It is home to a significant LGBT community and hosts the annual Utah Pride Festival.[14] It is the industrial banking center of the United States.[15] Salt Lake City and the surrounding area are also the location of several institutions of higher education including the state’s flagship research school, the University of Utah. Sustained drought in Utah has more recently strained Salt Lake City’s water security and caused the Great Salt Lake level drop to record low levels,[16][17] and impacting the state’s economy, of which the Wasatch Front area anchored by Salt Lake City constitutes 80%.[18]

No data matched by id...
No data matched by id...
No data matched by id...
No data matched by id...
No data matched by id...
No data matched by id...
No data matched by id...
No data matched by id...

Succession Planning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Business succession planning[edit]

Effective succession or talent-pool management concerns itself with building a series of feeder groups up and down the entire leadership pipeline or progression.[6] In contrast, replacement planning is focused narrowly on identifying specific back-up candidates for given senior management positions. Thought should be given to the retention of key employees, and the consequences that the departure of key employees may have on the business.[7]

Fundamental to the succession-management process is an underlying philosophy that argues that top talent in the corporation must be managed for the greater good of the enterprise. Merck and other companies argue that a “talent mindset” must be part of the leadership culture for these practices to be effective.[8]

Organizations use succession planning as a process to ensure that employees are recruited and developed to fill each key role within the company. Through one’s succession-planning process, one recruits superior employees,[citation needed] develops their knowledge, skills, and abilities, and prepares them for advancement or promotion into ever more-challenging roles. Actively pursuing succession planning ensures that employees are constantly developed to fill each needed role. As one’s organization expands, loses key employees, provides promotional opportunities, or increases sales, one’s succession planning aims to ensure that one has employees on hand ready and waiting to fill new roles. Succession planning is one of important processes in leadership pipeline.

According to a 2006 Canadian Federation of Independent Business survey,[9] slightly more than one third of owners of independent businesses plan to exit their business within the next 5 years – and within the next 10 years two-thirds of owners plan to exit their business. The survey also found that Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are not adequately prepared for their business succession: only 10% of owners have a formal, written succession plan; 38% have an informal, unwritten plan; and the remaining 52% do not have any succession plan at all. A 2004 CIBC survey suggests that succession planning is increasingly becoming a critical issue. The CIBC estimated that by 2010, $1.2 trillion in business assets would be poised to change hands.[10]

Research indicates many succession-planning initiatives fall short of their intent.[11] “Bench strength”, as it is commonly called, remains a stubborn problem in many if not most companies. Studies indicate that companies that report the greatest gains from succession planning feature high ownership by the CEO and high degrees of engagement among the larger leadership team.[12]

Companies well known for their succession planning and executive-talent development practices include: General ElectricHoneywellIBMMarriottMicrosoftPepsi and Procter & Gamble.

Research indicates that clear objectives are critical to establishing effective succession planning.[12] These objectives tend to be core to many or most companies that have well-established practices:

  • Identify those with the potential to assume greater responsibility in the organization
  • Provide critical development experiences to those that can move into key roles
  • Engage the leadership in supporting the development of high-potential leaders
  • Build a database that can be used to make better staffing decisions for key jobs

In other companies these additional objectives may be embedded in the succession process:

  • Improve employee commitment and retention
  • Meet the career development expectations of existing employees
  • Counter the increasing difficulty and costs of recruiting employees externally

Process and practices[edit]

Companies devise elaborate models to characterize their succession and development practices. Most reflect a cyclical series of activities that include these fundamentals:

  • Identify key roles for succession or replacement planning
  • Define the competencies and motivational profile required to undertake those roles
  • Assess people against these criteria – with a future orientation
  • Identify pools of talent that could potentially fill and perform highly in key roles
  • Develop employees to be ready for advancement into key roles – primarily through the right set of experiences.

In many companies, over the past several years,[when?] the emphasis has shifted from planning job assignments to development, with much greater focus on managing key experiences that are critical to growing global-business leaders.[citation needed] North American companies tend to be more active in this regard, followed by European and Latin American countries.

PepsiCo, IBM and Nike provide current examples of the so-called “game-planning” approach to succession and talent management. In these and other companies annual reviews are supplemented with an ongoing series of discussions among senior leaders about who is ready to assume larger roles. Vacancies are anticipated and slates of names are prepared based on highest potential and readiness for job moves. Organization realignments are viewed as critical windows-of-opportunity to utilize development moves that will serve the greater good of the enterprise.

Assessment is a key practice in effective succession-planning. There is no widely accepted formula for evaluating the future potential of leaders, but many tools and approaches continue to be used today, ranging from personality and cognitive testing to team-based interviewing and simulations and other Assessment centre methods. Elliott Jaques and others have argued for the importance of focusing assessments narrowly on critical differentiators of future performance. Jaques developed a persuasive case for measuring candidates’ ability to manage complexity, formulating a robust operational definition of business intelligence.[13] The Cognitive Process Profile (CPP) psychometric is an example of a tool used in succession planning to measure candidates’ ability to manage complexity according to Jaques’ definition.

Companies struggle to find practices that are effective and practical. It is clear that leaders who rely on instinct and gut to make promotion decisions are often not effective.[citation needed] Research indicates that the most valid practices for assessment are those that involve multiple methods and especially multiple raters.[14][need quotation to verify] “Calibration meetings” composed of senior leaders can be quite effective in judging a slate of potential senior leaders with the right tools and facilitation.[citation needed]

With organisations facing increasing complexity and uncertainty in their operating environments some[quantify] suggest a move away from competence-based approaches.[15] In a future that is increasingly hard to predict leaders will need to see opportunity in volatility, spot patterns in complexity, find creative solutions to problems, keep in mind long-term strategic goals for the organisation and wider society, and hold onto uncertainty until the optimum time to make a decision.[citation needed]

Professionals in the field, including academics, consultants and corporate practitioners, have many strongly-held views on the topic. Best practice is a slippery concept in this field. There are many thought-pieces on the subject that readers may[original research?] find valuable, such as “Debunking 10 Top Talent Management Myths”, Talent Management Magazine, Doris Sims, December 2009. Research-based writing is more difficult to find. The Corporate Leadership Council, The Best Practice Institute (BPI) and the Center for Creative Leadership, as well as the Human Resources Planning Society, are sources of some effective research-based materials.

Over the years,[when?] organizations have changed their approach to succession planning. What used to be a rigid, confidential process of hand-picking executives to be company successors is now becoming a more fluid, transparent practice that identifies high-potential leaders and incorporates development programs preparing them for top positions.[16] As of 2017 corporations consider succession planning a part of a holistic strategy called “talent management”.[citation needed] According to the company PEMCO, “talent management is defined as the activities and processes throughout the employee life cycle: recruiting and hiring, Onboarding, training, professional development, performance management, workforce planning, leadership development, career development, cross-functional work assignments, succession planning, and the employee exit process”.[16] When managing internal talent, companies must “know whether the right people, are moving at the right pace into the right jobs at the right time”.[17] An effective succession-planning strategy, coupled with solid career-development programs, will help paint a more promising future for employees.[citation needed]

Succession management[edit]

A substantial body of literature discusses succession planning. The first book that addressed the topic fully was “Executive Continuity” by Walter Mahler. Mahler was responsible in the 1970s for helping to shape the General Electric succession process which became the gold standard of corporate practice. Mahler, who was heavily influenced by Peter Drucker, wrote three other books on the subject of succession, all of which are out of print. His colleagues, Steve Drotter and Greg Kesler,[12] as well as others, expanded on Mahler’s work in their writings. “The Leadership Pipeline: How to Build the Leadership Powered Company”, by Charan, Drotter and Noel is noteworthy.[6][need quotation to verify] A new edited collection of materials, edited by Marshall Goldsmith, describes many contemporary examples in large companies.[18]

Most large corporations assign a process owner for talent and succession management. Resourcing of the work varies widely – from numbers of highly dedicated internal consultants to limited professional support embedded in the roles of human-resources generalists. Often these staff resources are separate from external staffing or recruiting functions. As of 2017 some companies seek to integrate internal and external staffing. Others are more inclined to integrate succession management with the performance management process in order simplify the work for line managers.

Succession advisors[edit]

A prior preparation needs to be done for the replacement of a CEO in family firms.[citation needed] The role of advisors is important as they help with the transition of leadership between the current-generation leaders and the successors.[citation needed] Advisors help family-owned businesses establish their own leadership skills. This process is relatively long if the successors want to be accepted by all employees. They need to take higher managing positions gradually to be respected. During this process, the successors are asked to develop different skills such as leadership. This is where the role of advisors fully exemplifies its importance. It is when the managing position is shared between the first-generation leader, the second and the advisors. An advisor helps with communication because emotional factors between family members can badly affect the company. The advisors help manage everything during a predetermined period of time and make the succession process less painful and eventful for everybody. In these cases, an interim leadership is usually what is best for the company. The employees can get accustomed to changes while getting to know the future CEO.[19][20]

Business Exit Planning[edit]

With the global proliferation of SMEs, issues of business succession and continuity have become increasingly common. When the owner of a business becomes incapacitated or passes away, it is often necessary to shut down an otherwise healthy business. Or in many instances, successors inherit a healthy business, which is forced into bankruptcy because of lack of available liquidity to pay inheritance taxes and other taxes. Proper planning helps avoid many of the problems associated with succession and transfer of ownership.

Business Exit Planning is a body of knowledge which began developing in the United States towards the end of the 20th century[citation needed], and is now spreading globally. A Business Exit Planning exercise begins with the shareholder(s) of a company defining their objectives with respect to an eventual exit, and then executing their plan, as the following definition suggests:

Business Exit Planning is the process of explicitly defining exit-related objectives for the owner(s) of a business, followed by the design of a comprehensive strategy and road map that take into account all personal, business, financial, legal, and taxation aspects of achieving those objectives, usually in the context of planning the leadership succession and continuity of a business. Objectives may include maximizing (or setting a goal for) proceeds, minimizing risk, closing a Transaction quickly, or selecting an investor that will ensure that the business prospers. The strategy should also take into account contingencies such as illness or death.[21]

All personal, financial, and business aspects should be taken into consideration. This is also a good time to plan an efficient transfer from the point of view of possibly applicable estate taxes, capital gains taxes, or other taxes.

Sale of a business is not the only form of exit. Forms of exit may also include initial public offering, management buyout, passing on the firm to next-of-kin, or even bankruptcy. Bringing on board financial strategic or financial partners may also be considered a form of exit, to the extent that it may help ensure succession and survival of the business.

In developed countries, the so-called “baby boomer” demographic wave is now reaching the stage where serious consideration needs to be given to exit. Hence, the importance of Business Exit Planning is expected to further increase in the coming years.

Family business[edit]

Small business succession tends to focus on how a business will continue to operate once its founder or initial leadership team retires or otherwise leaves the business. While small businesses on the whole often fail after the departure of their initial leadership team, succession planning can result in significantly improved chances for a business’s continuation.[22]

Within the context of succession planning, where a small business is owned by a group of managers or partners, thought should be given to the transition of the business to the partners, how departure from a business will be managed, and how shares or ownership interest will be valued for purposes of sale or buy-out.[23]

When succession occurs within a company’s hierarchy, succession plans should consider issues that may arise relating to retention of the intended successor, the possibility of jealousy by other employees, and how other employees will respond when they learn of the succession plan.[23] Additional issues are likely to arise if succession is to a family member,[24] particularly if more than one child of the managing owner works for the business or if siblings who do not work for the business will gain shares without having invested time and energy in the business.[23]

Small businesses and perhaps especially family businesses benefit from creating a disciplined succession process, involving,

  • Discussion and commitment by the shareholders;
  • Careful candidate selection; and
  • Integration and development of the selected successor.[22]

No part of the process should be rushed, with the integration process being expected to take roughly two years.[22]

Succession planning is a process and strategy for replacement planning or passing on leadership roles. It is used to identify and develop new, potential leaders who can move into leadership roles when they become vacant.[1][2] Succession planning in dictatorshipsmonarchies, politics, and international relations is used to ensure continuity and prevention of power struggle.[3][4] Within monarchies succession is settled by the order of succession.[3] In business, succession planning entails developing internal people with managing or leadership potential to fill key hierarchical positions in the company. It is a process of identifying critical roles in a company and the core skills associated with those roles, and then identifying possible internal candidates to assume those roles when they become vacant.[2] Succession planning also applies to small and family businesses (including farms and agriculture) where it is the process used to transition the ownership and management of a business to the next generation.[5]

Utah Uniform Partnership Act Lawyer Consultation

When you need legal help with the Utah Uniform Partnership Act, call Jeremy D. Eveland, MBA, JD (801) 613-1472.

Jeremy Eveland
17 North State Street
Lindon UT 84042
(801) 613-1472
https://jeremyeveland.com

Recent Posts

Business Law

Business Lawyer

Contract Law

Offer and Acceptance

The Utah Uniform Partnership Act

The 10 Essential Elements of Business Succession Planning

Business Succession Law

Estate Planning

Utah Business Law

Advertising Law

Real Estate Law

Law Firm

Legal Contract

Intellectual Property

Last Will and Testament