Zarlink Case

1. What is the strategy of the business and how has it changed over time? Why has it changed over time?
The strategy of the business is one of value enhancing, however over time, it has changed to more of a leadership strategy. A key part of their new strategy is to remove that impediment and bring in leadership at all levels that will be held accountable to guide Zarlink aggressively into businesses where it can make money for shareholders. It has changed because of their poor financial performance, and poor acquisition track record. Also, it was evident that Zarlink lacked the necessary vision, discipline and leadership to succeed.

2. How well has the business performed over time?
According to their share price as displayed in one of the exhibits, the business has been declining for the past 6-7 years. Their net income has been decreasing since 2001 as well, further proving the poor state of the business.

3. Is the board well set up to oversee governance of the management of the company? Explain your view
I think the new board is set up to oversee governance of the management of the company. Especially once they terminate Kirk Mandy and appoint David Banks as Interim Chief Executive Officer, I think they will be in a great position. Furthermore, I think the rest of the board is very qualified for the job and I think they will change the leadership of the company. I like how they intend to better position the product portfolio, and improve management of overhead costs and research and development expenses. For these reasons I believe they will be able to manage the company effectively.

4. Has the board done a good job of governing the management of the business?
I don’t think the old board has done a good job of governing the management of the business. This is apparent from their poor performance over the last 6-7 years,