Corporate Governance and Value Creation Relationship

Corporate Governance and Value Creation Relationship Department of Economics VALUE CREATION AND THE ROLE OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE Abstract Corporate Governance is a subject of many professional and academic debates. Since there are many different research and contexts associated with corporate governance problem, then, this topic has continued to be an interesting topic under scrutiny. However, is has been observed that the relationship between corporate governance and value creation of corporation remains as an untapped area with enough consideration. This paper tends to investigate this linkage and using Enron case as critical analysis. TABLE OF CONTENTS (JUMP TO) 1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Literature Review. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Corporate governance and performance of the company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3. 1. Definition and explanation of key concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3. 1. 1. The concept of corporate governance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3. 2. 2. The concept of value creation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3. 2. 2. 1. Definition of value creation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3. 2. 2. 2. The importance of value creation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3. 2. 2. 3. Measuring Value-creation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3. 2. The impact of corporate governance in the Value Creation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4. The role of finance in creating value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4. 1. The principles of management by the financial value. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4. 1. 1. The principle of double market. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4. 1. 2. The principle of identifying financial levers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4. 1. 3. The principle of internal steering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4. 2. The mechanisms and the extent of creating value. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 4. 2. 1. The economic indicators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 4. 2. 2. The indicators such as accounting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 4. 2. 3. The nature of stock market indicators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 4. 3. The limits of management by the financial value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264. 3. 1. Scope limited and performance standards unrealistic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 4. 3. 2. Transfer of risk to the employee shareholder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 4. 3. 3. Focus on short-term and limits the cost of capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 5. Critical approach to corporate governance: the case of Enron. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 5. 1. Introduction of the Enron affair. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 5. 2. Enrons scandal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 5. 3. The consequences of this scandal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 5. 4. The lesson from Enron Case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 6. Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 7. Further study recommendation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 List of Abbreviations NGO Non- Governmental Organization US United State CEO Chief Executive Officer BOD Board of Directors COO Chief Operating Officer CFO Chief Financial Officer CRO Chief Risk Officer CFROI Cash Flow Return on Investment EVA Economic Value Added RCF Residual Cash Flow DCF Discounted Cash Flow CVA Cash Value Added RAN The Rainforest Action Network MFV Management by the Financial Value TSR Total Shareholder Return MVA Market Value Added NPV Net Present Value EPS Earnings per Share ROE Return on Equity EROR Economic Rate of Return PBR Price to Book Ratio 1. Introduction The successive industrial revolutions of the late eighteenth and nineteenth century were a major factor for the development of Western capitalism and gave gradually traits that characterize it today. In this movement, the company as a structure that brings together human beings who are organized to act on nature to obtain useful results and thus create value has always been at the heart of the capitalist system. However, in recent decades, many changes have affected the financial-market capitalism and gave new prominence to creating value for shareholders of the company. This has resulted in the emergence of a form of management oriented to advance the financial value and mobilize employees to that goal. This focus on value creation reflects a desire to meet the requirements of the shareholder because it has become in the current financial world a king increasingly adulated and increasingly capricious. Undoubtedly, this logic has largely influenced the conduct of the strategy of com panies that demonstrate ingenuity to cope with competition and remain competitive. However, it has undergone profound questioned at a number of scandals that have marked with an indelible history of finance and have been accompanied by strengthening institutional mechanisms for regulation of businesses and financial markets. In such a context of questioning, suspicion and doubt in respect of managerial practices, questions about the role of governance and firms value creation does it not absolute importance to apprehend the changes that occurring within the company? The aim of this paper is to answer this question. The structure of the paper is organized as follows. Section 1 provides a background of what has been done in the literature in the effort to capture relationship between corporate governance and value creation. Section 2 introduces the key concepts such as corporate governance and value creation. Section 3 illustrates the role of finance in creating value in firms. Empirical approach are presented and discussed in section 4, with special stress on the managerial behaviour in Enrons Company. Section 5 will conclude and propose further areas of research. 2. Literature review On the topic of relationship between corporate governance and value creation, there have been various researches and conclusions. Before examining about the relationship between corporate governance and value creation, many early studies has explored the linkage between Ownership and Value Creation as a beginning. Talking about owners who have been passionate about their ideas and visions to create the best value for their company, study named Ownership and Value creation of Carlsson. R. H (2001) gave a valuable historical review and illustration with case how active ownership has played an important role in company development. Through this book, we can see that ownership makes significant differences in corporate governance, it fulfils an indispensable role in the market and its quality made firm the best value. Later, in his research Corporate Governance and Value Creation, Jean-Paul Page (2005) has referred to the financial approach to corporate governance in his analysis. He has explored the connection between the foundation of power and decision making to create the large value for firms. In order to focus on an in-depth analysis of the links between value creation and governance, his research started with the assumption that regulation and laws exist to constrain corporate activities which could harm society as well as the economy, then corporate agreement is expected. Through a research, he tried to find the answers of who should hold the ultimate power which companies can create maximum value or how this power should be used. To do this, first, he discussed the delegation of shareholder power and a variety of standard to evaluate the performance of managers. Then, he presented a framework by which securities analysts can evaluate corporate governance system. As the result of his study , he strongly believed that directors of companies have the necessary judgment to discharge their value creation responsibility. Jean-Paul Page result is developed further in detail by Monks (2002) when he applied this theory into Volkswagen Company. After that, Huse (2007) successfully combines the behavioural of directors work and the value creation which contributes to both the practitioner and the academic debate. Huses book is based on two key ideas: the main task of a broad of director is to create value for company and looking inside board to understand the value creation process needs. His book provided a good discussion about governance effectiveness and value creation by an exploration of behavioural perspectives on governance and how various types of related factors influence governance as well as value creation. In addition, in his recent research named The Value Broad: Corporate governance and organizational behaviour in 2008, he aimed to go further and explore actual behaviour in creating value from entrepreneurial management perception throughout various European countries such as Netherlands, Italy. Beside, The differentiated Network: Organizing Multinational Corporation for value creation of Nohria. N and Ghoshal. S (1997) was successful to present the globally distributed capabilities of multinational corporations and organize these corporations for value creation. This study is built to develop these ideas of both authors above. Besides theoretical research and studies, many case studies were analysed to examine the implication of all theories in the real economic market. Case study in Finances: Managing for Corporate Value Creation of Bruner. R. F (1990) provided numerous financial analyses of the world famous and successful corporations such as Walt Disney, Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Morgan Stanley Group INC, Merit Marine Corporation. . . However, this analysis was published in 1990, it can not update with changes in the economy as well as financial scandals have been happened through recent years. Based on all these suggestions, an analysis of value creation and the role of corporate governance is an interesting paper. And Enrons scandal in 2001 is an updated illustration. 3. Corporate governance and performance of the company 3. 1. Definition and explanation of key concepts 3. 1. 1. The concept of corporate governance We can consider that the practices of corporate governance have ancient origins insofar as they are inseparable from the very concept of enterprise. Indeed, corporate governance problem was already in the eighteenth century. Adam Smith posed as soon as 1776, in the Wealth of Nations, the problem of separation of interests between managers and owners in companies per share. This question will take a new turn with the emergence in 1807 in France and then England with the Company Act and a little later the United States, the limited liability company. In general, governance refers to the governing relations between the leaders of a company more broadly, an organization and the parties concerned by the fate of the so-called organization, mainly those who hold legitimate rights - namely shareholders. Even if made generally and in order to illuminate our analysis, such a definition requires clarification. First, governance is focused on a category of actors of any organization: the lea ders of this organization, category sometimes reduced to a person, most often represented by a small group strongly hierarchical around the leader, sometimes expressed by semi-hierarchical and ill-defined contours. Whatever the difficulties of defining exactly and narrow, this category of actors always pay attention on a system of governance. Corporate governance can be seen as vast field and its works as regulatory body that includes (OECD, 2004): Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Board of Directors (BOD) Management of Organization Shareholders Stakeholders (Suppliers, Employees, Creditors, Clients and Social Communities) Then, the issue of governance is also the role and control of corporate officers in legal persons. The leaders of an organization finalized commercial, public . . . Speak and act on behalf of this organization: a title that they can buy, sells, hire, dismiss and so on. They have before it the financial, material, human, which can be considerable even excessive. Issues relating to their appointment as corporate officers, the conditions for exercising their mandates are, therefore, legitimate and make corporate governance a key point of management systems of the latter. Finally, the governance system includes various components that can be, simplifying, grouped into three sets of components: structures, procedures and behaviour. The structures involved in the governance system are varied. Some are specific to the organization concerned: general meeting, board of directors, ad hoc committees. Others are external and intervene on the basis of contractual missions (auditors, rating agencies) or as part of missions of general interest (regulatory authorities). The procedures are also very varied and more or less diversified in codes or codes imposed on the actors involved (chart of accounts, commercial code . . . ). They may involve both methods of collection and dissemination of information on the functioning of the entities concerned that ways and means to carry out such an operation such as changing the parameters of the structure or listing on the financial market. The behaviour complements the first two components by providing a dimension without which they would remain for the most formal. Such behaviour are those agents individuals is not the legal fiction made up by legal persons involved in the institutional and responsible to implement it and animate it. Therefore, their best practices, their ethics or, conversely, their lack of scruples and their departures were a major part in the effectiveness of governance systems like any human system. In their brilliant literature review of corporate governance topic, Shleifer and Vishny (1997) offered a definition of corporate governance: Corporate governance deals with the ways in which suppliers of finance to corporations assure themselves of getting a return on their investment (p. 737). This notion of governance seems rather simplistic. Because it is limited to the individual control worked out by shareholders and ignores the rights of all the other stakeholders in the company such as creditors, suppliers, customers, employees, and finally, the State and society in general. Indeed, the shareholder affects some form of power and imposes limits in varying degrees that affect value creation. Besides, this definition of governance fails to take into account the implicit rules and standard such as legislation, regulations and contracts. All these things actually have an important influence on final decision. In his book, Jean- Paul also gave the broad definition of corporate governance as follows: Corporate governance consists of the legal, contractual, and implicit frameworks that define the exercise of power within a company, that influence decision making, that allow the stakeholders to assume their responsibilities, and that ensure that their rights and privileges are respected. (pp. 2) To be successful in this notion, corporations must acquire the best resources such as: finance, material and human at the best if they want to create value or wealth. Good corporate governance is assessed in a book named Corporate Governance: Responsibilities, Risk and Remuneration, Keasey. K and Wright. M (1997) He defined a good corporate governance is as concerned with correctly motivating managerial behaviour towards improving the business, as directly controlling the behaviour of managers. They also analysed executive remuneration is one mean of motivating good behaviour. Illustrating the standard corporate governance frame work, both authors above indicated that the key elements concern the enhancement of corporate governance is via supervisors of management performance and ensuring the accountability of management to shareholder and other stakeholders. Analysis of a frame work of corporate governance was also carried by Hart (1995). He discussed the need for accountability and supervisor of director come up because there is a divorce between ownership and control power in large firms. According Harts study, supervision may take various forms ranging form system where shareholders are outsiders with little direct incentive to monitor management. Moreover, Whittington (1993) argued that is has to be noted that the accountability and supervision aspects take place within a wider regulatory framework which regulates relationship with external third party contractors. 3. 1. 2. The concept of value creation 3. 1. 2. 1. Definition of Value Creation As for value creation, it is an ambiguous concept because of the multiplicity of managerial practices associated with it: exchange value, book value or economic value partnership, value for the customer, and so on. In all case, the most important objective of every firm is to maximize resource allocation, to produce as much economic value as much as possible and to look up social well-being. Offering the best product and services at reasonable price is the way which firms can do to achieve these objective above. Jean-Paul Page (2005) examined economic value as creating wealth. Because the firms wealth is measured by the value of their product on the market, then, creating value for firm mean company will observe its prices and value increase as demand for its services and goods rises. Concisely, creating economic value means increasing in firms value, increasing in share price and creating wealth. As a result, corporate governance have to focus on decision that tend to maximize share price and then on the creation of economic value. This way will translate the wealth creation objective of firms into tangible results. 3. 1. 2. 2. The importance of value creation In his academic journal, Favaro. Khas proved that if firm puts their value creation as a first strategy, it will help a corporation growth in the greatest rate. First of all, by understanding how, why, where the value is created within your company; which is the market where your company perform best; identifying which of your companys activity and asset is distinctive enough to be a profitable growth will tell your company where and how to grow. The best example of this case, we have to mention about Coca -cola. Since the early of 1980s, Coca-colas leader discovered the value creation in their mix businesses and in the entire beverage system; then, this company have taken a major growth opportunity in their core business. Secondly, there are two advantages which putting value creation first can gives firms are: capital and talent. When firm set value creation first, they will never suffer from a capital shortage. Favaro gave explanation that, these companies which put value creation first will find sufficient capital for their investment needs and can attract a large capital from the market, and then they never miss any investment opportunities. In addition, knowing all important targets, these companies also understand how important the high standard and good qualification managers are. Therefore, over time, these firms will build a team of manager with better capabilities and standards. This will give company more managerial talent and help these companies achieve higher level of profitable and also sustainable growth than their competitors. Value creation enhances companys ability to grow up which requires perseverance Discipline and leadership skills. Through his experience, Favaro suggests that: By product, channel, customer, market and technology; skilled managers who always put value creation first will understand how or why value is created or destroyed. Then, they will know whatever cut will be the best reveal the truly capabilities or asset which their company have to do to get profitable and growth. Promoting, celebrating and rewarding managers who see growth is an outcome of their focus on value creation. Briefly, if a company put value creation first in the right way, their managers can identify how and where to grow, they will use capital better than others and build up more talents. Consequently, value creation will offer you a vast advantage to achieve profitable and long-term growth. It should be noted that these multiple approaches are experiencing varying degrees of success. Thus, while some of them are rather a fashion effect, others seem more rooted in the reality of management. This is particularly the case in the field of strategy with the general themes related to the competitive advantage that determines the value that a company can create for its customers and in the field of finance with the concept of maximizing the shareholder value. However, there are two themes refer to distinct managerial logic. In schematising, one can oppose a logic of financial reform dominated the creation of financial value and logic of integration that connects the various aspects of value creation. The financial approach emphasizes the idea that any asset is comparable, at least conceptually, a financial asset whose correct measure is the present value of expected flows of that asset, given the risk that it is linked. Thus, by analogy with financial assets, it is possible to buy or sell at any time comparable assets or reinvest the funds on other opportunities. The option is part of choice and is a factor of flexibility. The logic of integration recognizes the importance of value creation but the analysis as the result of a synthesis of different components of value, whether organizational aspects, competitive or institutional. It puts forward concepts such as basic skills, know-how of cooperation and coordination, competitive advantage. It requires a broader view of performance and the development of a scoreboard, including non-financial aspects. This concept of value creation is currently experiencing a revival and for several reasons. This renewal first undoubtedly result of the transformation of financial capitalism and its origin movements takeover carried out on companies that exploitation not effectively their asset base for shareholders. These practices have provided external visibility to market discipline that has prompted leaders to do more attention to creating value and bring back the shareholder at the centre of the strategy. In addition, development of globalization and the rise of new technologies of information and communication technologies have accelerated the process of internationalization of enterprises and networking complex and globalize. The result is a financial reform of the strategy based on the refocusing on the principal market and the pursuit of critical size. That is why the purchase of shares and options markets external growth is systematically privileged at the expense of endogenous development of the company. But for institutional investors, who control more companies using their power, the ability of business to create value is an essential criterion of assessment. Finally, another external factor that has boosted the value creation is the gradual disappearance of state monopolies especially in the case of France. The purpose of the public monopoly system based on the existence of cross-shareholdings is to ensure a stable partnership. The financial globalization has gradually reduce d the interest of a national shareholding making less essential closures capital that provides few resources. 3. 1. 2. 3. Measuring Value-creation: When evaluating value creation, there are three main measurements are: Cash Flow Return on Investment (CFROI), Economic Value Added (EVA), and Residual Cash Flow (RCF). G. Bennett Stewart III (1991). The Quest for Value. HarperCollins discussed Economic Value Added (EVA) as the heart and soul of Value planning. He described EVA is the one measure which properly accounts for all the complex trade-offs involved in creating value. EVA computed by taking the spread between the rate of return on capital r and the cost of capital c* and then multiplying by the economic book value of the capital committed to the business: EVA = (r-c*) x Capital EVA = (rate of return cost of capital) x capital EVA will increase when: The rate of return earned on the existing base of capital improves; that is, more operating profits are generated without tying up more funds in the business. Additional capital is invested in projects that return more the cost of obtaining the new capital Capital is liquidated from, or further investment is curtailed in, substandard operations when inadequate return being earned. These are the only way in which value can be created

Netsuite customer relationship management for the Banking Sector Essay

NetSuite is the world’s leading provider of on-demand business application software combining accounting and enterprise resource planning (ERP), customer relationship management (CRM) and  ecommerce capabilities in a completely integrated solution. With over 12,000 customers globally, NetSuite companies are enabled to manage all key business operations uniting departments, automating processes and gaining unparalleled insight into their business. Netsuite is built around a single customer record, so all areas of the business; sales, support, accounting, distribution, shipping and billing, use the same information for every interaction. Because NetSuite gives vital business intelligence in real time, businesses can make informed decisions faster. Deliver better business management – powerful real-time, customisable dashboards, NetSuite business management software gives managers and employees the functionality, information and tools they need to manage their entire business better and streamline operations. Eliminate data re-entry – because NetSuite software is built on a single record for every aspect of business, there’s no need to waste time re-inputting data into separate systems. Eliminate IT maintenance and upgrade costs – NetSuite is cloud-based, business management software with a 99.5% uptime guarantee. This gives greater reliability and security while eliminating the need for on-site hardware and software. Make better decisions faster – NetSuite business management software gives real-time business intelligence dashboards for any and every aspect of the organisation from leads, commissions, sales revenue and forecasts to bank balances, receivable and payable anywhere and anytime. Increase collaboration – NetSuite SaaS offers portals that allow customers, partners and vendors to collaborate allowing organisations to get closer to customers and partners, move quickly and seize opportunities.

On the Film Zero Dark Thirty and Torture Essay

Zero Dark Thirty is a 2013 film directed by award-winning director Kathryn Bigelow, and is a narration about the multiple time-skips of how Maya (Jessica Chastain), a new CIA recruit, beat the odds which led to Osama Bin Laden’s ultimate death. â€Å"Our plane’s been hijacked. I hope I can be able to see your face again, baby. I love you! Goodbye!† were lines from the actual 9/11 audio footage at the beginning of the film and from that, I thought that Zero Dark Thirty would be an emotionally-touching action-packed movie. Because of an exciting plot, I expected it to be a thrilling film but it turned out to be despicably monotonous. Set in the bustling streets and the danger-prone areas of the Middle East, the set design became largely influential to the film, and it added to the viewer’s experience. However, if I hadn’t known that the movie was directed by Academy-Award winner, Kathryn Bigelow, I would have thought that this was directed by an unkno wn director. The chapter-by-chapter time skip actually took the plot away from the movie — it became choppy and incomprehensible. One moment we see Ammar (Reda Kateb) being tortured, and then in the next screen, it’s suddenly two years later. The only commendable action scene in the movie being Osama Bin Laden’s ambush, the plot seemed to drag as we see more conversations and less action than what we expected to see. The movie poster also said that the writer, Mark Boal, is an Academy award-winning screenwriter but it puzzles me how he actually got the information about the happenings when CIA operations are supposed to be undisclosed. Why would the scriptwriter just name-drop sites that were supposedly top-secret, like the existence of Area 51? Thus, the credibility of the events and places seem questionable. Moreover, the flood of names of terrorists in conversations was actually confusing and the discussions about situations in ISI were unnecessary. I wanted to see scenes related to finding Abu Ahmed and ultimately, Bin Laden. I wanted action, not conversations. Though the pacing was unbelievab ly slow, the cinematography during the bombing in the restaurant Maya and Jennifer were eating at was brilliant. The transition was truly surprising — one moment Jennifer was talking to someone over the phone, and then the next, the restaurant was already in pieces and people were dying. Maya’s expression of pure shock and terror was perfectly captured the camera. The editing of the movie headed by William Goldenberg was realistic, and the bombings were so unpredictable, I was surprised and scared out of my seat. Mostly, the ambush operation in the last 30 minutes of the film was so professionally shot it could pass up as an actual footage. It’s the little moments that make this film alive. After the phone call from Maya’s supervisor, stating that tonight will be the ambush, we witness the bonds of the â€Å"canaries† – the way they goofed around and gambled, yet still looked out for each other. Viewers always have the impression that soldiers are brute men who would sacrifice anything and anyone for their purpose, but this scene actually gives the impr ession that they’re men too who treasure the bonds they have. The only comical relief during the movie was provided by Dan’s sarcasm and personality. Ironically, this attitude always comes up during the supposedly-heartbreaking torture scenes which made it particularly hard for me to sympathize with Ammar (Reda Kateb). Another highlight of his role was when Dan fed the monkeys in a CIA site. I remembered the previous scene when Ammar said that Dan was an animal, and as the monkeys stole the ice cream from Dan, I saw how it was similar to their situation. Dan takes and takes from Ammar, but eventually, Ammar gets the best of him when he doesn’t provide information. As I contemplated about the film after watching it, I think the reason why it seemed so bland and dry is because it lacked the action that viewers are used to see in fictional CIA films. The super cool CIA combat and the shooting scenes where the CIA agent never gets shot weren’t present in the movie. Instead, the movie consisted of CIA operatives who commit mistakes and ultimately get killed, like Jennifer (Jennifer Ehle); we meet heartless CIA agents like Dan (Jason Clarke) who would torture a man endlessly to get the information he needs. We see unsexy Maya, an ordinary-looking woman who wears identical suits every day, who got carried away by emotions after Jennifer’s death and during her confrontation with Joseph Bradley (Kyle Chandler), and who was almost killed once in an attempt at her life. The film was made up of one-dimensional characters who got frustrated when they can’t do anything. I wanted to know the characters more but there was zero character development. There weren’t even any scenes about Maya’s past, like why and how was she recruited out of high school? Did she ever get in touch with Jennifer’s family after her death? This lack of character personality development and the blankness of her facial expressions in most of her screen time made me wonder why Jessica Chastain is praised for her role in Zero Dark Thirty. I’ve recently watched Les Miserables and if Jessica Chastain were to be nominated in the same category as Anne Hathaway for an Oscar, then Chastain could just say that she dreamed a dream of winning an Oscar. I won’t say that she did not deserve her Golden Globe award, but I never thought she’d be nominated for it either. Her portrayal as the angry young Bin Laden-obsessed CIA agent was so stereotyp ical — she started as the nervous, awkward new CIA operative and then ultimately became the â€Å"motherfucker,† as she puts it, who found Bin Laden’s location. Maya always had this expressionless face, as if trying very hard to capture a CIA agent’s demeanor. In fact, I only began to sympathize with Maya upon the death of Jennifer. Her endless pursuit of Bin Laden became more personal from this point, proving that nothing motivates like revenge. I think that the scene where Maya shook her head and then cried actually concludes the plot well because it showed her human side and the drive that has been pushing her all along. She quotes in one scene that her friends got killed because of the hunt and she believes that she has been spared for a reason. This gives justice to her emotions in the end, where she finally breaks down as the realization that she has reached her goal after almost a decade — yet the friends she had made along the way were already gone. She is no longer the new, awkward CIA recruit, rather, Maya has become the CIA operative who resorted to all means possible to take down Osama Bin Laden. With the methods th at the movie’s characters practiced, there has been much speculation whether the film is pro-torture or not. The director and the writer of the film presented these â€Å"enhanced interrogation techniques† as a part of the pursuit. So for me, it’s not a pro-torture movie but at the same time, it’s not anti-torture either. If Zero Dark Thirty were pro-torture, then the viewers should have seen how Ammar gave information after being tortured, but he did not. Instead we see that the key piece to the puzzle for finding Bin Laden was actually served to Dan and Maya over lunch, not during torture time. And if the movie were anti-torture, then there shouldn’t have been any torture scenes in the movie — leaving Reda Kateb, who played Ammar, with zero talent fee. The film showed that Maya was convinced that the location of Bin Laden’s courier, Abu Ahmed, is crucial to the pursuit not because there was information revealed during the torture sessions, rather, it’s the detainees’ refusal to give up any information about the courier that connects the dots for Maya. Therefore, the film depicts numerous, albeit controversial, practices used in America’s pursuit for Osama Bin Laden. It shows that torturing Jihad-driven detainees or buying a man a Lamborghini as bribery weren’t the ultimate keys for solving the puzzle that led to Bin Laden. No single method can perfectly encapsulate the sum of the efforts of the people behind the manhunt for Bin Laden. The totality of their hard work and passion was what the filmmakers strived to partake, so for me, the movie isn’t raising any notions on being pro or against these methods. Zero Dark Thirty relays the fact that we tread different paths in life with a great number of sacrifices along the way. Though this movie doesn’t live up to its tagline â€Å"The Greatest Manhunt in History,† is still a perfect example of humanity’s journey towards his goals. Americans would continue to preserve their seat of power, while the Muslims would continue to do anything to reach Jihad. I wanted to be awed by this film and I wanted to feel the characters’ emotions, but the film gave me neither. The lack of emotion in Zero Dark Thirty makes me think that the budget for this should have been allocated to a film with a different perspective, like a documentary, and not as a film with actors and actresses playing roles they fail to give color to.

The Number of Countries in the World

The answer to the seemingly simple geographical question of How many countries are there? is that it depends on whos doing the counting. The United Nations, for example, recognizes 241 countries and territories. The United States, however, officially recognizes fewer than 200 nations. Ultimately, the best answer is that there are 196 countries in the world. Heres why. United Nations Member States There are 193 member states in the United Nations. This total is often cited inaccurately as the actual number of countries in the world; its inaccurate because there are two other members with limited status. Both the Vatican (officially known as the Holy See), which is an independent nation, and the Palestinian Authority, which is a quasi-governmental body, have been granted permanent observer status at the United Nations. These two entities can take part in all official UN activities but cannot cast votes in the General Assembly. Likewise, some nations or regions of the world have declared their independence and are recognized by a majority of UN member states yet are not part of the United Nations. Kosovo, a region of Serbia that declared independence in 2008, is one such example.   Nations Recognized by the United States The United States officially recognizes other nations through the State Department. As of May 2018, the State Department recognized  195 independent countries around the world. This list reflects the political agenda of the United States of America and its allies. Unlike the United Nations, the United States maintains full diplomatic relations with Kosovo and the Vatican. However, one nation is missing from the State Departments list that should be on it. The Nation That Isnt The island of Taiwan, formally known as the Republic of China, meets the requirements for an independent country or state status. However, all but a handful of nations refuse to recognize Taiwan as an independent nation. The political reasons for this date back to the late 1940s, when the Republic of China was ousted from mainland China by Mao Tse Tungs communist rebels and ROC leaders fled to Taiwan. The communist Peoples Republic of China maintains that it has authority over Taiwan, and relations between the island and mainland have been strained. Taiwan was actually a member of the United Nations (and even the Security Council) until 1971 when mainland China replaced Taiwan in the organization. Taiwan, which has the worlds 29th-largest economy, continues to press for full recognition by others. But China, with its growing economic, military, and political clout, has largely been able to shape the dialogue on this issue. As a result, Taiwan cannot fly its flag at international events such as the Olympics and must be referred to as Chinese Taipei in some diplomatic situations. Territories, Colonies, and Other Non-Nations Dozens of territories and colonies are sometimes erroneously called countries but dont count because theyre governed by other countries. Places commonly confused as being countries include Puerto Rico, Bermuda, Greenland, Palestine, and Western Sahara. The components of the United Kingdom (Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and England) are  not fully independent countries, either, though they do enjoy a degree of autonomy. When dependent territories are included, the United Nations recognizes a total of 241 countries and territories.   So How Many Countries Are There? If you use the U.S. State Departments list of recognized nations and also include Taiwan, there are  196 countries in the world. The same number is reached if you count the UN voting members, its two permanent observers, and Taiwan. This is why 196 is probably the best current answer to the question.