View credit conflicts competitively
Partnerships enable organizations to achieve their vision, and most of the time they look great on paper. But all too often the cultures clash, conflict reigns, and, in the end, everyone loses. While conflict can appear at any stage of the Partnership Continuum, it is especially common during the Storm Stage of Relationship Development, when conflict erupts and must be resolved. If organizations have a past orientation and view the conflict competitively, then losers and winners are created. This dooms any hope of synergy moving the partnership into the creative zone.However attractive a partner may appear, making the partnership work takes time and effort. Companies do not have many problems becoming partners, but they often run into trouble managing their partnerships.
I’ve been on the inside with some of the largest conglomerates in America before, during, and after celebrated mergers and takeovers, and I’ve witnessed both success and bloody dissolution. The human factor is the most powerful variable in the fate of a partnership. How the people who make up these organizations build relationships and accomplish critical tasks invariably determines the outcome of the partnership.
As mentioned before, from an active portfolio manager’s perspective a major concern is migration risk. Investors who do not hold a bond until maturity have to be compensated for a possible deterioration in credit quality, a potentially resulting downgrade and increased volatility. This becomes even more important if the downgrade triggers investment restrictions. For a specific corporate bond the expected excess return over duration-matched government bonds can be estimated in three steps: