- What would you say are the crucial questions in the Maxwell Affair?
The moment Robert Maxwell was found dead in 1991, in mysterious conditions at sea there raised several crucial questions related to Maxwell Affair.
Why the board of members appointed Robert Maxwell as the director of a public company without making any proper investigation?
How a detestable person was allowed to harm so many public?
Why was Maxwell included in fraudulent activities and under what circumstances?
Did the board of members actively participated in the decision-making process?
What measures were adopted by the authorities to balance the reparation created by Maxwell’s companies?
- How might they have been answered?
These questions might have been answered through case evaluation of the Maxwell companies. The board of members should have done proper examination before appointing Robert Maxwell as the director of the company. As a director, it was his responsibility to run the organisation ethically. But he got engaged in deceptive activities that affected the entire organisation. As a detestable person, authorities should have stopped him from harming the public. He became an international publishing industrialist after receiving the British Military Cross (Armstrong et al., 2015). People admired him as he was appointed as the director of the company and also because he battled with the Free Czech army. But after the investigation in 1970, it was reported that he used his leading position to draw off funds to maintain his different interests. He also got involved in a criminal scheme to reinforce the price of organisations in the company. The board of members failed to actively participate in the decision-making process due to which his avidity to earn profit illegally went unnoticed.
The authorities balanced the reparation by disqualifying Robert’s son as a director by the UK Department for Business Skills and Innovations for eight years. The authorities might have taken these measures on time, but due to lack of proper inspection of the case, they failed to take significant actions.
References
Armstrong, C. S., Blouin, J. L., Jagolinzer, A. D., & Larcker, D. F. (2015). Corporate governance, incentives, and tax avoidance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 60(1), 1-17.