Page 1

11

NEW ZEALAND’S TOP 200 COMPANIES – PAGE 52

management.co.nz

AN EXCLUSIVE REPORT ON

TOP 200 2011

THE TOP

200 READ THE REVIEWS AND HIGHLIGHTS FROM THIS YEAR’S TOP 200 AWARDS

DON BRAID MAINFREIGHT

DECEMBER 2011

DECEMBER 2011 $7.10 INCL GST

CELEBRATING NZ’S GREATEST THOUGHT LEADERS

Don Braid, Executive of the Year p22 + Wayne Boyd, Chairperson of the Year p31 + Lloyd Morrison, Visionary Leader p43

9 421902 251030


WELCOME

www.management.co.nz

Celebrating new thinking

I

can’t think of a better time to be back on Management magazine. Just over four years ago I stepped down as editor of the magazine. My thinking, such as it was, was driven by a desire to focus more fully on writing. Now my new role is different but the issues that New Zealand leaders face remain the same. And what better time to be back than for the Top200 issue, the culmination of a year’s worth of painstaking work by the combined Deloitte/Management magazine team to identify and celebrate the best thinking that New Zealand business has to offer? When publisher Toni Myers first spoke with me about this new role, she made no secret of the fact that magazines face challenging times. What Toni and I didn’t quite nail in our discussions was how invigorating it would be to be back. Seven working days into my new role, I was privileged to be in Deloitte’s downtown Auckland offices, listening to this year’s Top 200 Awards judges as they trawled through page after page of company figures and fine-sliced company strategies with insight and aplomb. Management magazine has a long and distinguished history. It’s 58 years old. It’s seen the rise and adoption of the very idea of management as a career path, and championed the blossoming realisation that authentic leadership is the cornerstone of strong organisations. It continues to craft strong and

meaningful relationships across business networks, and for all that support and guidance I am truly grateful. The magazine has seen more than its fair share of rivals come and go. But all products are only as good as their most recent iteration. We may have laurels but we’re not going to rest on them. We have plans for the magazine. Expect both evolutionary and revolutionary change. For now, enjoy this issue. Enjoy delving into the thinking behind some of New Zealand’s most successful business people and companies. Then, as you head off for your summer break, forget all about business and work, strategies and executive plans. If you’re anything like me, you’ll be swimming in the sea, rediscovering your garden, savouring simple summer food, learning to sail. I’d argue we have a collective responsibility over summer to do whatever it is that unfurls our creativity and re-energises us. That way, we’ll come back refreshed and reinvigorated for yet more new thinking in the New Year.

A MEDIAWEB MAGAZINE PUBLISHER Toni Myers CONSULTING EDITOR & WRITER-AT-LARGE Reg Birchfield MANAGING EDITOR Ruth Le Pla editor@management.co.nz CONTRIBUTORS Stephen Dee, Bob Edlin, Nick Grant, Murray Jack, Don Jaine, Colin James, Sam Johnson, Peter Tynan ADVERTISING MANAGER Rod Myers 09-372 6444, 027-484 8046, admanager@management.co.nz DESIGNER Jennifer Adams COPY & WEB EDITOR Gill Prentice PRODUCTION MANAGER Fran Marshall franm@mediaweb.co.nz NEW SUBSCRIPTIONS www.management.co.nz/subscribe SUBSCRIPTION ENQUIRIES subs@mediaweb.co.nz

Phone 09-529 3000, Fax 09-529 3001 enquiries@mediaweb.co.nz www.mediaweb.co.nz PO Box 5544, Wellesley Street, Auckland 1141

NZ MANAGEMENT magazine is independently owned by Mediaweb Limited and is published 11 times a year. It is the officially recognised magazine of the New Zealand Institute of Management Incorporated. Editorial material does not necessarily reflect the views of NZIM. Copyright © 2011: Mediaweb Limited. All material appearing in NZ MANAGEMENT is copyright and cannot be reproduced without prior permission of the publisher. Editorial contributions are welcomed. Letters to the editor are also welcomed, but pen names are not acceptable. NZ MANAGEMENT is printed by PMP. Subscriptions: One-year NZ subscription (11 issues) $78.15 (GST incl). Overseas (airmail only): Australia $NZ130; rest of the world $NZ250. Enquiries: Mediaweb Limited, PO Box 5544, Wellesley Street, Auckland 1141, New Zealand. Phone: 09-529 3000, Fax 09-529 3001, enquiries@mediaweb.co.nz www.management.co.nz New Zealand Institute of Management enquiries to: National Office, Box 67, Wellington; Northern, Box 26001, Epsom; Central, Box 11781, Wellington; Southern, Box 13044, Christchurch.

Ruth Le Pla, Managing Editor Vol 58 No 11 • ISSN 1174-5339 (Print), 1179-3910 (Online)

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 1


CONTENTS 10 TOP200 COVER STORY

Top200 Thinking Seeds of optimism about the future direction of New Zealand’s largest enterprises lie hidden among the figures in this year’s Deloitte/Management magazine Top200 list of companies. Reg Birchfield delves into the data.

10

16

Around the Top200 sectors It was another tough year for organisations in many sectors. The earthquakes in Christchurch and the Rugby World Cup challenged and rewarded. Consumers remained hesitant to spend but at least our primary producers had good times, reeling in the rewards of high commodity prices across the globe.

16


DECEMBER 2011 • Vol 58 No 11

31

Top200 22

Deloitte/Management magazine Executive of the Year Don Braid

24

Deloitte/Management magazine Company of the Year Mainfreight

26

NZIM/Eagle Technology Young Executive of the Year Hamish McBeath

31

QBE Insurance Chairperson of the Year Wayne Boyd

34

Kensington Swan Responsible Governance Award Vodafone New Zealand

36

Marsh Most Improved Performance Award Kathmandu

40

Workbase Best Growth Strategy Award Ryman Healthcare

43

Designworks Visionary Leader Lloyd Morrison

46

Judges

48

Criteria

49

Deloitte Viewpoint

51

A-Z Top 200 Companies

52

Top 200 Companies

66

Top 30 Financial Institutions

68

Year-on-Year Comparisons

70

Top 200 Analysis

72

Performance by Sector

74

Missing, Merged, Miscellaneous

24

36

40

26


CONTENTS 1

EDITOR’S LETTER

76

INBOX: News and views

82

FOCUS

84

AS I SEE IT: Sam Johnson

85

MANAGERS ABROAD: Stephen Dee

96

NZIM: Ready to do better Reg Birchfield

105 EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT

90

Features 86

OPINION 94

On current projections, Asia is set to soon inherit the mantle of economic global leadership. So is there such a thing as Asian values, as some would contend, or simply universal values? By Ruth Le Pla.

THOUGHT LEADER: New ‘three Bs’ Don Jaine

100 POLITICS: The new term: time for strategic policy Colin James 101 ECONOMICS: Mind the gap Bob Edlin 102 LEADERSHIP: Leading by relinquishing Reg Birchfield 103 BOOKCASE: What would Drucker do now? Reg Birchfield ADVICE 104 EXEC HEALTH: The heat is on Peter Tynan

Impact Asia: What will happen after Asia’s rise?

90

Face to Face: Todd McLeay Lotteries Commission CEO Todd McLeay is preparing to take on a new role at APN News & Media. He talks with Nick Grant about what he’s learnt so far in his career.

107 NZIM’s Focus On Management Coping with natural disasters; Regional news; Training and development courses; Member comment from Tony Hassed.

7 Fort Lane Imperial Building

Sean Marshall

Executive Chef ex Matterhorn, Supreme Winner Cuisine Restaurant of the Year 2008

Gary Olasz Restaurant Manager / Sommelier Marie Rouge Maitre d' (09) 929 2701

4 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

roxy.co.nz


Keep your staff up and running

To keep up with the pace of business these days, you need your staff to be performing at their best. When your employees are happy and healthy, they’re far more productive in the workplace. That’s why, on top of health insurance, Southern Cross has a range of workplace

wellness options, from health checks and influenza vaccinations to corporate fitness programmes. It could be more affordable than you think, and your staff won’t be the only ones to benefit. Because the better you look after them, the better it will be for your business.

To find out more, call Southern Cross on 0800 323 555 or visit healthybusiness.co.nz Healthy people healthy business SCH6136

Southern Cross Medical Care Society, Level 1, Ernst & Young Building, 2 Takutai Square, Auckland 1010


TOP 200 THINKING

MARTIN SNEDDEN CEO, RUGBY NEW ZEALAND 2011

RUGBY WORLD CUP 2011 (RWC 2011) is living proof that our nation has a huge heart. IN NOVEMBER 2005, the International Rugby Board (IRB) was rubbished in many quarters for awarding New Zealand the hosting rights for one of sport’s biggest events. The detractors said that New Zealand was “… too small, too far away, too commercially risky, too obsessed with their own team”. IN ITS MASTERFUL BID, The New Zealand Rugby Union (NZRU) made a number of promises to counter those perceptions and all credit to the IRB for trusting us to deliver. IT CERTAINLY TOOK A BIG RISK bringing its “jewel in the crown” event, its sole revenue generator, to our place. It knew it would earn less money, but it also realised only New Zealand could deliver something truly unique. REGARDLESS OF THE MANY CHALLENGES we faced at the start of the project, the biggest “plus” working for us was the fact that rugby remains firmly part of our DNA. We knew that, if we could leverage effectively off what was a very strong rugby foundation, we could overcome all obstacles. THE “STADIUM OF FOUR MILLION” CONCEPT became the key to our success. IT WAS A CRITICAL PART OF THE PITCH used to persuade the IRB that, by bringing RWC 2011 to our country, the rugby world would be given a “rugby experience” which no other country could replicate. HOWEVER, EARLY ON WE RECOGNISED that not all Kiwis were interested in or liked rugby, and we knew we really needed the genuine support and help of this sizeable group. We began by issuing an invitation to all New Zealanders to become active participants in helping us host this event.

WE SPREAD THE MATCHES AND THE TEAMS all over the country and then secured huge buy-in to the concept of a nationwide festival being wrapped around the tournament in a way in which all of our communities could showcase themselves in their own unique way. IN THE END, MORE THAN 1000 EVENTS were delivered during the REAL New Zealand Festival – it was an essential ingredient to help fans enjoy New Zealand beyond the stadia, and to help Kiwis regardless of their views on rugby to celebrate who we are. WE ALSO TALKED LONG AND HARD of the need for Kiwis to think way beyond the performance of the All Blacks if the event was to be a success. We, along with our colleagues in the NZ 2011 Office, urged communities to adopt a second team, hang out flag bunting from their shops, offices and homes and to get into the spirit of a Tournament of 20 teams. IT WAS A MESSAGE about not only enjoying the presence of 19 other teams in their communities, but also about the richness of the welcome we needed to give to our guests. THE PROOF, THEY SAY, IS IN THE PUDDING. We asked Kiwis at the beginning of this journey whether they wanted dreams or memories. They firmly signed up to delivering an event that would live long in our memories. We have all seen it in our towns and cities, in fan zones and in the stadia. PEOPLE ARE SMILING AGAIN. After the tragedies of the past 12 months, the mood and morale of the country has been transformed. A recent Colmar Brunton poll showed most Kiwis thought the tournament succeeded, 91 percent wanted us to do it all again. The success of the event has been recognised across the world. AND THE MOST SATISFYING ASPECT of this is that the ownership of this success belongs genuinely to our people, to that stadium of four million. How good is that!


THINKING Seeds of optimism about the future direction of New Zealand’s largest enterprises lie hidden among the figures in this year’s Deloitte/Management magazine Top200 list of companies. Reg Birchfield delves into the data.

C

ollectively, the results delivered by companies that made it into NZ Management’s Top200 list this year only tell a story of continued recovery from the world’s worst economic downturn in 40 years. But individually, they could suggest something a little more promising. Revenue generated by the top 200 companies increased 7.9 percent on last year’s $141.5 billion to $152.8 billion. The top 30 financial institutions went backwards, with revenue down 9.1 percent. Add the two groups together, and revenue increased five percent to $179 billion. Given the world economic climate, that’s not a bad amount of growth. The after-tax profitability of the top 200 dropped 0.6 percent on 2010 to $3.99 billion. The finance sector did better,

10 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

following the hit inflicted by the global financial crisis (GFC). They lifted their collective net profit by 420.7 percent to $2.6 billion, well up on last year’s low of $500 million. None of this helped the Government’s revenue coffers much, however. The combined tax paid by our top 200 companies plus the top 30 financial institutions collapsed almost 50 percent to just $3.25 billion compared to last year’s $6.2 billion. Tax paid by the top 200 companies fell 29.8 percent and 66.5 percent by the financial institutions. Little wonder the Government spending squeeze continues, which doesn’t help economic growth either. The top 20 of the nation’s 200 largest companies generated 50 percent of the total revenue and 63 percent of the collective net profit. Revenue nudged up just one percent on last year and


Photo: Jan-Michael David


RYMAN... GROWING CAPABILITY EVERY YEAR. the tax garnered lifted just three percent. The top 100, or half the list, generated 86 percent of the total revenue and earned 108 percent of the profits (reflecting a collective decline in profits in the other 100 companies). That was something of an improvement on 2010 when the top 100 accumulated only 90 percent of net profits. When it comes to making the largest profits, the banks had it pretty much to themselves. Only Fonterra, which came in second behind ANZ National, could match their numbers. Fonterra’s lift in revenue was also impressive, climbing from $17 billion last year to break the $20 billion barrier this year – far and away our largest company and almost three times bigger than its nearest rival, Fletcher Building. World prices for dairy products made a big difference. The agricultural sector had a good year. Strong commodity prices and consequent high returns meant farmers splashed out on fertiliser and other sector-related products and services. Companies like Rayonier (forestry), Open Country Dairy, Combined Rural Traders Society, Seeka Kiwifruit, Landcorp Farming, Viterra (grain), Balance Agri-Nutrients, Ravensdown Fertiliser, Westland Co-op Dairy and Livestock Improvement Corp all featured among those with significantly improved revenue or profitability. However, this year’s Top 200 Awards judges think there is more to the enhanced performance of some agriculture-based enterprises than just the godsend of strong commodity prices – though they undoubtedly provide the premium. “There is an underlying sophistication coming through in many of New Zealand’s largest businesses, and particularly in the agricultural sector,” says Janine Smith, a principal of The Boardroom Practice and professional company director. “It is 12 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

very heartening and I think we can feel more confident about New Zealand going forward if this continues.” The other two judges, Asia-Pacific Risk Management director Roger Kerr and Neil Paviour-Smith, managing director of Forsyth Barr, agree with Smith. There is, says Kerr, greater sophistication in management processes, in the use of smart technologies, in the management of capital, and in managers’ and directors’ strategic approach to doing and building their businesses. “Farmers are inherently risk takers,” says Smith. “And farmers that are now sitting around board tables are taking more calculated and better informed risks. They are competent directors and smart business people.” And while strong commodity prices had a positive knockon effect on companies such as the Port of Tauranga and transport operators like Mainfreight – this year’s Deloitte/ Management magazine Company of the Year – the judges felt that more New Zealand companies were emerging from the rubble of the recession determined and equipped to tackle the world. Companies such as outdoor equipment and clothing retailer Kathmandu and aged care enterprise Ryman are good examples. Both are category finalists in this year’s awards. Both companies, said the judges, think more professionally about where they are going and how they might get there – in the home and global markets. All three judges identified improved governance as a key factor in the emergence of smarter, more strategic and ambitious thinking. There is little doubt in their minds that any


improvement in the corporate performance of New Zealand The judges agreed there are signs of positive change in companies will have to come from the top – from the nation’s the quality of chairs. This too is having a positive impact on boardrooms. the performance and ambitions of more Top 200 companies. It seems that, finally, there are more competent directors “The sooner we do away with the ‘don’t interfere with sitting around the board tables of a greater percentage of Top management’-type chair, the better,” says Smith. 200 companies than there used to be. Better performing boards should be a priority. “Even inDirectors need a better understanding of the companies stitutional investors are demanding it,” says Kerr, who thinks in which they serve and the industries in which they operate. investor expectations have lifted in the wake of the corporate “[We need more] like the directors of Mainfreight,” says and financial disasters of recent years. As guardians of shareKerr. “They know the freight and transport industry inside out. holders’ interests and as the scrutineers of executive performThey are well informed about the business and world trends, ance, directors should do a better job. and consequently they are now operating successfully around “Some directors still boast that they sit on as many as 10 the globe. They really know what they are doing.” boards,” says Smith. “They can’t possibly do a good job. DirecNew Zealand enterprise needs more than just a suite of tors need thinking space and boards need greater skill diversity. competent executives. It needs even more competent directors Boards are no longer a place for old men.” who do more than simply attend board meetings and ensure The judges’ comments parallel the increasingly obvious imcompliance with governance regulations. pacts of new technologies, regulatory and market demand for “They need to understand strategies too and have a deep greater transparency, the crumbling of the institutionalised old understanding of the sectors in which they are involved,” says boys’ club approach to board membership and the dramatic Smith. impact of social media on company reputation. “Directors don’t need to get involved with the operational “A greater sense of accountability and visibility is emergdetail, but they do need to understand a great deal more about ing,” says Paviour-Smith. “And I am not just talking about the markets they are in. They must know more about what things like continuous disclosure. It is everyday scrutiny, and drives and motivates a successful enterprise than simply com- criticism and assessment of both management and boards.” plying with all the rules of good governance.” This year’s judges also perceived a shift in ownership atDirectors must do more than read and note a management titudes which, they thought, might stimulate a new approach representation letter or rely on external advice as a way of to building bigger and stronger local outsourcing their duties and obligations, the judges warned. companies. “There is an expectation that where individuals have Promising New Zealand specific capabilities and knowledge they will use them,” says companies often sell to offPaviour-Smith. “They do that through astute (boardroom) shore buyers before reaching questioning and analysis of management actions.” their potential. That might Competent and committed directors are critical to the be changing too. The judges process of turning New Zealand’s largest, and even its medium- noted the joint Infratil and size companies, into world-class performers. “They need to NZ Superannuation Fund purmake a greater strategic personal contribution and be able to chase of Shell’s New Zealand cope with the increasing complexity of business,” says Kerr. retail business. Highly competent directors are as important to the sucAnd they see Mainfreight’s cess of an enterprise as equally competent managers. Boards can’t, said the judges, pad out their numbers with accountants and lawyers. Directors need to YOUNG EXECUTIVE OF THE YEAR know how to ask the hard questions. HAMISH MCBEATH “Executives are learning that it is acceptable ... BUILDING HIGHfor directors to ask penetrating questions and to delve more deeply into the business,” says Smith. PERFORMING TEAMS. “The extent to which directors are allowed to do that, however, goes back to the effectiveness of board chairs.” DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 13


drive to become a global logistics and transport operator as a model for how local management and in-depth industry knowledge can create home-grown businesses that are globally competitive. “It’s a way of thinking about things,” suggests Kerr, “… of thinking that you don’t need to sell out too quickly and that you can compete with the world’s best if you want to.” The National Government’s intention to sell up to 49 percent of its State Owned Enterprises might also provide a new business model for a nation that suddenly seems more intent on retaining control of its key national assets. “One outtake from the SOE sales process might be a greater acceptance of the potential value and appropriateness to New Zealand of a mixed ownership business model for our largest and most strategically-important enterprises,” says PaviourSmith. “Public listed companies can exist and operate with a major government shareholding. This is completely different from the assets sales approach of 20 years ago when the government sold everything at fire sale prices. “At least in the public mind, it is becoming increasingly important that the Government retain control of some of our key assets, and good on them for saying they intend to.” Air New Zealand is, said the judges, “a good example” of a company that is now stronger as a business and as an employer through its partial public sector ownership model. By taking a portfolio investment approach, Government could provide the financial backbone to ensure security over key aspects of the national infrastructure. And by taking a hands-off approach to management of the day-to-day operation, mixed ownership business would 14 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

KATHMANDU... SERIOUS ABOUT GROWTH. be allowed to compete and respond to market disciplines and be held to account as a public company. By adopting the mixed ownership model, the public can be involved in the purchase and retain the right to object when it is not happy with political manoeuvres or the performance of management and the board. The model would, said the judges, provide the market discipline that is essential for efficiency and running a great business. But shareholders and customers should be listened to – and that does not necessarily happen with 100 percent government ownership. “There isn’t enough market discipline to have the board and the management respond to customer and shareholder criticism,” says Kerr. “Applying market disciplines over partially listed companies is also good for the taxpayers.” Given the enormity of the Government’s existing asset base – something like $250 billion – it’s “not essential for the government to own everything for ever”, said the judges. And given New Zealand’s current indebtedness and the need for capital to invest in key sectors such as education, health, welfare and new infrastructure projects, selling 49 percent of the SOEs made sense. Without denying the enormity of the economic issues facing New Zealand, this year’s Top200 judges were bullish about the leadership, ownership and strategic management trends transforming the country’s largest enterprises. The next two or three years will prove the point, one way or another. M


Collective thinking We believe in putting our heads together to harness the power of collective thinking. www.deloitte.co.nz

Š 2011 Deloitte. A member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited.


AROUND THE

SECTORS It was another tough year for organisations in many sectors. The earthquakes in Christchurch and the Rugby World Cup challenged and rewarded. Consumers remained hesitant to spend but at least our primary producers had good times, reeling in the rewards of high commodity prices across the globe.

COMMUNICATIONS & MEDIA

Photo: thinkstockphotos.com

16 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

Companies in the communications and media sector had another tough year with six of the total 11 entrants in this year’s Top200 list returning losses after tax. Only Telecom, Vodafone, Sky Network Television, Fairfax and TVNZ ended up in the black. Print-based media continued to feel the pressure from the ongoing migration to online communication. And advertisers remained cautious around spending. The Rugby World Cup provided a bright spot for TV as audiences switched on for the games. Revenues for the top five companies in this sector slipped by $39 million to $8.92 billion. But profits after tax suffered an even more serious blow, dropping back from $485 million to just below $398 million.


CONSTRUCTION & TRADE Fortunes in this sector remained mixed with some operators having an extremely busy year and others appearing to be on the verge of closing down. The need to rebuild after the Christchurch earthquakes has lifted demand in that region with operators reporting high volumes, strong forward workloads and what some have termed embarrassingly high margins. Such companies are in growth mode and have hiked staff numbers in recent months. Fletcher Building, the leading construction company in our list, lifted its revenue and profit after tax by 9.2 percent and 3.2 percent respectively. Elsewhere, however, demand is patchy. Many smaller operators are cutting costs to win work and surviving on increasingly thin margins. Revenues for our top five companies this year climbed from $10.83 billion to $11.79 billion while profits after tax rose by $36 million to $511 million.

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 17


FOOD & BEVERAGE

MANUFACTURING

Food and beverage companies constitute an eighth of all the companies in this year’s total Top200 list, underscoring once more the significance of this sector to New Zealand’s economy. A number of factors, including higher transport costs and consumers’ tighter collective grip on their wallets, delivered tough times for our food and beverage companies this year. Nine of the 25 companies, including Cerebos Gregg’s, ANZCO Foods and Goodman Fielder, reported lower revenues. Twelve of the same group of companies turned in lower profits after tax. Homing in on this year’s top five food and beverage companies, we see their combined turnover fall from $4.03 billion to $3.74 billion. Their after tax profits were slashed from $174.8 million to just $71.67 million. The truism remains that we have to eat no matter what the economy does, but we don’t seem to have wanted to spend more than strictly necessary this time round.

Manufacturing activity continued to inch upwards during the year reflecting, perhaps, a certain resilience in the nation’s business confidence. The BNZ-BusinessNZ Performance of Manufacturing Index (PMI) has stayed on the positive side of its bellwether 50-point indicator since it dipped below the line in August 2010. All five seasonally-adjusted indices which make up the overall PMI have flickered into expansion at times: all-important new orders, deliveries, employment, production and finished stocks. Overall, however, conditions still appear challenging. Of the 22 manufacturing companies in this year’s Top 200 list, eight revealed lower revenues: with Siemens NZ showing the largest revenue drop at 40 percent. Six of the 22 companies reported lower profits after tax. Together, this year’s top five manufacturing companies shed $409 million from their combined turnovers but still managed to add another $100 million to their after-tax take. The debate around New Zealand’s strength as a manufacturing nation, and the specific areas in which we should focus, looks set to continue.


OIL, GAS, MINERALS, ELECTRICITY & WATER With the recent grounding of the MV Rena on Astrolabe Reef off the Bay of Plenty coast, oil dominates the news for all the wrong reasons at the moment. But, by and large, the 21 companies in the oil, gas, minerals and electricity sector provided a bright spot among this year’s results. All but two of them – Genesis Power and Watercare Services – fronted up with profits after tax. Unlike many other sectors, the top five companies in this one managed to lift both their combined revenue and their collective profits after tax this year.

PRIMARY PRODUCTION The agricultural sector fuelled the New Zealand economy throughout 2011 with the meat, wool and dairy sectors all performing extremely well. This time last year, when we reported on the top five companies in this group, they had lifted their collective revenue by $1 billion. Another 12 months on, the revenue hike comes in at a stunning $2.5 billion. When it came to profits after tax, however, these companies collectively dropped $6.2 million from their books. While industry giant, Fonterra, lifted its profit after tax, this was offset by lower returns from Silver Fern Farms and Zespri Group: both of which reported losses for their latest tax periods. Clearly, strong commodity prices have provided an underlying boost to the agricultural sector’s results this year. But, as our judges commented during their sessions this year, smart management and strong governance are also increasingly playing their part. This year’s figures will only add to a much wider ongoing debate as to whether New Zealand should focus its energies in the primary production sector and its associated industries, as some would prefer, or look to carve out a niche for itself in fast-growing nonassociated technology areas, as others advocate.

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 19


RETAIL & WHOLESALE

TRANSPORT

Retail is detail, as our judges commented at one of their sessions, and this year many retailers have had to sweat the detail to make headway in the slow economy. Some clearly experienced a spike in business during the Rugby World Cup but, overall, tough conditions prevailed. Of the big five companies in this sector, Foodstuffs Auckland, South Island and the Wellington Co-operative all showed aftertax losses this year. Sector leader Woolworths New Zealand and The Warehouse Group managed to stay in the black. Overall profits after tax for these five companies more than halved down to $41.63 million compared with last year’s top five companies. This was on the back of a slight upturn in combined turnover from $14.9 million to $15.3 million.

New Zealand’s transport sector has long proved a rich source for lessons in how – and sometimes how not – to manage and govern our country’s top companies. This year’s list provides another bumper crop. Air New Zealand made a strong strategic commitment to linking its fortunes to the influx of international visitors for this year’s Rugby World Cup. And under the very capable guidance of group managing director Don Braid, logistics provider Mainfreight continued its push to create a global network for its business. Both Mainfreight and regular strong performer Port of Tauranga benefitted from the year’s strong commodity prices. From among this year’s top five Top200 transport sector companies, Auckland International Airport produced a stellar performance, lifting its revenue 10.8 percent to $402 million and its profit after tax by 239 percent to $100.76 million. Total revenues for the top five transport companies this year rose $458 million to $7.49 billion. This translated into combined after tax profits of $271.37 million: or $35 million less than for the previous year. M

20 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


We do both www.deloitte.co.nz

Š 2011 Deloitte. A member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited.


DELOITTE/MANAGEMENT MAGAZINE EXECUTIVE OF THE YEAR

Don Braid Twice the man

M

ainfreight group managing director Don Braid is back. He was the Deloitte/Management magazine Top 200 Executive of the Year in 2008. A repeat performance doesn’t happen often. But then, executives of Braid’s calibre don’t surface all that often either. Of all the Top 200 Executives of the Year, Braid is perhaps the most understated. But his accomplishments as the head of Mainfreight, this year’s Top 200

Company of the Year, cannot be. When he featured on this page three years ago he was called perhaps the most “self-effacing” of the CEOs who have lifted the Top 200 mantle. He doesn’t need to be. Braid is a leader of proven and consummate organisational skill, vision, drive, humanity and humility – a worthy disciple of the company’s wise founder and executive chairman, Bruce Plested, who once called his CEO “a very com-

EXECUTIVE OF THE YEAR AWARD JUDGES’ COMMENTS WINNER DON BRAID GROUP MANAGING DIRECTOR MAINFREIGHT

FINALIST NIGEL MORRISON

FINALIST JOHN WILLIAMSON

MANAGING DIRECTOR & CEO SKYCITY ENTERTAINMENT GROUP

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER HELLABY HOLDINGS

Nigel Morrison is transforming SkyCity. His appointment to the top job didn’t happen by chance. His knowledge and experience of the gaming sector is critical to the transformation of this previously successful enterprise that was showing signs of flagging fortunes. Morrison has a vision for taking the business forward outside of traditional gaming and the leadership skills to deliver on that vision. His international experience and strong communication skills make him a highly effective executive and a worthy finalist in this year’s Executive of the Year Award.

This year Hellaby Holdings’ CEO John Williamson has shown just how effective his leadership and business skills are. His company, which has promised more than it has delivered in recent years, is now showing the market a clean pair of performance heels. He has emphatically stepped up to fill the shoes of the company CEO. He is more than a change manager, though he has indeed effectively changed this investment-based business. Williamson has a clear view of what needed to be done at Hellaby and is successfully executing the strategies to deliver on that view.

22 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

Mainfreight’s Don Braid simply refuses to take his foot off the accelerator. He is an outstanding leader who understands his customers, his people and his business. He continues to deliver on the company’s ambitious global expansion plans. But while he grows the business, he remains true to his principles and Mainfreight’s belief in the importance of its employees and the environment in which we live. Braid is both an outstanding leader and a highly competent business manager. He was the Deloitte/Management magazine Top 200 Executive of the Year in 2008. It takes a very special leader to repeat that kind of performance – and this year he has.


Photo: Jan-Michael David

plete modern and old-fashioned leader wrapped up in one”. Braid has been with the business since 1994 when Mainfreight purchased Daily Freightways. He had worked there for the previous 16 years. Little wonder Braid is now acknowledged for his depth of industry knowledge and understanding. In his time at the Mainfreight helm, Braid has faithfully implemented the board’s long-range strategy to become the best in its business, in New Zealand and elsewhere in the world where it sets up office. He has helped take the company from Australasia to Asia, the United States and now Europe. When Mainfreight purchased the Netherlands-based Wim Bosman Group earlier this year, Braid said he expected

trade with Europe would surpass trade on both its Asia/USA/Asia and its Asia/ Australia/New Zealand/Asia trade lanes. He sees Mainfreight’s “100 year vision” as a cornerstone for developing global growth and trust in his company. “In Asia they identify with [the 100 year] vision immediately,” he said earlier this year. Braid exemplifies Mainfreight’s “egalitarian” but simultaneously performancebased values. Like most of the company’s owners and directors, he is proudly Kiwi. He wants to keep the company that way. When Mainfreight’s “blokey-kind of board”, as one commentator has called it, announced the retirement of two of its directors recently, Braid credited much of the company’s success to the strength of its board. Shrugging off suggestions that

some directors were too old and had been there too long he said simply; “their age and longevity” was crucial. “Replacing these men from a pool of retired businessmen and professional directors could significantly impact on your investment,” he told shareholders at the company’s AGM. Braid believes in Mainfreight’s disciplines of promoting from within and using a graduate recruitment programme as the first step towards staff moving from the floor to other roles in the business. There are no private offices at Mainfreight. “And no car park with my name on it,” he said in an interview earlier this year. Mainfreight’s success, according to Braid, is built on the passion and dedication of the company’s people. The comments ring truer coming from Braid than from most other senior executives in the marketplace – probably because the company’s business model emphatically eschews financial and other positionbased inequality. Can you name any other company that publishes the names of every one of its 3242 “team members” in its annual report? It is an accomplishment of which Braid feels distinctly proud. Braid is forthright, open, dedicated to Mainfreight and all its stakeholders – particularly its employees and customers. He does not suffer fools gladly, might be described as politically incorrect, but he is an honest leader who cares for his company, communities and the country. It is hard to see Braid being handed a knighthood as some of his equally highachieving Deloitte/Management magazine Executives of the Year have been. It is difficult to imagine him minding too much. M DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 23


DELOITTE/MANAGEMENT MAGAZINE COMPANY OF THE YEAR

Mainfreight T

he lessons of Mainfreight are many fold. That it should be chosen as the Deloitte/Management magazine Top 200 Company of the year could not be more appropriate. There are lessons to learn from this enterprise. Mainfreight and its approach to governance, leadership and strategy might, in another time and place, have featured in the classic corporate text From Good to Great written by America’s leading enterprise academic and writer, Jim Collins. Not for Mainfreight founder and executive chairman Bruce Plested the nonsense of importing executives from offshore and paying them moraledestroying and inappropriately high salaries. His company is now a $1.3 billion global enterprise. But it is also home-grown and, no one knows the business better. Not for him the putting of wise and experienced directors prematurely out to grass. Former chief executive and organisational mentor Don Rowlands stepped down from the board this year, aged 85. Mainfreight does what New Zealand needs more companies to do. It has built a business which it is now successfully taking it to the world. It does so by balancing its unique and non-negotiable in-house disciplines against an understanding of the benefits of incorporating aspects of the local business cultures in other countries. It operates 166 branches in Australia, through Asia, the United States and is now invading Europe. “It is,” says Plested, “our intention to extend our footprint to be located in all the major trading nations of the world.” And it is Mainfreight’s unswerving

24 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

commitment to maintaining and exporting its corporate culture, people ethos and service standards that delivers its success – a key lesson for Kiwi companies looking to tackle the world. Mainfreight’s climb to the top of the Top 200 mountain has been sure and steady. It has been threatening to break through for years. It took a world economic crisis to reveal the company’s true grit. Again in this year’s annual report Plested said: “… we have had great satisfaction in battling through the recession. Using every ounce of our ability and physical energy we have not only survived, but improved our market position…” His next paragraph, however, best illustrates the Mainfreight motivation. In describing the company’s achievement of improved market position and an increased tax paid profit for the year he said: “there were no mass redundancies, or enforced reduction of ‘head count’,” a description he called “revolting, uncaring, unfeeling” and one he thought would only ever be used by the “least successful of companies’ management”. Mainfreight had not, in its 32-year history, ever had to “inflict large-scale redundancies”, he added. Mainfreight is a people business, in the true and most comprehensive meaning of the word. It champions its people, runs a fair and rational remuneration policy, cares about education for its employees and the community at large, and cares for the health and safety of its people. But it also stretches. The company lists annual targets and anticipated achievements for shareholders and em-

ployees alike. It publishes its “targets, aspirations, hopes and aims” to give a “better understanding” of what the business plans to accomplish. “The targets are challenging and have exposed us to some criticism in the past for appearing to overreach ourselves or, in some cases, failing to achieve the goals,” says Plested. “If we do nothing about goal setting, that is what we will achieve.” Mainfreight exemplifies all the key practices and attributes that Collins identified as necessary to move good enterprises to greatness. Their strategies suggest an inclination to promote executives from within their ranks, to develop executives, and recruit and use directors who know their industry deeply and are wise enough to take their own advice, to promote more people-focused policies and to make a commitment to expanding offshore. M


Photo: Jan-Michael David

COMPANY OF THE YEAR AWARD JUDGES’ COMMENTS WINNER MAINFREIGHT

FINALIST KATHMANDU

FINALIST PORT OF TAURANGA

Mainfreight is driven to succeed. And what it has accomplished by turning itself into a global New Zealand enterprise is exceptional. That it has accomplished its strategic objectives in the prevailing wilted world economy is testament to the leadership and commercial skills of it directors, managers and employees. Mainfreight is a billion-dollar business that has worked consistently to achieve its global goals. At the same time it has maintained its business, cultural and organisational integrity. It is not just the Deloitte/ Management magazine Top 200 Company of the Year; it is a world-beater that New Zealand enterprises should seek to emulate.

Kathmandu’s focus on quality products underpins the company’s growing local and global success. Record sales and earnings, strong margin growth, increases in the total number of retail stores, and growth in same-store sales illustrate what can only be described as a stunning year’s performance. The company’s first full year listed on the New Zealand and Australian stock exchanges was both significant for the business and a measure of its future ambitions. This is a well led, innovative and focused enterprise. And its commitment to its brand development is helping to pushing its growth. Kathmandu is a great business that is harnessing the great outdoors.

The Port of Tauranga last docked as a finalist in the Deloitte/Management magazine Top 200 Company of the Year category in 2008. The fact only serves to show what an outstanding business this is. The judges said then, and repeated the comment this year, that the port is a worldclass performer. Once again the figures tell the story – with a 24 percent increase in revenue and an almost 54 percent growth in profit. The company continues to focus on efficiency, employee safety and strategic investment. The combination of these and other key indicators keeps the port ahead of the fleet. The Port of Tauranga is an outstanding enterprise that knows its business.

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 25


NZIM/EAGLE TECHNOLOGY YOUNG EXECUTIVE OF THE YEAR

Hamish McBeath Visionary young leader

H

amish McBeath has a vision for New Zealand manufacturing. “The country needs to re-embrace and re-build its manufacturing industries for a number of sound economic reasons,” he says. “Too many of our manufacturers fall over unnecessarily.” McBeath is the 2011 NZIM/Eagle Technology Young Executive of the Year. And he hopes winning the award will enhance the credibility and currency of his pro-manufacturing argument. As general manager of Pacific Coilcoaters, a $110 million business within Fletcher Building’s Steel Group, McBeath won the NZIM Northern Region young executive title on his way to taking out the National Award. Now he wants to be an ambassador for both the concept of the award and for local manufacturing. To illustrate his case for re-thinking manufacturing businesses he quotes his experience with Fletcher Steel’s wire mill

business which was due to be closed down. “Now it is one of the company’s most profitable units,” he says. New Zealand manufacturing can, says McBeath, make good money in the world market if it is properly targeted. “There are many products New Zealand can bring to the table on which they can make a lot of money. But they are niche, not long run, products.” His rationale is based, in part, on the jobs and export income that manufacturing creates. He admires the efficiency and effectiveness of the country’s rural sector but, he adds, many agriculture-based industries are not particularly labour intensive. And that is an economic disadvantage. McBeath’s career began in the Royal New Zealand Navy. He enrolled as a trainee officer, reached the rank of lieutenant and then left to join the commercial world. He found a shop-floor job as a shift manager at Fletcher Building’s Pacific Steel wire mill. Then a loss-making unit, after

his appointment as sales manager, it has since turned to profit. McBeath’s boss Paul Zuckerman, chief executive of Fletcher Building, describes him as a “young, innovative and high achieving [executive] who holds a senior leadership position within New Zealand’s largest listed company”. Brought up with a strong sense of responsibility, McBeath credits the navy with developing his leadership and management skills early in his career. “The navy provided an interesting foundation in strategy formulation,” he says. “The military’s strategy development is scenario-based and grounded in the basic principle of making sure you win. The outcome of not winning in business might be less severe, but it is still


a useful base principle to apply.” By constantly running scenarios around where his markets are tracking and contemplating likely competitor reactions and moves, he identifies new business opportunities early. The strategy provides either a competitive edge or a strengthened baseline position. McBeath believes in building high performing teams. His leadership style is open and honest and he tries to bring the right mixture of capabilities and personalities to provide team balance. “I focus on delegating effectively, setting clear performance goals and ex-

pected outcomes, and then coaching and supporting team members to success,” he says. “I am not interested in being the one with all the answers.” His greatest achievement so far has, he thinks, been to “deliver superior shareholder value through high-performing and safe employees”. He calls his communication style “open, down to earth and accessible”. The navy helped him appreciate the importance of this approach to personal communication. Tackling and completing an MBA in 2005 exposed McBeath to strategic

YOUNG EXECUTIVE OF THE YEAR AWARD JUDGES’ COMMENTS WINNER HAMISH MCBEATH GENERAL MANAGER PACIFIC COILCOATERS Hamish McBeath’s education in leadership began in the Royal New Zealand Navy where he quickly and willingly learned to lead by example and to alter his leadership style to meet different circumstances. He is a well qualified manager and leader who clearly articulates his values. McBeath describes himself as a coach for his people. He emphasises the importance of personal engagement, focusing on respect and clear communication. He stresses the importance of diversity as a means of avoiding like-minded thinking. McBeath’s vision is to keep manufacturing alive and well in New Zealand.

FINALIST MATTHEW (MATT) CARTER GENERAL MANAGER HR AND STUDENT SERVICES, OTAGO POLYTECHNIC Matt Carter is an outstanding human resources professional. He is humble and effective, and a highly capable leader who cares about his people. He understands the importance of diversity in building a creative and productive workplace. Carter is passionate about the role of learning. In addition to his role at the Otago Polytechnic, he has a broad involvement in the community.

thinking, and planning theories and models. He then completed a course on Advanced Mergers and Acquisitions at Australia’s Mt Eliza Business School in 2009. “Both courses benefitted me greatly,” he adds. McBeath’s leadership and people skills have worked to his advantage at Fletcher Building. It is one of the reasons the company involved him in the executive team that successfully acquired the Australian Crane Group for the company earlier this year. He played a pivotal role in negotiating a way through what was a “high profile, sensitive and complex hostile takeover”, according to Zuckerman. McBeath may be in the steel business but “I’m pretty strong on the environmental aspects of the business”, he says. “People see the steel industry as a massive consumer of power, but there is more to it than what meets the eye.” He is a founding member of the Sustainable Steel Council and sits on Fletcher Building’s Environmental External Reporting Committee. “Being green is good for the bottom line, particularly in the steel industry. We have made some tremendous savings by thinking seriously and honestly about the environment,” he adds. But that’s another story. For now, Hamish McBeath is convinced he made the right decision when he jumped ship for a career in the ups and downs of the commercial world. For one thing, he can spend more time with his wife and their one-year-old son. For another, he looks set to be one of New Zealand’s most outstanding commercial leaders in the not-too-distant future. M DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 27


Congratulations to our 17th NZIM/Eagle Technology

Young Executive of the Year

2011

Hamish McBeath General Manager, Pacific Coilcoaters

Hamish McBeath, general manager Pacific Coilcoaters, was honoured alongside New Zealand’s leading business individuals and organisations at the Deloitte/Management magazine Top 200 Awards in Auckland on November 24 2011. Management development compliments of NZIM. Travel prize to London compliments of Singapore Airlines.

www.nzim.co.nz • www.eagle.co.nz • www.management.co.nz/top200 PRINCIPAL SPONSORS:

IN ASSOCIATION WITH:


“ Hamish is a leader who has well articulated values, emphasises the importance of staff engagement and stresses diversity.�

Congratulations Hamish McBeath General Manager, Pacific Coilcoaters

2011 NZIM/Eagle Technology Young Executive of the Year We are proud to invest in the leaders of tomorrow with our ongoing support of the NZIM/Eagle Technology Young Executive of the Year Awards. After all, they are the future of New Zealand business.

Auckland: 09 639 0600 | Wellington: 04 802 1400 www.eagle.co.nz


QBE SALUTES  WAYNE BOYD BRIGHTEST STAR FOR 2011

QBE-049 Rapport B

You’ve been named QBE Insurance Chairperson of the Year 2011 for very good reason: you’ve been able to achieve outstanding results, rising to great heights above both the economy and your competitors. You’re a star! Congratulations.

Proud to support the Deloitte/Management Magazine Top 200 awards .


QBE CHAIRPERSON OF THE YEAR

Wayne Boyd

W

hen it comes to reviewing a company performance after a tricky but successful corporate manoeuvre, it’s often difficult to identify who made the greatest contribution – the board collective, the chairman or the chief executive. Telecom has faced just such a challenging change programme over the past five to six years. And in the minds of this year’s Top 200 panel of judges, there is no doubt that the man most responsible for the resolution of the

Telecom organisational conundrum was its retiring chairman, Wayne Boyd. He won’t see it that way because he is not an egotistical man and has frequently credited the full board, the CEO and the senior executive team for doing the job. The telecommunications industry issues involved in the restructure of Telecom were extremely complex. The company was New Zealand’s largest listed enterprise. It was also effectively a government monopoly. Boyd’s legal background, financial

knowledge, strategic skills and experience, and his deep understanding of governance and leadership made him the best chairman for the job – both in theory and in practice. The change process had to be properly managed given the economic and political implications of getting it wrong. “Boyd did a superb job,” said this year’s judges. Boyd is one of New Zealand’s most respected corporate directors and board chairmen. He has chaired some of New DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 31


QBE CHAIRPERSON OF THE YEAR

Zealand’s largest enterprises including Meridian Energy, Auckland International Airport and Freightways. He was appointed to the Telecom board in 2004 and took over the chairmanship from Dr Roderick Deane in 2006. Chairing Telecom after 2006 was never going to be easy. The national politics that went with the job would see to that. Observers wondered why he even volunteered to step up. But Boyd’s reputation has in large measure been built on his willingness to tackle difficult assignments, particularly

when they are in the national interest. Successive governments signalled their desire for change at the telecommunications giant – and so it has been. Once accepted, Boyd never stepped back from the task at hand. Now, with the organisation split in two, he is moving on. Wayne Boyd is no stranger to this award category. He has been chosen as a finalist three times. Apart from his corporate leadership he has been deeply involved with the administration of New Zealand sport through his directorship of Sport and Recreation New Zealand (SPARC) and chairmanship of

the New Zealand Hockey Federation. He was also an independent director of Ngai Tahu Maori Trust for 10 years and chairman of both Shotover Jet and the New Zealand Blood Service – another government job. Boyd is held in high regard by his peers for his governance skills and for his unflinching commitment to best practice governance. He is a competent negotiator but an approachable individual with whom executives reportedly enjoy working. He is now the 2011 QBE Top 200 Chairman of the Year. M

CHAIRPERSON OF THE YEAR AWARD JUDGES’ COMMENTS

WINNER WAYNE BOYD

FINALIST TED VAN ARKEL

FINALIST JOAN WITHERS

Wayne Boyd is never afraid to take or make the governance leadership hard calls. Separating Telecom into two businesses under his watch was bound to be a testing exercise. Rather than shy away, he accomplished the objectives with skill and organisational aplomb. His chairmanship of Telecom has been exemplary in difficult circumstances, but he retires from his role as chairman leaving two companies well structured for the new regulatory environment. His past chairmanship of other major New Zealand enterprises such as Auckland International Airport and Meridian Energy has been equally outstanding. Boyd is highly regarded by his peers, an exemplar of best practice governance and a worthy winner of this award.

Ted van Arkel has successfully made the transition from top management to chairman of the board in a relatively short space of time. His effective chairmanship of such well-performing companies as Charlie’s and Restaurant Brands points to the depth of his food/retailing sector experience and knowledge. His board chairmanship skills have also been extended to the education sector as chairman of Unitec. Important skills to have as tough trading conditions continue.

As the chair of two of New Zealand’s larger companies, Auckland International Airport and Mighty River Power, Joan Withers commands admiration and respect for her governance and leadership skills. She is highly regarded for her understanding of the skills required to be both an effective senior executive and an independent director. Withers is both a team leader and a team builder with a reputation for working well with the CEOs of the enterprises she chairs.

32 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


The Top 200 Awards recognise excellence in New Zealand business. We congratulate those whose commitment and hard work have raised them to the top in their respective fields. At Kensington Swan we too celebrate excellence and are proud of the achievements of our people and our firm which is recognised for excellence in a number of leading directories. Our greatest recognition comes from our clients. ‘This is a very forward-thinking firm, which really adds value to its services and advice.’

CHAMBERS AND PARTNERS

‘I rate the firm’s technical ability highly, they have good knowledge, expertise and are definitely innovative.’

IFLR1000

‘The firm is business-oriented and always gets to the nub of the issue very quickly with succinct and relevant advice. The service is worth every penny.’ CHAMBERS AND PARTNERS

AU C K L A N D

W E L L I N G TO N

K E N S I N G TO N S WA N . C OM


KENSINGTON SWAN RESPONSIBLE GOVERNANCE AWARD

Vodafone New Zealand Stakeholder Commitment

S

uch is Vodafone’s corporate commitment to responsible governance that it has been a finalist in the Kensington Swan Responsible Governance Award and its predecessor category six times since 2001. It finally won the award last year and repeated its success this year. Vodafone was a finalist in the Top 200 Business Ethics Award in 2001. It returned as a finalist in the Kensington Swan Award in 2006 and has been a finalist ever since. As the judges said this year, Vodafone provides New Zealand’s “benchmark of best practice” when it comes to responsible governance. The company’s commitment to responsible governance is total and global. As its entry to this year’s Top 200 award explains, Vodafone’s “founding ethical principles are enshrined within our Business Principles which are set within the Vodafone Code of Conduct”. This code explains how employees should apply the principles in practice. The Code and the Principles are both global Vodafone policies. As it was last year, Vodafone’s success this year is in large measure based on outstanding examples of applied stakeholder commitment. Vodafone’s documentation, communication and implementation of organisation-wide performance standards are rigorously led and managed. The company operates an externally facilitated whistle-blower programme called “Speak Up”, which is coupled with a Duty to Report Policy that is included under its Code of Conduct. Speak Up is anonymous and widely promoted via the company’s global internal audit team. And, says Vodafone CEO Russell

34 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

Stanners, the company’s global sustainability reporting is recognised as best practice. The group publishes a global sustainability report which is supplemented by local operating market reports. The judges this year agreed that Vodafone’s approach to dealing with cybersafety and txt bullying combined commercial decision-making with a fine balance between precompetitive issues and taking an opportunity to differentiate the company as a responsible service provider. “Txt bullying is a serious issue,” said Stanners, and Vodafone approaches the issue on an industry-wide basis “to ensure compliance and consistency between operators”. In 2006 the company urged data protection company NetSafe to set up a working group including itself, Telecom and the police to standardise the approach to txt bullying complaints and agree a process for handing over complaints between different mobile networks. Vodafone has since shared this information and its own processes

with new mobile operators. In July this year Vodafone hosted an open forum of New Zealand’s leading experts in e-learning and cybersafety to discuss mobile phone use in schools. The outcomes of the forum have been shared openly and the forum linked to the NetSafe Cyberbullying Taskforce. An outcome of the company’s commitment to solving the txt bullying problem is the Vodafone Blacklist. A process and solution for combating txt bullying, this won the Consumer Service Innovation Award at the Global Telecoms Business Innovation Awards in London in June this year. Vodafone also won credit this year for its partnership with Parents Inc in helping to up-skill young people on safe and responsible use of technology. Vodafone openly discloses New Zealand statistics on bullying and harassment complaints from customers. Its Corporate Responsibility report has since 2006 included independently audited statistics and these show a dramatic 40 percent reduction in complaints. M


RESPONSIBLE GOVERNANCE AWARD JUDGES’ COMMENTS WINNER VODAFONE NEW ZEALAND

FINALIST AIR NEW ZEALAND

FINALIST ASB BANK

STAKEHOLDER COMMITMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES

COMMUNITY SUPPORT

Vodafone continues to lead the way in demonstrating exemplary responsible governance. It provides the benchmark in best practice to which other New Zealand businesses might aspire. Stakeholder commitment is driven from the top with stakeholder engagement as a key priority, monitored monthly and formally reported twice a year. Vodafone is this year’s winner both for its commitment to responsible governance and for its work on cybersafety, particularly addressing txt bullying. The company’s performance across all criteria on which companies in this category are measured, stacked up in spades.

Air New Zealand chief executive Rob Fyfe is an outspoken advocate who encourages New Zealand business to take more action to back up the country’s clean, green image. Fyfe has been a spokesperson for Pure Advantage which launched in July this year advocating “green growth for greater wealth”. The Air New Zealand Environmental Trust is an innovative way of dealing with the issue of carbon offsets by offering passengers the opportunity to donate to the Trust’s specified environmental programmes. The airline in turn tops up the fund by calculating the carbon-offset value of its employees’ travel and injecting several hundreds of thousands of dollars a year into the Trust. A Green Team of 3000 employees gets involved in a range of clean-up, planting and other environmental projects. Air New Zealand has successfully tested a ‘generation two’ non-food bio-fuel in flight. It is changing flight paths and working more closely with air traffic control, substantially reducing fuel burn. Reducing moisture and consequently the weight of aircraft in flight has cut fuel consumption, as has the decision to invest $30 million attaching winglets to its 767s. Air New Zealand’s environmentally linked decisions have both cut costs and enhanced revenue.

ASB Bank invests more than $10 million a year into local communities. This year, this represents 3.8 percent of its pre-tax profit and is more than five times the London Benchmarking Group Australian/New Zealand average of 0.63 percent. This equates to A$1862 per full-time employee against an average of A$322. ASB staff can choose the charities they support with ASB matching fundraising by up to $10,000 per chosen charity. ASB donated $1.5 million to the Red Cross in response to the Christchurch earthquakes and then led the industry in March with the introduction of a $250 million investment to kick-start the Christchurch rebuild. ASB GetWise, a financial literacy programme delivered free to primary and secondary schools, involves independent, trained facilitators delivering interactive workshops on the fundamentals of savings and sound financial decision-making. Begun in 2010 the programme has already reached over 130,000 students nationwide. ASB’s sustainability report measures and actively targets carbon emissions. It achieved a reduction in emissions of 16 percent in 2009 and a further 12 percent in 2010. ASB Bank’s long-term partnership with St John Ambulance is helping to build safer, more caring communities.

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 35


MARSH MOST IMPROVED PERFORMANCE

Kathmandu O

utdoor clothing and travel equipment retailer Kathmandu first appeared on the Deloitte/ Management magazine Top 200 horizon in 2002. Its potential was recognised when it won a place as a finalist in the then Deloitte Emerging Enterprise of the Year Award. The promise identified a decade ago has been realised. The company is becoming a global player in the outdoor equipment and adventure market. This year Kathmandu showed what it can do, even when the highly competitive retail market was down and

36 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

panting for patrons. Its outstanding performance has earned the company recognition with the 2011 Marsh Most Improved Performance Award – all this in its first full year trading as a listed company on both the New Zealand (NZX) and the Australian (ASX) stock exchanges. Kathmandu is another great Top 200 example of a New Zealand enterprise that is intent on becoming a big player in the export market. As company chairman James Strong said in this year’s annual report: “Kathmandu will now move forward as the market leader in the

outdoor travel and adventure category and make further investment to enhance future growth opportunities.” The company grew its sales by 23.5 percent to $306 million in the year. Its net profit before extraordinaries was up 47 percent and gross profit margin improved 65.5 percent. Same store sales in both New Zealand and Australia grew by double figures and it opened 14 percent more stores across Australasia. The performance is significant given the general economic environment and, as Strong also put it, “the challenging


circumstances now facing the retail sector” as consumers cut their personal debt levels and rein in spending. With this year’s performance and the Top 200 Award under its belt, Kathmandu plans to drive sales growth by rolling out more stores in New Zealand and Australia. It also wants to optimise its existing store footprint. According to Strong it will also introduce new products and develop its online capabilities. “The success of these strategies to date, combined with the delivery of the new Kathmandu brand strategy over the next two years will support the ex-

pansion of both the Kathmandu retail footprint and the range of product that we offer,” he added. The judges this year rated Kathmandu’s performance outstanding on all the criteria they had to consider to find finalists and a winner in this award category. It was, they said, simply an outstanding performance in a very difficult market. “Actually, it was a stellar performance,” said one judge. The company’s focus on selling quality products, its management of cash and borrowings to reduce debt and its generally sound management processes all contributed to the result.

The judges also commented on the company’s positive approach to environmental management and its employment policies. It was, said the judges, a great allround performance that suggests this newly listed company is serious about growth and the future of its product and service offering. Company CEO Peter Halkett told shareholders this year that, while Kathmandu recognises and is cautious about the uncertain economic outlook ahead, “our performance through the past year gives us confidence that our focused growth strategies should continue”. M

MOST IMPROVED PERFORMANCE AWARD JUDGES’ COMMENTS WINNER KATHMANDU

FINALIST BALLANCE AGRI-NUTRIENTS

Retail is tough, but Kathmandu is tougher. In a very flat market on both sides of the Tasman, this retailer of outdoor clothing and accessories dressed for the occasion. It grew total sales by 23.5 percent, same store sales by 16 percent and net profit before extraordinaries by 47 percent. That is a fantastic result in any economic climate. The good news does not stop there. Kathmandu expanded its product range and opened more stores, lifting its portfolio in New Zealand, Australia and the UK to a total of 111. Kathmandu dresses to kill the competition and deserves to win the Marsh Most Improved Performance Award for 2011.

Strong demand for fertiliser by farmers flush with funds from strong commodity prices delivered Ballance into greener pastures and super profits this year. Favourable market conditions drove a 19 percent increase in sales volumes. Management took the best possible advantage of an excellent growth opportunity, expanded its product range, made strategic investments and turned in a robust performance that deserves recognition. Profit after tax increased by 375 percent and the company paid out the largest rebate in its history.

FINALIST HELLABY HOLDINGS After four years of business and balance sheet reconstruction, Hellaby Holdings put its best foot forward this year. The company’s diversified portfolio of New Zealand industrial, distribution and retail businesses turned in a 49 percent better profit, dramatically reduced debt and boosted shareholder returns substantially. A great all-round performance that supports the directors’ claim that the company has a “new sense of purpose” and is working to accomplish its “vision to be a leading Australasian investor”.

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 37


Most Improved Performance Award 2.0 Marsh is proud to be the sponsor of the Most Improved Performance Award at the Deloitte / Management Magazine Top 200. As the world’s leading insurance broker and risk advisor, we recognise the importance of being the highest performing organisation within your field. We therefore acknowledge those who are striving to become New Zealand’s top organisations. Congratulations to the winner, we salute your achievements. Call 0800 627 744 or email info.marshnz@marsh.com or visit www.marsh.co.nz for a comprehensive overview of our credentials.


WORKBASE BEST GROWTH STRATEGY

Ryman Healthcare

R

yman Healthcare turned in a stunning performance in 2011 – proving yet again the potency and consistency of its business growth strategy. Last year Ryman was a finalist in the Top 200 Best Growth Strategy Award. This year it took out the winner’s trophy. This aged-care specialist has been spectacularly successful since it was started by founders Kevin Hickman and John Ryder in 1982. It listed on the NZX in 1999. Since then its sharemarket value has increased 796 percent – a clear indication that investors are now convinced the company’s business model works. Ryman is one of New Zealand largest construction companies. The foundation of its strategy calls for the

40 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

development, design, construction and operation of all the facilities it builds for the long-stay care of the elderly – a rapidly expanding market. Ryman’s success, as both media commentators and this year’s judges have pointed out, is based on the consistent application of its business model, growth in the aged care sector and a board that supports the executive team in its focused implementation of the company’s ambitious growth plans. And now Ryman is dipping its toe in Australian waters. The annual increase in the number of units built and beds provided is, as company chairman David Kerr wrote in his annual report, necessary to meet

the “growing demand Ryman is experiencing”. The company achieved its new build rate in 2011 and effectively boosted sales by 50 percent, beating its medium term target of 15 percent underlying profit growth. The company’s growth strategy hasn’t changed since the company listed. It intends to be New Zealand’s leading provider of retirement and healthcare facilities for the elderly. “Our approach to sustaining longterm growth is to grow our capability every year,” says Kerr. Ryman’s approach to managing its finances is conservative to “ensure it can effectively execute” its growth plans.


Consequently, the business is currently in the “strongest financial position” it has ever been. And now the company plans to try out its winning Kiwi market strategy in Australia. The board and executive team are both confident that a Ryman village will appeal to Australia’s increasing number of elderly. “We are acutely aware that new markets present new challenges,” Kerr wrote, assuring shareholders that Ryman will build only one new development once it secures its first parcel of land. “We have learned a great deal about the Australian market already through our research and believe in the oppor-

tunity to be very significant in the long term,” he added. The company also focuses on the development and reward of its employees to ensure it can deliver a quality product and service. “We always attain our aged care certifications with very good results for each village,” wrote Kerr. “We actively encourage and financially reward additional training undertaken by our staff.” New Zealand and Australia are entering a prolonged period of elderly population growth. Ryman is confident that its future prospects are exciting, so long as it holds true to its strategic approach and single-minded focus on doing the things it does well. M

BEST GROWTH STRATEGY AWARD JUDGES’ COMMENTS WINNER RYMAN HEALTHCARE

FINALIST PORT OF TAURANGA

Ryman Healthcare’s growth strategy is proven, consistent and it delivers outstanding results year after year. This year is no exception. Ryman’s deep understanding of the retirement and aged-care business suggests time has not wearied this successful enterprise. The company plans long term, is very clear on strategy, is highly disciplined and executes superbly. Shareholders have reaped the rewards of the company’s commitment to consistently implementing a proven business model and growth strategy that leaves little to chance. The result is a 25 percent compound annual profit growth over the past five years.

Favourable primary industry markets, particularly for dairy products and forestry, helped the Port of Tauranga cream its North Island competitors again this year. This is a smart port operator that has consistently invested in its infrastructure to ensure that it is best placed to attract shipping and transport trade. The company’s commitment to strategic positioning has delivered it a berth as a Top 200 category finalist or winner several times over the years. The Port’s consistent strategic approach has helped it win the war against competitors and deliver excellent results.

FINALIST SKYCITY ENTERTAINMENT GROUP A transformative set of change strategies across the organisation have rejuvenated SkyCity’s fortunes. They look set to underpin future growth. SkyCity focused on its Auckland operations to capitalise on the business from the Rugby World Cup. Its investments in superior accommodation, new dining and other facilities are all part of a strategy to widen the experience available in its Auckland casino’s inner-city precinct. The strategy looks set to deliver future shareholder rewards.

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 41


· Better communication with customers · Fewer mistakes and less wastage · Improved productivity

Workplace literacy training - built to meet your business needs Low employee literacy, numeracy and communication skills are undermining New Zealand businesses’ efforts to improve performance and productivity. The training is designed to build the skills employees need to do their jobs effectively and meet your business objectives. Plus government support covers up to 90% of training costs. Contact Nick Miles at Workbase on 09 361 3800 or email nmiles@workbase.org.nz

Making a difference

www.workbase.org.nz


DESIGNWORKS VISIONARY LEADER

Lloyd Morrison Advocate for change

L

loyd Morrison has been visionary across many fields of interest for many years. He is a passionate New Zealander and champion of the interests of the country. He saved the New Zealand Stock Exchange from being sold to overseas interests and energised others to help transform the exchange for the better. As a consequence, the NZX is now a more successful enterprise and its existence retains a very important equities market in New Zealand. A vibrant economy needs a vibrant capital market. Never afraid to lead a charge for change, Morrison is articulate, outspoken and always willing to be held to account. His campaign to create a new flag for New Zealand seemed almost prophetic this year – witness the way Kiwis adopted flag symbolism to support their effort to bring home the Rugby World Cup. Lloyd Morrison was born in Palmerston North, and educated at Wanganui Collegiate and the University of Canterbury. He began his career in stockbroking, then moved on to investment banking and fund management through his company Morrison & Co which now manages Infratil, which he established in 1994. Morrison is a business visionary who appreciates both the need and the opportunity for New Zealanders to invest in the nation’s infrastructure assets and businesses.

Infratil, his vehicle to accomplishing this, now invests in infrastructure both at home and abroad. He is not so much a trader, as an investor who takes long-term investment positions in essential enterprises, understanding that the long view provides the greatest prospects for the future of the nation. Morrison is a patron of the arts, involved with and supporting his community through sport and other activities

and he walks the talk. He has been consistently committed to promoting a dialogue around building a better New Zealand. His strong sense of positive nationalism is compelling and relevant to our times. His support for the building of a strong superannuation fund for New Zealand is just another expression of his concern for our future. He wants New Zealand to be a nation of owners, not just workers. M DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 43


Paul Brock, Chief Executive, Kiwibank


JUDGES

The Judges

TOP 200

Janine Smith is a principal of The Boardroom Practice and a professional company director in both the public and private sector. She is currently chair of AsureQuality, chair of McLarens Young NZ, deputy chair of Kordia Group, and a director of The Warehouse Group and New Zealand Steel and Tube. She previously held executive director positions in Arnott’s New Zealand and Telecom Directories. Smith specialises in boardroom practice, strategic planning, organisational development and organisational change issues for boards and management. She is an alumna of London Business School and the University of Auckland.

46 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

Roger J Kerr is a director and shareholder in Asia-Pacific Risk Management, an advisory firm specialising in interest rates, debt, foreign exchange and corporate treasury management, and ETOS, a company which manages outsourced treasury services. With 29 years’ investment banking and financial markets experience, he is an advisory board member of the New Zealand Government Debt Management Office, board member of the National Provident Fund, chairman of Trust Investments Management and of PIE Funds Management, a director of Select Access New Zealand and a trustee of Auckland City Mission Foundation.

Neil Paviour-Smith has over 20 years’ experience in various roles in domestic equity markets. He is managing director of NZX firm Forsyth Barr, having previously been research director, and following portfolio management and research roles with Westpac Investment Management and National Mutual Funds Management. He is a director of New Zealand Exchange and of the New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants. He is a Fellow of the Institute of Finance Professionals NZ Inc and formerly chairman of the NZ Society of Investment Analysts 1999-2001. He is a member of the NZX, the Institute of Directors, the Institute of Chartered Secretaries NZ and the CFA Institute.


RESPONSIBLE GOVERNANCE AWARD

Doug Matheson MNZM has over 20 years’ experience in a wide range of governance positions in New Zealand and overseas. He is a member of the NZIM Foundation Executive and a member of the Massey University Graduate School of Business Advisory Board. He is a Fellow of the Institute of Directors and Life Fellow of NZIM.

Rodger Spiller has extensive experience and a doctorate in responsible investment and business. He heads Money Matters and is a wealth management adviser. Spiller also presents keynotes and training on leadership and increasing ROI from training. He is a director of the Responsible Investment Association Australasia and Oxfam (NZ).

Duncan Paterson is CEO and founder of CAER – Corporate Analysis. Enhanced Responsibility, the not-for-profit ESG research organisation based in Canberra, Australia. He has worked extensively in the field of responsible investment, both in Australia and in the UK with EIRIS – Experts in Responsible Investment Solutions. Paterson is also president of the Responsible Investment Association Australasia (RIAA), a director of the Association for Sustainable and Responsible Investment in Asia (ASrIA), and a member of FINSIA’s Managed Funds & Super Advisory Group.

YOUNG EXECUTIVE OF THE YEAR AWARD

Reg Birchfield is a business journalist and publisher. As a founding director of Fourth Estate Holdings in 1971, he was editor and publisher of National Business Review, the NZ Business Who’s Who, Capital Letter and other publications. He established Profile Publishing, publisher of NZ Management and other magazines, in 1984. He is now a director of RJMedia and a Life Fellow of the New Zealand Institute of Management.

Jo Brosnahan is the founding chair of Leadership NZ. She is also chair of Landcare Research and Northpower Fibre, and a director of a number of companies and organisations, including carboNZero. She was a CEO in local government for 14 years, initially of the Northland Regional Council, and then, from 1996, of the Auckland Regional Council.

Sharon McCook is group manager, research partnerships at the Health Research Council of New Zealand, the agency responsible for managing the Government’s investment in health research. She was Young Executive of the Year (Northern Region) for 2010. She also serves on the board of the Children’s Autism Foundation.

Tim Miles has extensive commercial experience within New Zealand and internationally. His career includes roles as managing director PGG Wrightson, chief technology officer of Vodafone Group, chief executive and chairman of Vodafone UK and CEO of Vodafone NZ. He has served as a director of Goodman Property Trust and chairman of Equity Partners Media and Communications. He is an advisory trustee of Leadership NZ.

Judges who had a personal interest in any of the companies they were assessing, declared a conflict of interest and did not vote with respect to those companies.

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 47


CRITERIA

Criteria N

Z Management magazine’s listing of New Zealand’s largest organisations includes publicly listed companies and larger unlisted companies required to disclose audited financial statements, including New Zealand subsidiaries and branches of overseas companies. It also includes producer boards, cooperatives, local authority trading enterprises and stateowned enterprises. To be included in the Top 200, organisations must operate for a commercially determined profit and be liable for tax on earnings. Companies fully owned by another New Zealand company are excluded. All figures are the latest available, verified and audited. • Revenue: as disclosed in the entity’s Statement of Income or equivalent. Includes sales (excluding gross commission sales), rent, dividends, share of income from associated companies and interest received. • Profit After Tax: includes equity accounted profit and profit attributable to non controlling (minority) interests. • EBITDA: earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation and impairments of property plant or equipment or intangible assets. • EBIT: earnings before interest and tax, includes unusual income and expense items. Not shown for the financial institutions. • Return On Revenue: calculated by profit before interest and tax divided by revenue. Where no profit figures are shown, this calculation is not applicable as indicated by N/A. • Total Assets: as disclosed in the entity’s financial statements. Includes current and non-current assets, investments, tangible and intangible assets, deferred tax assets and goodwill.

48 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

• Total Equity: as disclosed in the entity’s financial statements including non controlling (minority) interests. For New Zealand branches of overseas companies, the amount shown as owing to head office is taken as deemed equity. • Return on Total Equity/Total Assets: calculated by profit after-tax divided by average total equity/total assets over the past two years. Where an entity is in its first year of operation the current year total equity/total assets figure has been used as an approximate. • Proprietorship Ratio: Total Equity (see above) divided by average total assets over the past two years expressed as a percentage. • Total Employees: New Zealand staff who work more than 30 hours a week. Includes staff of wholly owned subsidiaries. GENERAL • Companies that have operated less than six months are not included in this listing. • Majority shareholdings greater than 50 percent by other New Zealand entities are indicated in brackets. A key to these abbreviations follows the listing. • A * indicates companies that are more than 50 percent overseas-controlled. • Not disclosed (N/D) is used where figures were not disclosed by the company or disclosed but not able to be verified. • An (-) indicates the company was not ranked last year. FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS Includes banks, finance companies, insurance companies (life/ fire and general/ superannuation). These organisations are ranked on total assets and appear separately. The financial institution results are

based on the entity’s legal set of accounts and not those accounts which include funds under administration (ie, accounts which include assets that are not legally owned by that institution, but administered by it). • Revenue: as disclosed in the entity’s Statement of Income or equivalent but not reinsurance revenue (insurance companies). • Profit After Tax: is shown for information purposes only and no ranking is given. • Total Equity: as disclosed in the entity’s financial statements including non controlling (minority) interests. For New Zealand branches of overseas companies, the amount shown as owing to head office is taken as deemed equity. • Pre-tax Return on Revenue: calculated by profit before tax (and after interest) divided by revenue. Where no profit figures are shown, this calculation is not applicable as indicated by N/A. • Proprietorship Ratio: Total Equity (see above) divided by average total assets over the past two years expressed as a percentage. M

TAXATION CHANGES The Government announced in the Budget in May 2010 a change in corporate tax rate from 30c to 28c from the 2012 tax year. In addition, tax depreciation on buildings was disallowed from the 2012 income year. These changes have resulted in a one-off impact on the tax expense due to a recalculation of deferred tax by companies in their annual financial statements for the year ended on or after 31 May 2010. This has been reflected in the Top 200 figures for the 2010 year for companies with balance dates on or before 30th June and the 2011 year for the remainder.


Focus on strengths Murray Jack: Chairman, Deloitte

W

hat a difference a year makes. At the time of last year’s Deloitte/Management magazine Top 200 Awards the world and New Zealand were emerging cautiously from the aftermath of the GFC. Growth had returned and business sentiment was positive. A year on and the world is teetering on the brink of GFC round two; the European sovereign debt crisis is intensifying, US growth has stalled, and Australian business confidence lags that in New Zealand. Is Asia, and particularly China, strong enough to prevent the world tipping into a double dip recession? And we have had the Christchurch earthquake in February which has severely affected a region that makes up 10 percent of our economy. The response from all New Zealanders has been impressive and it was remarkable that the economy continued to grow through the first part of this year. Next year will bring a boost to the construction industry as the rebuild gathers momentum. In the meantime the impact on the Government’s balance sheet is material. The fact that our own adjustment process is not complete was reflected in the ratings downgrades delivered at the end of September. Household debt remains too high in a world that is deleveraging and facing sluggish growth for an extended period. We face an outlook that is uncertain. Yet we have many strengths. New Zealand is an easy place to do business,

our institutions are sound, we have natural advantages in food production, our economy is well integrated with Australia, and we are close to, and building ever closer linkages with Asia. New Zealand has many very successful enterprises, and many of them are recognised in the Top 200 Awards. It’s very much a Kiwi thing to think that success comes from luck. Sometimes it does, but usually it comes from hard work. Great companies share some common characteristics. • They have high aspirations and set challenging goals. They are never satisfied with where they are. They are always thinking about where they are going; how to develop market-leading products and services, how to turn market leadership into market dominance, how to drive superior returns to shareholders. • They place a premium on innovation and creativity. They understand that these lie at the heart of sustainable competitive advantage. Great companies have innovation at the core of their strategy, they take risks, they are prepared to fail, they are always learning. • They focus relentlessly on execution. Ideas are cool but they are nothing if they cannot be monetised. Great companies treat execution seriously, they measure performance at a granular level, they have a pace and energy that is infectious. • Leadership is always decisive. Great companies invest significantly in identifying and developing leadership talent. They recognise that leadership excellence marks the difference between success and failure. While many New Zealand companies have these characteristics our future success depends on having more. The World

Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report identifies our many strengths, but also our relative weaknesses. These are in infrastructure, innovation and business sophistication. The Government is investing significantly in upgrading our infrastructure. But business needs to take the lead in building our innovation capabilities and business sophistication. Developing an innovative culture is hard work. It requires aspiration, vision, a willingness to take risks and to fail, investment in the process, and different incentives. Our traditional #8 wire mentality is a barrier to true innovation in the business context. It conjures up a mindset that innovation is cheap, that it is luck, or a part-time activity that is not the result of a disciplined process. For truly innovative companies it is none of these. Similarly developing our business sophistication requires investment. As we embrace the Asian opportunity we must deepen our international marketing and distribution capabilities and build more complex value chains. We see this with Fisher & Paykel Appliances’ transformation of its manufacturing capability offshore. The management and leadership capabilities required to perform successfully step up a few notches. Faced with global uncertainty and anaemic economic growth prospects business could easily be pessimistic about the future. But I don’t see that. I see a business community that is well positioned and performing well in current conditions. It is not time to rest after coping with the past few years – we have had “cups of tea” in the past and watched as the rest of the world moved on. It is time to invest to take advantage of the opportunities ahead. M DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 49


TOP 200 A-Z LISTING

Abano Healthcare Group ...................................... 170 ABB ..................................................................... 137 AFFCO Holdings ..................................................... 33 AgResearch .......................................................... 183 Air New Zealand ...................................................... 5 Airways Corporation of New Zealand .................... 189 Alcatel-Lucent New Zealand ................................. 121 Alliance Group ....................................................... 24 Allied Foods (NZ) .................................................. 117 Amcor Packaging (New Zealand) .......................... 101 AMP NZ Office Trust ............................................. 200 ANZCO Foods ........................................................ 30 Aotea Energy ........................................................... 8 Aperio Group (New Zealand) ................................ 195 Apple Sales New Zealand ..................................... 110 Ashburton Trading Society .................................... 142 AsureQuality ........................................................ 196 Auckland International Airport ................................ 85 Avon Pacific Holdings ........................................... 184 Ballance Agri-Nutrients........................................... 48 Beca Group ............................................................ 78 Bidvest New Zealand .............................................. 72 Blue Star Group Holdings ....................................... 58 BP New Zealand Holdings ........................................ 7 Bridgestone New Zealand..................................... 150 Briscoe Group ........................................................ 80 British American Tobacco Holdings (NZ) ................ 108 Bunnings................................................................ 60 Bupa Healthcare New Zealand.............................. 163 CablePrice (NZ) .................................................... 186 Cadbury ............................................................... 116 Cavalier Corporation ............................................ 136 CDC Pharmaceuticals ........................................... 169 Cerebos Gregg’s ................................................... 182 Chevron New Zealand ............................................ 15 Christchurch City Holdings ...................................... 52 Coca-Cola Amatil (NZ) ............................................ 66 Coles Group New Zealand Holdings ...................... 168 Combined Rural Traders Society .............................. 37 Compass Group New Zealand .............................. 198 Contact Energy....................................................... 12 Datacom Group...................................................... 50 DB Breweries ......................................................... 73 Delegat’s Group ................................................... 134 DGL Investments .................................................... 39 DHL Holdings (New Zealand) ................................ 161 Dow AgroSciences (NZ) ........................................ 197 Downer EDI Engineering Group ............................ 135 DSE (NZ) ................................................................ 99 Dunedin City Holdings .......................................... 128 Ebos Group ............................................................ 25 Exego (NZ) Holdings ............................................. 144 ExxonMobil New Zealand Holdings ......................... 16 Fairfax New Zealand Holdings ................................ 57 Farmlands Trading Society ....................................... 53 Fernhoff ............................................................... 124 Fisher & Paykel Appliances Holdings ....................... 32 Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Corporation................... 67 Flavoured Beverages Group Holdings ...................... 83 Fletcher Building ...................................................... 2 Fonterra Co-operative Group .................................... 1 Foodstuffs (Auckland) ............................................... 6 Foodstuffs (Wellington) Co-operative ...................... 11 Foodstuffs South Island ............................................ 9 Ford Motor Company of New Zealand .................... 94 Freightways ............................................................ 97 Frucor Beverages .................................................... 82

Fuji Xerox New Zealand........................................ 155 Fulton Hogan ......................................................... 10 General Cable Holdings NZ................................... 125 Genesis Power ....................................................... 17 Goodman Fielder New Zealand............................... 34 Goodman Property Trust ....................................... 199 Goodyear & Dunlop Tyres (NZ) .............................. 175 GR Media Holdings .............................................. 174 Hallenstein Glasson Holdings................................ 146 Harvey Norman Stores (NZ) .................................... 46 Hellaby Holdings .................................................... 74 Hewlett-Packard New Zealand ................................ 42 Holden New Zealand ............................................ 109 Honda New Zealand............................................. 194 Housing New Zealand ............................................ 35 IBM New Zealand .................................................. 90 Infratil .................................................................... 14 Ingram Micro New Zealand Holdings ...................... 54 ITW New Zealand................................................. 188 JB Hi-Fi NZ ........................................................... 172 Juken New Zealand .............................................. 122 Kathmandu Holdings ............................................ 107 Kimbyr Investments .............................................. 192 Kiwi Income Property Trust.................................... 157 Kordia Group ....................................................... 126 Kura ....................................................................... 62 Landcorp Farming................................................. 138 Linde Holdings New Zealand ................................ 133 Lion Nathan Wines and Spirits New Zealand ......... 141 Livestock Improvement Corporation ...................... 176 Mainfreight ............................................................ 26 Market Gardeners ................................................ 112 MARS New Zealand ............................................. 160 Mazda Motors of New Zealand............................. 145 McDonald’s Restaurants (New Zealand) ................ 154 Mercedes-Benz New Zealand................................ 173 Meridian Energy ..................................................... 13 Methanex New Zealand ......................................... 55 Michael Hill International........................................ 70 Mighty River Power ................................................ 22 Millstream Equities ............................................... 100 Mitre 10 New Zealand............................................ 59 Mitsubishi Motors New Zealand ........................... 149 Nestle New Zealand ............................................... 76 New Zealand Breweries .......................................... 86 New Zealand Investment Holdings ........................ 171 New Zealand Post .................................................. 28 New Zealand Railways Corporation ........................ 36 New Zealand Sugar Company............................... 120 New Zealand Wool Services International.............. 190 Newmont Waihi Gold ........................................... 164 Nobilo Holdings ................................................... 151 Noel Leeming Holdings........................................... 64 Norske Skog Tasman............................................. 104 Northpower ......................................................... 140 Nuplex Industries ................................................... 21 NZ Poultry Enterprises ............................................ 77 NZ Snack Food Holdings ....................................... 123 NZPM Group ........................................................ 131 Oceana Gold Holdings (New Zealand)..................... 84 OfficeMax Holdings ................................................ 88 Open Country Dairy ................................................ 68 Opus International (NZ) .......................................... 92 Oregon Group ........................................................ 69 Orica Investments (NZ) ......................................... 102 Pact Group (NZ) ................................................... 106 Pan Pac Forest Products ........................................ 113

Panasonic New Zealand ....................................... 147 Pepsico New Zealand Holdings ............................. 193 Pfizer New Zealand .............................................. 187 PGG Wrightson ...................................................... 27 PMP (NZ) ............................................................. 127 Port of Tauranga ................................................... 153 Ports of Auckland ................................................. 167 Powerco ................................................................. 95 Pumpkin Patch ....................................................... 96 Radius Health Group ............................................ 181 Rakon .................................................................. 158 Ravensdown Fertiliser Co-operative ........................ 38 Redeal ................................................................. 130 Renaissance Corporation ...................................... 148 Restaurant Brands NZ........................................... 103 Retirement Care (NZ)............................................ 152 RTA Pacific (NZ) ...................................................... 31 Ryman Healthcare ................................................ 143 Sanford .................................................................. 79 SCA Hygiene Holding ........................................... 114 Scales Corporation ............................................... 166 Schneider Electric (NZ) .......................................... 191 Sealed Air (New Zealand) ..................................... 162 Seeka Kiwifruit Industries ..................................... 178 Siemens (NZ)........................................................ 118 Silver Fern Farms .................................................... 19 Sime Darby Motor Group ........................................ 75 Skellerup Holdings ................................................ 159 Sky Network Television ........................................... 44 SKYCITY Entertainment Group ................................ 43 Smiths City Group ................................................ 139 Solid Energy NZ ...................................................... 41 Sony New Zealand ............................................... 185 Spotless Facility Services (NZ).................................. 87 Steel & Tube Holdings ............................................. 89 Tasman Steel Holdings............................................ 45 Telecom Corporation of New Zealand ....................... 4 Television New Zealand .......................................... 93 Telstra New Zealand Holdings................................. 51 The Colonial Motor Company ................................. 71 The New Zealand Refining Company..................... 111 The Tatua Co-operative Dairy Company ................. 177 The Warehouse Group ............................................ 20 Toll Group (NZ) ...................................................... 98 Tourism Holdings.................................................. 156 Toyota New Zealand............................................... 40 Transfield Services (New Zealand) ........................... 65 Transpacific Industries Group Finance (NZ) .............. 81 Transpower New Zealand ....................................... 49 TrustPower ............................................................. 47 Turners & Growers.................................................. 56 Unilever New Zealand .......................................... 105 Unison Networks.................................................. 180 Vector .................................................................... 29 Vitaco Health Group ............................................. 179 Viterra (NZ) .......................................................... 119 Vodafone New Zealand .......................................... 18 Wahn Investments ................................................ 165 Watercare Services ................................................. 91 Wesfarmers Industrial and Safety Holdings NZ ...... 129 Westland Co-operative Dairy Company ................... 61 Weyville Holdings ................................................. 132 Wilson & Horton .................................................... 63 Woolworths New Zealand Group .............................. 3 YPG Holdings ....................................................... 115 ZESPRI Group ......................................................... 23 DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 51


Rank

Previous Year

NEW ZEALAND COMPANIES

1

1

2

2

3

4

4

3

5

5

6

6

7

8

8

(-)

9

9

10

12

11

10

12

11

13

15

14

16

15

13

16

18

17

17

18

20

19

14

20

19

21

24

22

22

23

21

24

23

25

25

26

32

27

30

28

26

29

27

30

28

Revenue ($000s)

Company Name (Head Office) Fonterra Co-operative Group Auckland Fletcher Building Auckland Woolworths New Zealand Group Auckland Telecom Corporation of New Zealand Wellington Air New Zealand (75% NZG) Auckland

% Change

Profit After Tax ($000s)

Rank

% Change

EBITDA ($000s)

Co-op

20,131,000

17.9

771,000

1

12.6

1,508,000

NZSX*

7,453,000

9.2

291,000

4

3.2

696,000

*

5,242,829

4.5

100,740

21

204.9

324,617

NZSX *

5,115,000

-3.4

166,000

7

-56.5

1,764,000

NZSX

4,377,000

7.0

81,000

25

-1.2

461,000

Foodstuffs (Auckland) Auckland BP New Zealand Holdings Wellington Aotea Energy (50% I, 50% NZSF)1 Wellington Foodstuffs South Island Christchurch Fulton Hogan Christchurch

Co-op

3,550,868

0.8

(75,878)

196

-760.6

55,805

*

3,195,134

10.5

112,589

17

41.5

228,416

-

2,805,400

N/A

226,200

5

N/A

341,800

Co-op

2,460,182

4.5

(23,861)

183

-297.2

23,301

-

2,458,243

13.6

73,949

30

-7.0

234,475

Foodstuffs (Wellington) Co-operative Lower Hutt Contact Energy (51.8% OEPH) Wellington Meridian Energy (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Wellington Infratil Wellington Chevron New Zealand Auckland

Co-op

2,384,776

2.3

(37,513)

192

-451.3

16,313

NZSX *

2,235,793

2.9

150,294

9

-2.8

440,414

SOE

2,055,773

-0.4

303,111

2

64.7

728,919

NZSX

2,033,100

10.3

119,600

14

25.9

519,300

*

1,978,284

-1.9

55,979

34

19.8

111,236

*

1,970,465

7.3

12,840

95

82.2

79,279

SOE

1,838,254

-3.1

(16,609)

180

-124.0

187,976

*

1,711,500

6.4

151,500

8

24.6

559,400

Co-op

1,709,505

-15.1

(12,941)

178

-129.7

26,115

NZSX

1,679,711

-0.3

78,145

28

29.1

159,162

NZSX

1,580,664

7.9

69,271

31

3.4

130,842

SOE

1,570,755

3.9

127,073

11

50.2

421,349

Co-op

1,425,086

-8.1

7,257

111

-72.0

17,469

Co-op

1,387,625

-7.1

6,318

117

-66.8

42,946

NZSX

1,352,142

-1.5

31,579

50

34.7

49,585

NZSX

1,341,500

18.4

25,715

54

-29.3

87,281

NZSX*

1,303,006

12.5

(30,667)

189

-231.6

1,703

SOE

1,288,579

6.0

(35,642)

190

-2,886.7

185,122

NZSX

1,203,912

1.1

203,847

6

2.4

641,670

*

1,167,403

-2.0

406

148

-94.4

24,109

ExxonMobil New Zealand Holdings Auckland Genesis Power (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Auckland Vodafone New Zealand Auckland Silver Fern Farms Dunedin The Warehouse Group Auckland Nuplex Industries Auckland Mighty River Power (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Auckland ZESPRI Group Mt Maunganui Alliance Group Invercargill Ebos Group Christchurch Mainfreight Auckland PGG Wrightson Christchurch New Zealand Post (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Lower Hutt Vector Auckland ANZCO Foods Christchurch

A = annualised figures. * = more than 50% overseas controlled. NZSX = New Zealand Stock Exchange. Footnotes page 64. 52 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


EBIT ($000s)

% Return on Revenue

Total Assets ($000s)

1,019,000

5.1

15,530,000

2

9.6

5.2

6,541,000

3

12.6

44.05%

15,815

07/11

477,000

6.4

7,492,000

7

32.3

4.4

3,700,000

6

8.7

56.24%

20,000

06/11

241,665

4.6

3,824,701

16

4.0

2.7

1,461,795

17

7.1

38.96%

12,517

06/10

480,000

9.4

6,392,000

8

-6.9

2.5

2,311,000

10

6.8

34.86%

7,306

06/11

145,000

3.3

4,902,000

13

6.6

1.7

1,504,000

16

5.3

31.67%

9,400

06/11

N/A

1.6

1,568,208

33

6.8

-5.0

553,633

37

-12.8

36.46%

950

02/11

194,043

6.1

1,513,520

35

19.0

8.1

376,600

53

35.5

27.04%

1,700

12/10

314,800

11.2

1,453,500

37

N/A

N/A

617,500

31

N/A

27.04%

236

03/11

N/A

0.9

777,900

55

3.3

-3.1

208,011

82

-11.6

27.18%

1,300

02/11

142,507

5.8

1,630,791

30

5.2

4.6

465,588

45

17.3

29.27%

4,997

06/11

N/A

0.7

715,116

60

-6.4

-5.1

103,750

115

-29.7

14.02%

1,430

03/11

274,092

12.3

5,643,499

9

9.6

2.8

3,235,610

7

5.0

59.97%

1,116

06/11

494,749

24.1

8,459,973

5

-2.9

3.5

4,931,302

5

6.1

57.42%

726

06/11

368,000

18.1

5,033,100

12

11.8

2.5

1,842,900

12

6.7

38.66%

3,000

03/11

89,924

4.5

822,021

53

-3.8

6.7

484,570

44

12.6

57.81%

104

12/10

65,056

3.3

837,206

52

7.0

1.6

251,758

71

5.0

31.09%

N/D

12/10

34,306

1.9

3,676,802

17

45.2

-0.5

1,712,012

13

-1.1

55.15%

1,101

06/11

314,200

18.4

1,989,700

22

12.3

8.1

388,200

52

40.2

20.64%

1,770

03/11

2,338

0.1

600,241

68

-0.5

-2.2

338,613

57

-4.5

56.27%

N/D

09/10

119,390

7.1

640,123

66

-5.2

11.9

271,540

66

27.2

41.29%

8,000

07/11

108,478

6.9

1,032,053

45

2.8

6.8

560,732

36

12.8

55.07%

223

06/11

260,089

16.6

5,376,587

11

9.8

2.5

2,906,542

8

4.5

56.59%

784

06/11

14,323

1.0

340,897

99

-8.0

2.0

71,882

134

9.7

20.21%

165

03/11

21,163

1.5

439,556

88

-15.1

1.3

358,266

55

1.8

74.86%

5,500

09/10

45,612

3.4

538,319

77

3.9

6.0

198,796

86

16.6

37.63%

900

06/11

71,484

5.3

593,660

70

5.0

4.4

305,646

61

8.5

52.74%

3,426

03/11

(11,820)

-0.9

1,449,026

38

-5.1

-2.1

604,341

33

-4.9

40.62%

1,466

06/11

(16,068)

-1.2

14,681,994

3

12.3

-0.3

794,369

25

-4.4

5.72%

7,898

06/11

469,146

39.0

5,579,012

10

0.5

3.7

2,112,745

11

9.7

37.97%

649

06/11

13,610

1.2

497,171

81

1.2

0.1

244,178

72

0.2

49.40%

N/D

09/10

Rank

% Change

% Return on Assets

% Return Total Equity on Total Proprietorship Approx Balance ($000s) Rank Equity Ratio (%) Employees Date

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 53


Rank

Previous Year

NEW ZEALAND COMPANIES

31

36

32

31

33

33

34

29

35

35

36

34

37

42

38

40

39

38

40

47

41

50

42

63

43

39

44

45

45

37

46

41

47

44

48

49

49

46

50

51

51

48

52

55

53

59

54

57

55

70

56

56

57

54

58

58

59

61

60

62

Revenue ($000s)

Company Name (Head Office) RTA Pacific (NZ) Wellington Fisher & Paykel Appliances Holdings Auckland AFFCO Holdings Hamilton Goodman Fielder New Zealand Auckland Housing New Zealand (100% NZG) Wellington New Zealand Railways Corporation (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Wellington Combined Rural Traders Society Dunedin Ravensdown Fertiliser Co-operative Christchurch DGL Investments2 Auckland Toyota New Zealand Palmerston North Solid Energy NZ (50% MF,50% MSOE) Christchurch Hewlett-Packard New Zealand3 Auckland SKYCITY Entertainment Group Auckland Sky Network Television Auckland Tasman Steel Holdings Auckland Harvey Norman Stores (NZ) Auckland TrustPower Tauranga Ballance Agri-Nutrients Tauranga Transpower New Zealand (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Wellington Datacom Group (52% EM) Wellington Telstra New Zealand Holdings Auckland Christchurch City Holdings (100% CCC) Christchurch Farmlands Trading Society Hastings Ingram Micro New Zealand Holdings Auckland Methanex New Zealand Auckland Turners & Growers Auckland Fairfax New Zealand Holdings Wellington Blue Star Group Holdings Auckland Mitre 10 New Zealand4 Auckland Bunnings5 Auckland

% Change

Rank

% Change

EBITDA ($000s)

*

1,166,037

26.8

(26,919)

186

-89.6

-15,214

NZSX

1,115,417

-3.8

33,545

46

140.3

104,416

-

1,094,303

0.0

21,010

66

-17.2

53,661

NZSX*

1,092,504

-2.0

14,737

87

-32.5

147,918

-

1,030,000

4.4

293,000

3

143.4

635,000

SOE

1,016,400

-8.1

34,000

45

-82.5

319,900

Soc

1,007,175

37.6

1,636

137

39.0

7,614

Co-op

936,245

12.0

33,503

47

16,993.4

84,641

*

931,823

10.0

87,337

23

29.0

144,191

*

827,859

14.0

(389)

152

-108.6

17,428

SOE

826,304

20.2

87,184

24

28.5

195,479

*

817,468

51.6

(9,833)

176

-33.3

21,046

NZSX

812,100

-3.5

123,003

12

20.7

300,784

NZSX*

798,045

7.5

120,326

13

16.8

322,853

*

787,967

-13.1

103,497

19

-8.1

151,320

*

767,116

-4.4

24,528

58

-2.0

36,746

NZSX

766,960

1.0

112,369

18

-5.9

275,392

Co-op

765,211

10.3

26,340

53

375.3

74,305

SOE

737,200

0.4

78,500

27

20.8

377,700

-

725,167

8.7

22,266

62

-26.4

66,524

*

700,942

-2.2

(65,145)

195

-24.9

167,498

-

697,659

18.5

77,322

29

40.6

244,008

Soc

686,445

21.7

705

144

231.0

3,984

*

628,179

7.8

(3,129)

165

-174.7

7,189

*

622,526

27.3

13,830

92

147.8

40,438

NZSX*

599,433

1.2

6,326

116

-33.6

41,483

*

594,721

-0.6

25,308

56

136.5

199,020

*

571,069

0.3

(84,894)

197

-12.3

39,588

-

548,954

0.0

709

143

0.0

6,163

-

541,524

0.0

(2,377)

161

0.0

29,919

A = annualised figures. * = more than 50% overseas controlled. NZSX = New Zealand Stock Exchange. Footnotes page 64. 54 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

Profit After Tax ($000s)


Total Assets ($000s)

% Return on Revenue

(15,497)

-1.3

354,011

95

-9.1

-7.2

120,345

109

-20.7

32.38%

799

12/10

63,523

5.7

1,558,414

34

-5.7

2.1

614,948

32

5.5

38.31%

1,352

03/11

39,275

3.6

462,065

85

6.3

4.7

361,958

54

6.0

80.74%

3,550

09/10

119,253

10.9

1,632,972

29

4.7

0.9

229,273

77

6.6

14.36%

2,600

06/11

457,000

44.4

15,539,000

1

0.6

1.9

11,623,000

2

2.5

75.03%

N/D

06/11

36,800

3.6

13,570,100

4

2.4

0.3

12,638,300

1

0.3

94.25%

4,190

06/11

3,240

0.3

203,815

140

32.8

0.9

51,880

151

3.3

29.04%

515

03/11

68,637

7.3

786,183

54

13.7

4.5

267,377

68

11.3

36.20%

581

05/11

117,200

12.6

663,500

63

7.7

13.6

422,258

48

21.6

65.99%

N/D

06/10

13,066

1.6

270,455

114

6.9

-0.1

56,327

148

-0.7

21.52%

240

03/11

138,672

16.8

1,133,457

42

13.3

8.2

519,375

40

18.1

48.68%

1,472

06/11

14,718

1.8

316,073

106

5.4

-3.2

(92,935)

199

N/A

-30.18%

N/D

10/10

216,074

26.6

1,682,671

27

2.8

7.4

774,816

26

16.0

46.69%

3,656

06/11

197,899

24.8

1,940,560

23

1.6

6.3

1,297,544

21

9.4

67.41%

1,046

06/11

109,443

13.9

1,810,508

25

-21.3

5.0

1,548,354

14

5.8

75.31%

N/D

06/10

36,746

4.8

266,736

116

-0.1

9.2

177,443

96

14.8

66.49%

1,317

06/10

220,521

28.8

2,605,472

18

1.8

4.4

1,418,491

18

7.9

54.93%

449

03/11

46,494

6.1

527,424

78

14.8

5.3

331,150

58

8.3

67.13%

750

05/11

197,300

26.8

4,170,600

14

17.0

2.0

1,533,500

15

5.3

39.65%

675

06/11

43,843

6.0

320,955

104

14.9

7.4

127,216

108

17.8

42.39%

N/D

03/11

16,959

2.4

1,714,803

26

0.7

-3.8

303,437

62

-19.4

17.75%

N/D

06/10

127,170

18.2

2,320,899

19

1.5

3.4

1,308,817

20

5.8

56.82%

N/D

06/11

2,212

0.3

120,687

168

8.9

0.6

43,570

162

1.7

37.64%

N/D

06/11

2,136

0.3

218,059

132

4.3

-1.5

3,050

191

-68.7

1.43%

303

12/10

15,709

2.5

459,529

86

32.8

3.4

98,824

121

14.3

24.53%

130

12/10

23,256

3.9

447,513

87

5.2

1.4

300,829

63

2.1

68.93%

N/D

12/10

177,942

29.9

2,264,533

20

2.8

1.1

704,763

28

4.3

31.55%

N/D

06/10

(45,463)

-8.0

467,414

84

-5.8

-17.6

4,312

190

-184.1

0.90%

N/D

06/11

6,163

1.1

155,582

153

0.0

0.5

45,306

160

1.6

29.12%

132

06/10

20,904

3.9

415,884

89

0.0

-0.6

38,526

166

-6.2

9.26%

1,938

06/10

Rank

% Change

% Return on Assets

% Return Total Equity on Total Proprietorship Approx Balance ($000s) Rank Equity Ratio (%) Employees Date

EBIT ($000s)

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 55


Rank

Previous Year

NEW ZEALAND COMPANIES

61

88

62

53

63

66

64

67

65

52

66

68

67

65

68

123

69

69

70

76

71

78

72

71

73

79

74

73

75

82

76

77

77

84

78

94

79

75

80

81

81

107

82

87

83

80

84

86

85

96

86

83

87

95

88

85

89

91

90

90

Revenue ($000s)

Company Name (Head Office)

% Change

Profit After Tax ($000s)

Rank

% Change

EBITDA ($000s)

Westland Co-operative Dairy Company Hokitika Kura (50% TWU) Nelson Wilson & Horton Auckland Noel Leeming Holdings Auckland Transfield Services (New Zealand) Auckland

Co-op

540,625

24.5

3,315

131

-4.4

31,799

-

539,220

-8.3

18,399

74

10.8

44,215

*

519,954

4.7

(2,150)

158

34.3

79,269

*

518,851

5.5

(2,689)

162

39.1

13,116

*

518,193

-17.1

13,863

91

12.3

42,971

Coca-Cola Amatil (NZ) Auckland Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Corporation Auckland Open Country Dairy6 Waharoa Oregon Group7 Auckland Michael Hill International Queensland

*

513,443

2.1

47,892

37

-16.5

122,202

NZSX

507,851

-0.1

52,466

36

-26.8

120,913

-

497,747

93.0

(8,111)

171

-293.1

10,275

*

490,473

0.0

79,469

26

0.0

104,113

NZSX*

489,928

10.4

34,499

44

32.6

57,261

NZSX

485,950

11.9

8,534

104

722.0

18,953

*

477,005

0.0

8,330

106

0.0

27,444

*

471,604

9.7

16,750

80

33.0

52,923

NZSX

468,164

2.0

15,348

85

49.0

34,068

*

458,797

11.1

(2,163)

159

90.3

6,576

*

447,519

2.2

31,652

49

-8.5

58,947

-

441,980

10.0

(25,938)

184

-214.7

47,923

-

432,618

18.1

44,962

38

35.6

70,852

NZSX

428,754

-2.5

25,025

57

-36.1

57,431

*

420,810

0.7

21,612

65

2.8

41,495

NZSX*

419,519

10.7

(242,507)

199

-5,672.3

99,129

*

417,480

7.2

25,373

55

-29.1

48,688

*

415,915

-1.7

(22,770)

182

48.2

84,334

NZSX*

407,295

3.4

54,639

35

-56.9

211,596

NZSX

402,478

10.8

100,761

20

239.3

265,902

*

400,962

-0.7

22,709

61

-49.3

57,683

*

398,290

16.0

14,597

88

60.6

39,252

*

390,641

-0.4

13,119

94

-35.8

28,854

NZSX*

386,258

1.5

17,041

78

198.2

32,583

*

379,780

-0.3

20,207

68

0.3

39,909

The Colonial Motor Company Wellington Bidvest New Zealand8 Auckland DB Breweries Auckland Hellaby Holdings Auckland Sime Darby Motor Group Auckland Nestle New Zealand Auckland NZ Poultry Enterprises Auckland Beca Group Auckland Sanford Auckland Briscoe Group Auckland Transpacific Industries Group Finance (NZ) Auckland Frucor Beverages Auckland Flavoured Beverages Group Holdings Auckland Oceana Gold Holdings (New Zealand) Dunedin Auckland International Airport Auckland New Zealand Breweries14 Auckland Spotless Facility Services (NZ) Auckland OfficeMax Holdings Auckland Steel & Tube Holdings Lower Hutt IBM New Zealand Lower Hutt

A = annualised figures. * = more than 50% overseas controlled. NZSX = New Zealand Stock Exchange. Footnotes page 64. 56 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


EBIT ($000s)

% Return on Revenue

Total Assets ($000s)

Rank

% Change

% Return on Assets

% Return Total Equity on Total Proprietorship Approx Balance ($000s) Rank Equity Ratio (%) Employees Date

10,908

2.0

351,446

97

4.8

1.0

190,224

90

1.8

55.40%

337

07/11

31,823

5.9

760,564

56

4.3

2.5

461,408

46

4.0

61.93%

N/D

06/10

64,348

12.4

1,512,201

36

11.2

-0.1

499,848

41

-0.4

34.81%

N/D

12/10

5,296

1.0

210,956

136

0.8

-1.3

23,560

181

-11.4

11.21%

1,117

03/10

22,579

4.4

327,073

101

-10.8

4.0

148,606

104

8.6

42.83%

2,328

06/10

101,372

19.7

662,604

64

4.9

7.4

288,186

65

16.6

44.52%

1,035

12/10

98,840

19.5

517,608

79

9.0

10.6

313,291

59

17.3

63.12%

2,448

03/11

(651)

-0.1

362,058

94

12.6

-2.4

191,234

88

-4.2

55.96%

155

07/10

93,378

19.0

726,350

57

0.0

10.9

414,492

49

19.2

57.07%

579

06/10

45,806

9.3

293,108

110

13.5

12.5

178,376

94

20.5

64.71%

285

06/11

15,874

3.3

211,935

134

2.4

4.1

117,719

110

7.3

56.22%

742

06/11

22,297

4.7

131,732

159

0.0

6.3

64,418

141

12.9

48.90%

917

06/10

33,420

7.1

307,687

109

2.1

5.5

202,872

84

8.4

66.61%

500

09/10

26,833

5.7

228,444

128

-0.4

6.7

133,778

105

13.1

58.45%

2,155

06/11

1,840

0.4

233,114

125

-2.9

-0.9

(40,273)

196

N/A

-17.02%

N/D

06/10

52,111

11.6

126,978

162

0.3

25.0

8,602

188

286.9

6.78%

N/D

12/10

33,150

7.5

644,404

65

-0.1

-4.0

210,505

81

-11.8

32.65%

N/D

05/11

62,446

14.4

171,818

147

2.8

26.5

102,191

117

45.5

60.31%

1,675

03/11

43,677

10.2

719,295

59

-0.2

3.5

552,202

38

4.5

76.68%

N/D

09/10

34,176

8.1

191,119

141

10.0

11.8

131,886

106

16.7

72.30%

543

01/11

(187,326)

-44.7

841,882

51

-26.1

-24.5

177,653

95

-84.2

17.93%

1,800

06/11

38,877

9.3

579,109

75

2.5

4.4

451,192

47

5.6

78.88%

612

12/10

72,488

17.4

1,311,185

39

-0.9

-1.7

497,858

42

-4.6

37.80%

N/D

09/10

103,753

25.5

598,808

69

18.1

9.9

308,596

60

24.2

55.81%

490

12/10

209,059

51.9

3,866,210

15

18.5

2.8

2,467,531

9

4.6

69.23%

288

06/11

38,042

9.5

1,083,090

44

13.1

2.2

521,132

39

4.5

51.07%

N/D

09/10

26,074

6.5

162,136

151

6.2

9.3

52,943

150

31.7

33.63%

N/D

06/11

22,851

5.8

245,280

121

-10.2

5.1

191,144

89

7.1

73.75%

1,102

12/10

26,301

6.8

231,542

126

6.1

7.6

151,971

103

11.5

67.59%

686

06/11

29,763

7.8

238,375

123

0.5

8.5

112,935

113

18.8

47.49%

755

12/10

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 57


Rank

Previous Year

NEW ZEALAND COMPANIES

91

155

92

92

93

98

94

106

95

99

96

89

97

104

98

101

99

97

100

100

101

93

102

64

103

105

104

72

105

116

106

121

107

130

108

111

109

114

110

157

111

128

112

109

113

126

114

112

115

110

116

122

117

119

118

74

119

113

120

133

Revenue ($000s)

Company Name (Head Office) Watercare Services (100% AC)9 Auckland Opus International (NZ) Wellington Television New Zealand (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Auckland Ford Motor Company of New Zealand Auckland Powerco New Plymouth

% Change

Profit After Tax ($000s)

Rank

% Change

EBITDA ($000s)

-

373,107

87.3

(12,333)

177

55.5

196,838

*

372,819

0.3

22,067

63

18.6

39,923

SOE

367,125

3.3

2,080

133

108.0

228,395

*

364,009

15.9

1,891

136

-65.5

4,824

*

363,495

1.7

26,883

52

35.9

192,950

Pumpkin Patch Auckland Freightways Auckland Toll Group (NZ) Auckland DSE (NZ) Auckland Millstream Equities (69% MFL)10 Auckland

NZSX

357,014

-6.6

(1,876)

157

-107.4

21,365

NZSX

352,758

7.3

29,899

51

29.1

65,335

*

352,317

3.2

(30,485)

188

15.6

3,715

*

341,109

-5.8

7,097

113

-49.0

16,216

*

340,924

-2.7

(183,244)

198

-9,206.4

48,544

Amcor Packaging (New Zealand) Auckland Orica Investments (NZ) Lower Hutt Restaurant Brands NZ Auckland Norske Skog Tasman Kawerau Unilever New Zealand Auckland

*

335,102

-4.1

3,971

128

153.4

32,024

*

334,574

-36.2

146,646

10

102.4

172,248

NZSX

324,911

2.1

24,017

59

22.9

49,129

*

317,873

-3.3

(17,392)

181

-116.5

51,350

*

313,611

15.2

8,941

102

82.3

16,226

*

310,347

16.7

35,605

43

49.2

73,915

*

306,379

23.5

39,066

40

316.2

69,075

*

298,986

0.7

116,045

15

114.0

158,304

*

296,207

4.6

5,374

120

685.7

6,327

*

296,038

30.9

6,768

115

-65.4

8,216

NZSX*

291,517

16.3

57,718

33

144.3

156,942

Co-op*

282,324

-7.4

4,116

127

-2.9

14,328

*

279,875

9.8

41,980

39

114.3

77,411

*

275,810

-4.3

(47,038)

193

-193.6

15,606

*

274,694

-9.7

(1,445,247)

200

-327.2

150,854

*

274,440

4.3

(896)

154

-111.2

16,108

*

273,687

2.7

17,654

76

33.5

33,722

*

269,946

-40.0

18,590

72

125.3

30,865

*

A 269,826

34.0

(7,882)

169

-82.7

10,742

*

A 268,061

11.2

19,211

71

22.4

32,387

Pact Group (NZ) Dunedin Kathmandu Holdings Christchurch British American Tobacco Holdings (NZ) Auckland Holden New Zealand Auckland Apple Sales New Zealand Auckland The New Zealand Refining Company Whangarei Market Gardeners Christchurch Pan Pac Forest Products Napier SCA Hygiene Holding Auckland YPG Holdings11 Auckland Cadbury Auckland Allied Foods (NZ) Auckland Siemens (NZ) Auckland Viterra (NZ)12 Auckland New Zealand Sugar Company13 Auckland

A = annualised figures. * = more than 50% overseas controlled. NZSX = New Zealand Stock Exchange. Footnotes page 64. 58 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


% Return on Revenue

Total Assets ($000s)

53,212

14.3

7,821,336

34,516

9.3

13,678

EBIT ($000s)

% Return Total Equity on Total Proprietorship Approx Balance ($000s) Rank Equity Ratio (%) Employees Date

% Change

% Return on Assets

6

216.6

-0.2

5,581,395

4

-0.4

108.46%

619

06/11

238,782

122

11.9

9.8

75,340

132

33.1

33.33%

1,700

12/10

3.7

228,690

127

-11.6

0.9

154,281

101

1.3

63.31%

950

06/11

4,347

1.2

132,373

158

4.4

1.5

68,069

136

2.8

52.53%

70

12/10

115,160

31.7

1,886,026

24

0.6

1.4

490,924

43

5.5

26.11%

N/D

06/11

6,274

1.8

205,007

138

14.8

-1.0

32,451

170

-3.3

16.92%

790

07/11

55,553

15.7

399,187

90

4.4

7.6

167,769

97

18.4

42.92%

N/D

06/11

(2,046)

-0.6

1,101,409

43

0.7

-2.8

694,940

30

-4.3

63.31%

990

06/10

10,849

3.2

104,437

180

12.7

7.2

64,447

140

11.7

65.40%

N/D

06/10

(143,058)

-42.0

1,229,699

41

-16.6

-13.6

270,596

67

-50.6

20.02%

N/D

06/10

19,058

5.7

309,515

108

-41.1

1.0

233,256

76

1.5

55.89%

815

06/10

166,640

49.8

869,092

49

-15.3

15.5

773,383

27

17.1

81.63%

N/D

09/10

34,710

10.7

111,352

177

8.1

22.4

58,895

146

44.7

54.96%

4,374

02/11

(9,017)

-2.8

672,234

62

-5.7

-2.5

262,716

69

-6.4

37.94%

N/D

12/10

13,903

4.4

103,410

181

4.2

8.8

48,658

157

20.1

48.01%

N/D

12/10

60,174

19.4

352,384

96

13.6

10.7

117,129

111

31.8

35.36%

N/D

06/11

61,660

20.1

339,890

100

6.4

11.9

254,926

70

15.8

77.33%

358

07/11

156,009

52.2

490,830

82

21.1

25.9

200,793

85

81.3

44.81%

N/D

12/10

6,263

2.1

109,388

179

-9.5

4.7

49,484

155

11.5

42.97%

35

12/10

8,216

2.8

77,411

189

29.8

9.9

33,003

169

22.9

48.17%

N/D

09/10

83,188

28.5

962,922

48

1.5

6.0

601,697

34

10.1

62.96%

260

12/10

10,442

3.7

189,564

142

1.6

2.2

74,975

133

5.6

39.87%

350

06/11

64,240

23.0

484,103

83

14.9

9.3

348,303

56

12.8

76.93%

362

03/11

(32,629)

-11.8

278,982

113

-14.4

-15.5

98,951

120

-52.3

32.71%

567

12/10

(1,477,829)

-538.0

853,220

50

-66.1

-85.7

(1,212,916)

200

N/A

-71.91%

621

06/10

14,680

5.3

222,135

131

1.6

-0.4

162,200

99

-0.6

73.59%

N/D

12/10

26,388

9.6

123,252

164

-3.2

14.1

77,215

131

20.7

61.65%

850

09/10

26,504

9.8

113,843

175

13.3

17.4

63,383

142

34.6

59.16%

226

09/10

2,196

0.8

225,675

130

77.9

-4.5

(6,973)

195

N/A

-3.96%

144

10/10

27,412

10.2

132,722

157

5.9

14.9

83,838

127

22.2

64.97%

194

12/10

Rank

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 59


Rank

Previous Year

NEW ZEALAND COMPANIES

121

102

122

137

123

124

124

118

125

136

126

127

127

115

128

134

129

131

130

(-)

131

135

132

129

133

139

134

142

135

108

136

141

137

146

138

170

139

138

140

150

141

159

142

163

143

172

144

158

145

152

146

148

147

144

148

156

149

174

150

143

Revenue ($000s)

Company Name (Head Office) Alcatel-Lucent New Zealand Wellington Juken New Zealand Auckland NZ Snack Food Holdings Auckland Fernhoff Christchurch General Cable Holdings NZ Christchurch Kordia Group (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Auckland PMP (NZ) Auckland Dunedin City Holdings (100% DCC) Dunedin Wesfarmers Industrial and Safety Holdings NZ Auckland Redeal Auckland NZPM Group Auckland Weyville Holdings Timaru Linde Holdings New Zealand Auckland Delegat's Group Auckland Downer EDI Engineering Group Hamilton Cavalier Corporation Auckland ABB Auckland Landcorp Farming (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Wellington Smiths City Group Christchurch Northpower (100% NEPT) Whangarei Lion Nathan Wines and Spirits New Zealand14 Auckland Ashburton Trading Society15 Ashburton Ryman Healthcare Christchurch Exego (NZ) Holdings Auckland Mazda Motors of New Zealand Auckland Hallenstein Glasson Holdings16 Auckland Panasonic New Zealand Auckland Renaissance Corporation17 Auckland Mitsubishi Motors New Zealand Porirua Bridgestone New Zealand Auckland

% Change

Profit After Tax ($000s)

Rank

EBITDA ($000s)

*

264,844

-21.4

11,273

97

-6.5

19,463

*

264,168

15.9

15,521

84

-82.1

49,903

*

263,995

1.9

16,198

82

23.5

66,809

*

263,735

-0.9

3,564

129

-45.1

47,016

*

263,451

15.2

(7,964)

170

48.8

18

SOE

258,530

1.8

(966)

155

14.3

50,898

*

250,286

-7.5

(1,653)

156

69.5

14,707

-

249,129

10.6

16,244

81

-10.3

81,926

*

247,793

0.3

7,657

109

33.3

14,670

*

246,570

-1.5

1,164

140

-69.0

5,506

Co-op

239,545

3.5

1,093

142

143.9

7,457

*

235,793

-5.7

3,418

130

806.6

14,842

*

233,497

3.3

21,707

64

-11.2

61,513

NZSX

232,684

5.4

31,939

48

575.4

57,178

*

232,649

-23.7

6,026

119

-23.8

13,706

-

231,569

3.8

18,180

75

59.9

34,264

*

226,914

8.3

14,572

89

115.2

25,277

SOE

222,053

34.6

114,592

16

2,061.9

147,280

NZSX

220,742

-2.4

1,892

135

15.1

11,793

-

218,109

5.8

7,657

109

94.4

28,844

*

216,443

12.2

7,928

108

26.5

22,216

Soc

210,906

13.3

696

145

93.9

1,766

NZSX

210,446

19.6

100,177

22

27.7

114,331

*

208,936

7.9

(3,798)

168

30.1

9,702

*

208,444

5.0

8,158

107

131.5

11,265

NZSX

208,267

0.0

19,581

70

0.0

35,155

*

206,905

2.8

1,592

138

11.8

2,779

NZSX

A 205,603

5.5

401

149

118.2

2,655

*

205,319

17.9

(2,323)

160

-360.7

6,146

*

204,866

-7.2

(261)

151

99.3

5,762

A = annualised figures. * = more than 50% overseas controlled. NZSX = New Zealand Stock Exchange. Footnotes page 64. 60 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

% Change


EBIT ($000s)

% Return on Revenue

Total Assets ($000s)

Rank

% Change

% Return on Assets

% Return Total Equity on Total Proprietorship Approx Balance ($000s) Rank Equity Ratio (%) Employees Date

17,498

6.6

227,142

129

15.6

5.3

43,129

163

22.8

20.36%

564

12/10

36,158

13.7

589,778

73

-0.5

2.6

225,228

79

7.1

38.09%

857

03/11

52,792

20.0

590,436

72

1.0

2.8

240,350

73

7.0

40.91%

N/D

12/10

22,376

8.5

397,442

91

-15.8

0.8

23,315

182

14.4

5.36%

N/D

12/10

(3,621)

-1.4

185,765

144

17.4

-4.6

80,832

128

-10.2

47.00%

462

12/10

14,848

5.7

257,067

119

-8.2

-0.4

95,971

122

-1.0

35.73%

905

06/10

6,518

2.6

133,832

156

-4.4

-1.2

(1,616)

193

N/A

-1.18%

N/D

06/10

63,348

25.4

965,829

47

8.6

1.8

153,175

102

10.6

16.51%

1

06/11

12,833

5.2

116,025

172

0.0

6.6

58,199

147

14.1

50.16%

700

06/10

4,160

1.7

122,162

166

-3.0

0.9

45,656

159

2.5

36.81%

491

12/10

5,648

2.4

116,953

171

3.9

1.0

29,888

175

3.7

26.04%

N/D

03/11

7,456

3.2

211,248

135

1.1

1.6

131,111

107

2.6

62.40%

372

06/10

40,707

17.4

588,605

74

-2.4

3.6

406,380

50

5.2

68.19%

340

12/10

55,408

23.8

349,442

98

2.6

9.3

167,656

98

20.0

48.60%

199

06/11

9,443

4.1

65,809

191

-35.2

7.2

39,882

164

16.3

47.66%

N/D

06/10

27,797

12.0

215,725

133

12.9

8.9

99,294

118

19.1

48.82%

950

06/11

22,674

10.0

114,139

173

-8.4

12.2

51,573

152

29.3

43.20%

676

12/10

134,819

60.7

1,662,973

28

9.3

7.2

1,351,627

19

8.9

84.88%

600

06/11

9,365

4.2

168,726

150

-3.3

1.1

46,347

158

4.1

27.01%

666

04/11

13,771

6.3

385,066

92

3.3

2.0

236,855

75

3.3

62.50%

895

03/11

20,349

9.4

279,159

112

39.2

3.3

62,995

143

13.4

26.26%

1,042

09/10

1,144

0.5

29,045

200

15.6

2.6

10,361

187

6.9

38.25%

60

06/11

108,241

51.4

1,609,315

32

21.1

6.8

565,830

35

19.6

38.51%

2,600

03/11

6,448

3.1

183,029

145

5.5

-2.1

23,617

180

-15.1

13.25%

761

06/10

10,952

5.3

65,624

192

0.9

12.5

37,115

167

21.2

56.81%

26

03/11

29,232

14.0

83,641

186

0.0

23.4

62,064

145

31.5

74.20%

1,100

08/10

2,474

1.2

47,906

196

-9.2

3.2

23,759

179

6.8

47.20%

110

03/11

906

0.4

45,094

197

3.2

0.9

13,369

186

3.0

30.12%

N/D

09/10

4,129

2.0

113,831

176

0.9

-2.0

78,598

130

-2.9

69.36%

94

03/11

2,946

1.4

148,674

154

-3.9

-0.2

92,096

123

-0.3

60.70%

668

12/10

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 61


Rank

Previous Year

NEW ZEALAND COMPANIES

151

140

152

147

153

182

154

167

155

164

156

165

157

161

158

192

159

168

160

166

161

169

162

153

163

174

164

154

165

177

166

145

167

160

168

149

169

171

170

125

171

175

172

190

173

181

174

(-)

175

(-)

176

200

177

151

178

(-)

179

179

180

187

Revenue ($000s)

Company Name (Head Office) Nobilo Holdings Kumeu Retirement Care (NZ) Auckland Port of Tauranga Tauranga McDonald's Restaurants (New Zealand) Auckland Fuji Xerox New Zealand Auckland

% Change

Profit After Tax ($000s)

Rank

% Change

EBITDA ($000s)

*

202,555

-5.8

11,325

96

-12.2

53,745

*

199,880

7.0

16,189

83

109.5

101,975

NZSX

199,689

24.4

58,398

32

53.6

109,428

*

197,600

7.9

35,884

42

5.4

70,713

*

197,539

6.6

(9,272)

174

-37.0

2,798

NZSX

196,600

7.1

(27,344)

187

-692.8

45,553

NZSX

196,366

4.1

(26,406)

185

-409.7

34,683

NZSX

195,366

32.9

8,480

105

258.2

21,933

NZSX

195,109

7.3

20,200

69

68.9

40,245

*

193,953

5.8

14,821

86

86.8

24,986

DHL Holdings (New Zealand) Auckland Sealed Air (New Zealand) Auckland Bupa Healthcare New Zealand Auckland Newmont Waihi Gold Waihi Wahn Investments Auckland

*

187,660

7.1

4,188

126

-46.2

15,046

*

185,997

-6.8

20,245

67

20.1

32,992

*

185,262

6.6

(36,909)

191

-241.8

37,007

*

184,888

-6.6

7,120

112

-76.9

44,880

*

183,661

7.1

(15,207)

179

-852.2

5,604

Scales Corporation Christchurch Ports of Auckland Auckland Coles Group New Zealand Holdings Auckland CDC Pharmaceuticals Christchurch Abano Healthcare Group Auckland

-

182,796

-11.1

687

146

-95.0

26,912

CCO

180,111

6.6

23,326

60

-37.3

82,056

*

180,007

-12.8

(9,197)

173

-963.6

-10,644

Co-op

176,357

0.1

442

147

-39.0

1,397

NZSX

175,946

-1.7

13,494

93

-82.9

26,416

New Zealand Investment Holdings18 Auckland JB Hi-Fi NZ Auckland Mercedes-Benz New Zealand Auckland GR Media Holdings19 Auckland Goodyear & Dunlop Tyres (NZ) Upper Hutt

*

174,770

2.0

16,850

79

156.8

36,271

*

174,628

15.9

(485)

153

86.4

1,866

*

172,866

6.2

10,438

99

146.6

27,436

*

171,529

N/A

(50,531)

194

N/A

2,342

*

168,091

N/A

(3,419)

167

N/A

-574

Livestock Improvement Corporation Hamilton The Tatua Co-operative Dairy Company Morrinsville Seeka Kiwifruit Industries20 Bay of Plenty Vitaco Health Group Auckland Unison Networks Hastings

-

167,080

21.5

17,634

77

111.2

37,417

Co-op

166,807

-18.4

(3,152)

166

-8,618.9

7,799

NZSX

A 163,760

35.8

8,575

103

2,217.6

25,840

*

162,835

3.5

(9,469)

175

26.2

12,395

-

162,833

4.9

18,510

73

-1.9

60,231

Tourism Holdings Auckland Kiwi Income Property Trust Auckland Rakon Auckland Skellerup Holdings Auckland MARS New Zealand Auckland

A = annualised figures. * = more than 50% overseas controlled. NZSX = New Zealand Stock Exchange. Footnotes page 64. 62 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


EBIT ($000s)

% Return on Revenue

Total Assets ($000s)

Rank

% Change

% Return on Assets

% Return Total Equity on Total Proprietorship Approx Balance ($000s) Rank Equity Ratio (%) Employees Date

42,902

21.2

504,949

80

-5.8

2.2

228,286

78

4.6

43.86%

214

02/11

75,698

37.9

710,188

61

-2.2

2.3

(83,449)

198

N/A

-11.62%

2,666

05/10

92,131

46.1

990,468

46

3.6

6.0

700,252

29

8.5

71.94%

158

06/11

58,182

29.4

325,680

102

12.5

11.7

181,942

93

21.9

59.14%

1,850

12/10

(2,783)

-1.4

125,232

163

6.1

-7.6

1,659

192

-147.3

1.36%

N/D

03/11

(23,706)

-12.1

319,727

105

20.0

-9.3

156,022

100

-16.2

53.24%

440

06/11

34,683

17.7

2,112,555

21

6.4

-1.3

1,042,865

22

-2.6

50.90%

104

03/11

12,806

6.6

269,093

115

19.3

3.4

204,966

83

4.3

82.87%

450

03/11

31,534

16.2

173,931

146

0.7

11.7

110,325

114

19.1

63.64%

702

06/11

21,526

11.1

92,684

184

49.0

19.1

48,868

156

35.7

63.10%

140

12/10

10,554

5.6

171,631

148

7.5

2.5

62,596

144

6.9

37.79%

1,020

12/10

29,543

15.9

252,289

120

6.0

8.3

219,907

80

9.6

89.72%

566

12/10

27,784

15.0

551,058

76

12.4

-7.1

103,743

116

-32.3

19.92%

2,128

12/10

15,876

8.6

290,442

111

3.6

2.5

189,191

91

3.8

66.30%

N/D

12/10

(11,588)

-6.3

120,819

167

-8.4

-12.0

64,897

138

-21.0

51.37%

N/D

12/10

18,394

10.1

311,530

107

2.9

0.2

114,333

112

0.6

37.22%

5

06/10

56,617

31.4

721,685

58

-1.4

3.2

400,874

51

5.8

55.14%

522

06/11

(13,130)

-7.3

259,238

117

-4.3

-3.5

238,562

74

-3.8

90.00%

800

06/10

1,261

0.7

38,681

198

5.0

1.2

6,711

189

6.4

17.77%

72

03/11

20,124

11.4

168,985

149

4.4

8.2

91,360

125

13.2

55.22%

1,700

05/11

30,034

17.2

160,102

152

-1.1

10.5

33,118

168

60.2

20.58%

N/D

12/10

(111)

-0.1

76,454

190

11.4

-0.7

50,580

153

-1.0

69.74%

N/D

06/10

26,910

15.6

383,788

93

16.7

2.9

30,742

173

34.8

8.63%

67

12/10

(21,196)

-12.4

591,052

71

N/A

N/A

(50,945)

197

N/A

8.63%

N/D

08/10

(2,296)

-1.4

83,468

187

N/A

N/A

25,714

177

N/A

8.63%

554

12/10

26,064

15.6

236,838

124

5.9

7.7

184,834

92

9.8

80.28%

650

05/11

1,975

1.2

122,900

165

-5.0

-2.5

39,223

165

-7.5

31.09%

200

07/10

19,645

12.0

131,612

160

-8.7

6.2

64,848

139

13.7

47.03%

198

12/10

6,645

4.1

206,692

137

-0.4

-4.6

53,224

149

-16.4

25.70%

384

03/11

38,658

23.7

627,247

67

3.9

3.0

289,216

64

6.4

46.99%

N/D

03/11

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 63


Rank

Previous Year

NEW ZEALAND COMPANIES

181

183

182

178

183

184

184

162

185

188

186

196

187

201

188

194

189

197

190

189

191

207

192

(-)

193

191

194

193

195

198

196

202

197

210

198

203

199

205

200

199

Revenue ($000s)

Company Name (Head Office) Radius Health Group Auckland Cerebos Gregg's21 Auckland AgResearch (50% MF, 50% MCRI) Hamilton Avon Pacific Holdings Auckland Sony New Zealand Auckland CablePrice (NZ) Lower Hutt Pfizer New Zealand Auckland ITW New Zealand Auckland Airways Corporation of New Zealand (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Wellington New Zealand Wool Services International Christchurch Schneider Electric (NZ) Auckland Kimbyr Investments Auckland Pepsico New Zealand Holdings Auckland Honda New Zealand Auckland Aperio Group (New Zealand) Auckland AsureQuality (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Auckland Dow AgroSciences (NZ) New Plymouth Compass Group New Zealand Auckland Goodman Property Trust Auckland AMP NZ Office Trust Wellington

% Change

Profit After Tax ($000s)

Rank

% Change

EBITDA ($000s)

-

159,943

0.6

1,970

134

180.2

7,534

*

A 159,472

-6.0

10,780

98

16.5

19,717

CRI

158,287

1.0

6,209

118

172.3

20,847

*

157,348

-9.9

10,263

101

-37.0

21,812

*

155,927

2.2

(3,015)

163

70.5

-1,461

*

154,335

14.1

1,380

139

39.5

5,299

*

152,757

11.3

249

150

-96.9

3,234

*

152,685

3.1

14,128

90

58.8

27,029

SOE

152,435

5.0

4,707

123

600.7

23,931

-

151,217

0.3

1,147

141

126.2

7,077

*

146,452

12.2

(3,020)

164

-158.6

-1,344

*

145,490

14.1

4,462

125

1,433.3

10,735

*

144,663

-3.5

(8,246)

172

24.3

12,517

*

143,283

-1.6

2,214

132

-1.2

19,534

*

139,564

-0.7

5,061

122

155.7

20,606

SOE

139,145

1.8

5,149

121

5.4

13,760

*

138,652

12.3

6,827

114

20.3

11,120

*

138,468

2.8

4,595

124

-3.5

8,402

NZSX

137,700

3.6

36,700

41

1,210.7

67,700

NZSX

137,200

-0.7

10,400

100

124.2

47,000

TOP 200 FOOTNOTES 1. Aotea Energy (8) Holding Company of ZEnergy formed to acquire the business formerly carried on by Shell New Zealand. 2. DGL Investments (39) Main trading company is Downer New Zealand. 3. Hewlett-Packard New Zealand (42) Amalgamated with EDS New Zealand and EDS Defence Services on 1 November 2009. 4. Mitre 10 New Zealand (59) Current year financial statements unavailable when list closed. Prior year figures have been repeated. No comparatives shown. 5. Bunnings Auckland (60) Current year financial statements unavailable when list closed. Prior year figures have been repeated. No comparatives shown. 6. Open Country Dairy (68) Prior year figures annualised.

7. Oregon Group (69) Current year financial statements unavailable when list closed. Prior year figures have been repeated. No comparatives shown. 8. Bidvest New Zealand (72) Current year financial statements unavailable when list closed. Prior year figures have been repeated. No comparatives shown. 9. Watercare Services (91) On 1 November the company acquired the water and wastewater businesses not previously under its control and now provides the total watercare and wastewater services to the new Auckland Council. 10. Millstream Equities (100) Main trading company is Pernod Ricard New Zealand. 11. YPG Holdings (115) Trading as Yellow (Directories).

A = annualised figures. * = more than 50% overseas controlled. NZSX = New Zealand Stock Exchange. 64 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

12. Viterra (NZ) (119) Name changed from ABB Grain and balance date to 31 October following amalgamation. Figures annualised. 13. New Zealand Sugar Company (120) Change of balance date to December 2010 and figures annualised. 14. Lion Nathan Wines & Spirits (141) and NZ Breweries (86) Post balance date amalgamation of Contract Bottling Co, Lion Nathan Wines and Spirits New Zealand, Maltexo and New Zealand Breweries to become New Zealand Breweries. 15. Ashburton Trading Society (142) Prior year figures annualised from 15 months. 16. Hallenstein Glasson Holdings (146) Current year financial statements unavailable when list closed. Prior year figures have been repeated. No comparatives shown.


EBIT ($000s)

% Return on Revenue

Total Assets ($000s)

Rank

% Change

% Return on Assets

% Return Total Equity on Total Proprietorship Approx Balance ($000s) Rank Equity Ratio (%) Employees Date

4,349

2.7

48,146

195

-49.2

2.8

25,404

178

7.8

35.54%

N/D

03/10

14,880

9.3

120,336

169

4.1

9.1

99,170

119

11.4

84.09%

301

12/10

9,262

5.9

257,553

118

-0.1

2.4

195,084

87

3.3

75.70%

768

06/11

17,149

10.9

114,006

174

-6.9

8.7

91,662

124

11.9

77.51%

N/D

06/10

(2,358)

-1.5

49,565

194

10.8

-6.4

16,232

184

-17.0

34.42%

N/D

03/11

4,330

2.8

94,323

183

50.9

1.8

30,289

174

4.6

38.63%

332

03/11

2,010

1.3

117,465

170

-22.5

0.2

68,044

137

0.3

50.58%

165

11/10

24,919

16.3

186,412

143

8.4

7.9

50,227

154

33.0

28.03%

N/D

11/10

9,020

5.9

137,417

155

-4.0

3.4

44,375

161

10.5

31.63%

752

06/11

5,153

3.4

82,761

188

-5.2

1.3

31,293

172

3.7

36.81%

76

06/10

(2,719)

-1.9

129,748

161

4.2

-2.4

79,139

129

-3.7

62.25%

277

12/10

7,084

4.9

84,047

185

19.7

5.8

29,361

176

16.4

38.07%

N/D

07/10

5,611

3.9

324,354

103

4.9

-2.6

18,404

183

-38.0

5.81%

N/D

12/10

5,588

3.9

204,426

139

4.4

1.1

88,147

126

2.5

44.06%

268

03/11

13,878

9.9

110,439

178

-7.4

4.4

(5,912)

194

N/A

-5.15%

N/D

06/10

9,244

6.6

63,143

193

10.7

8.6

32,024

171

16.3

53.30%

1,297

09/10

10,710

7.7

98,635

182

12.4

7.3

71,803

135

10.0

77.04%

N/D

12/10

6,573

4.7

36,280

199

7.7

13.1

15,014

185

30.0

42.92%

N/D

09/10

67,700

49.2

1,618,000

31

7.1

2.3

892,100

23

4.2

57.03%

49

03/11

45,800

33.4

1,283,900

40

-1.2

0.8

882,400

24

1.1

68.32%

26

06/11

17. Renaissance Corporation (148) Change of balance date. Figures annualised from nine months trading. 18. New Zealand Investment Holdings (171) Trading as Marley NZ. 19. GR Media Holdings (174) New company incorporated in August 2009 to be the parent of MediaWorks NZ. 8.5 months trading has not been annualised. 20. Seeka Kiwifruit Industries (178) Change of balance date. Figures annualised from nine months trading. 21. Cerebos Gregg’s (182) Change of balance date. Figures annualised from 15 months.

FINANCIALS

ABBREVIATIONS

1. Bank of New Zealand (3) 2010 results taken from general disclosure statement for Bank of New Zealand. Last year reported as National Australia Bank Group, the parent company. 2. AMI Insurance (13) Previously reported as AMI Members Trust. 3. Heartland New Zealand (14) New company. Prior year comparatives include consolidated results of Marac Finance, Canterbury Building Society, Southern Cross Building Society and PGG Wrightson Finance. 4. AXA Asia Pacific Holdings (17) Post balance date purchase by AMP. 5. PSIS (20) Post balance date registration as The Co-operative Bank by the Reserve Bank of New Zealand. 6. Fisher & Paykel Finance (25) A wholly-owned subsidiary of Fisher & Paykel Appliance Holdings.

AC Auckland Council, AECT Auckland Electricity Consumer Trust, CCC Christchurch City Council, DCC Dunedin City Council, EM Evander Management I Infratil, MCRI Minister of Crown Research Institutes, MF Minister of Finance, MFL Millstream Finance, MSOE Minister for State Owned Enterprise, NZG New Zealand Government, NEPT Northpower Electric Power Trust, NZSF New Zealand Superannuation Fund OEPH Origin Energy Pacific Holdings TSBCT TSB Community Trust TWU Te Waka Unua

Companies with a revenue greater than $75 million are eligible to participate in this survey if audited statutory accounts are available for verification and they meet the ‘Criteria’ outlined on page 48. If you feel your company should have been included in the ‘Top 200’, please phone: 0-9-520 3000. All care has been taken to ensure accuracy. The publisher accepts no responsibility for errors and omissions.

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 65


Rank

Previous Year

FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

5

5

6

6

7

7

8

8

9

10

10

11

11

9

12

(-)

13

22

14

(-)

15

14

16

17

17

13

18

16

19

15

20

19

21

21

22

20

23

30

24

25

25

26

26

24

27

27

28

(-)

29

31

30

33

Total Assets ($000s)

% Change

% Return on Assets

Revenue ($000s)

NZSX*

116,458,000

-1.2

0.7

6,620,000

1

-17.3

NZSX*

72,783,000

-0.9

1.0

4,505,000

2

-13.9

*

69,647,000

-0.3

0.9

3,826,000

4

-14.4

*

63,050,000

-0.8

0.9

4,147,000

3

-5.1

SOE

13,875,337

13.4

0.2

882,040

6

20.5

*

7,178,131

3.5

1.0

508,766

9

4.5

*

5,020,899

5.3

1.1

280,387

14

-11.2

-

4,849,952

10.1

0.9

284,614

13

2.5

*

3,282,000

5.9

-1.7

197,000

18

-42.6

Soc

2,813,833

7.1

0.5

205,638

17

7.9

*

2,681,694

-23.4

0.5

76,529

27

-38.0

-

2,647,247

0.0

2.9

537,380

8

71.2

-

2,266,914

308.4

-50.0

388,282

10

8.4

NZSX

2,117,950

63.6

0.4

181,408

19

7.7

*

2,069,110

8.5

4.9

1,323,800

5

3.1

*

2,055,435

30.7

0.7

66,273

28

41.7

*

1,975,000

0.2

1.5

371,000

11

1.6

NZSX

1,617,644

1.3

3.6

604,636

7

16.9

*

1,550,380

-12.0

4.0

286,983

12

-16.5

Co-op

1,451,933

4.0

0.5

122,147

23

-5.7

*

1,110,888

9.1

2.5

160,166

21

11.5

*

1,106,585

-3.3

0.9

235,040

16

-8.2

Soc

628,517

58.8

1.8

95,835

25

-1.9

-

531,130

0.3

3.5

165,163

20

-2.6

-

486,276

10.9

3.1

99,230

24

14.5

-

462,447

-13.8

1.1

80,204

26

-14.1

*

438,997

1.7

1.4

18,379

30

-31.1

*

395,804

83.5

-20.7

136,235

22

2.6

*

375,039

-2.4

0.6

250,220

15

-0.9

*

352,788

4.1

1.0

34,596

29

-10.6

Company Name (Head Office) ANZ National Bank Wellington Westpac New Zealand Auckland Bank of New Zealand1 Auckland ASB Bank Auckland Kiwibank (50% MF, 50% MSOE) Lower Hutt Rabobank New Zealand Lower Hutt The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Auckland TSB Bank (100% TSBCT) New Plymouth Deutsche Bank AG New Zealand Auckland Southland Building Society Invercargill Citibank NA New Zealand Auckland AMP Life (NZ Branch) Wellington AMI Insurance2 Christchurch Heartland New Zealand3 Auckland IAG (NZ) Holdings Auckland The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi Auckland AXA Asia Pacific Holdings4 Wellington Tower Auckland GE Finance and Insurance Group Auckland PSIS5 Wellington Toyota Finance New Zealand Auckland Custom Fleet NZ Auckland Medical Assurance Society NZ Wellington Fidelity Life Assurance Company Auckland Fisher & Paykel Finance6 Auckland Motor Trade Finances Dunedin Kookmin Bank Auckland Branch Auckland American Home Assurance Co (NZ Branch) Auckland QBE Insurance (International) NZ Branch Auckland Mercedes-Benz Financial Services New Zealand Auckland

* = more than 50% overseas controlled. NZSX = New Zealand Stock Exchange. Footnotes page 64. 66 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

% Rank Change


% Change

% Pre-Tax Return on Revenue

Total Equity ($000s)

Rank

% Return on Total Equity

Proprietorship Ratio (%)

827,000

177.5

17.6

10,446,000

1

8.1

8.91%

9,000

09/10

763,000

254.5

18.3

4,128,000

2

19.0

5.65%

N/D

09/10

602,000

432.6

16.6

4,002,000

3

15.5

5.74%

N/D

09/10

568,000

140.7

19.6

3,947,000

4

15.2

6.24%

4,652

06/11

21,228

-53.7

3.7

607,849

6

3.5

4.66%

951

06/11

71,989

747.4

21.4

638,445

5

15.9

9.05%

N/D

12/10

56,189

10.8

29.0

27,909

26

205.9

0.57%

250

12/10

39,847

-22.1

21.2

358,316

10

11.6

7.74%

300

03/11

(54,000)

-164.3

-37.1

88,000

22

-37.2

2.76%

N/D

12/10

14,250

-5.2

10.9

202,040

14

7.5

7.43%

239

03/11

15,676

-26.3

30.1

146,386

16

11.3

4.74%

37

12/10

76,390

-3.9

24.7

389,661

9

20.2

14.72%

N/D

12/10

(705,015)

-2,263.2

-181.8

139,394

17

-279.0

9.88%

N/D

06/11

7,143

-50.0

6.4

296,406

11

2.8

17.37%

400

06/11

96,940

528.6

10.8

289,687

12

40.2

14.57%

N/D

06/10

12,896

17.3

27.2

11,656

29

114.4

0.64%

14

03/11

30,000

-43.4

19.9

273,000

13

11.3

13.84%

N/D

12/10

58,065

15.9

15.9

441,332

7

13.7

27.46%

800

09/10

65,447

129.2

33.5

393,342

8

18.1

23.75%

N/D

12/10

7,102

-45.9

7.7

124,004

19

5.9

8.71%

330

03/11

26,921

130.7

22.5

156,707

15

18.8

14.72%

75

03/11

10,005

-58.2

6.2

54,856

24

20.1

4.87%

N/D

12/10

9,310

-18.6

11.5

118,702

20

8.2

23.18%

173

03/11

18,314

8.3

11.0

129,089

18

15.2

24.34%

150

06/11

14,173

50.5

20.4

93,035

21

16.2

20.12%

230

03/11

5,306

-39.5

8.7

66,244

23

8.2

13.26%

52

09/10

5,893

-19.0

46.1

6,629

30

78.3

1.52%

12

12/10

(63,438)

-914.0

-47.2

47,448

25

-258.4

15.52%

90

11/10

2,219

-88.0

1.1

23,187

28

8.4

6.11%

231

12/10

3,417

-11.2

14.8

24,885

27

14.4

7.20%

24

12/10

Profit After Tax ($000s)

DECEMBER 2011

Approx Employees

Balance Date

| management.co.nz | 67


YEAR-ON-YEAR COMPARISONS These tables compare the results of this year’s top 200 companies, Top 30 financial organisations, and the combined Top 230 results, with the performance of those same companies in their previous reporting year.

These tables compare the results of the companies which make up this year’s Top 200, Top 30 financial organisations, and the combined Top 230 results, with the companies in last year’s lists.

TOP 200 COMPANIES

TOP 200 COMPANIES

2011 $000s Revenue

2010 $000s % Change

2011 $000s

152,785,986

141,543,035

7.9

Revenue

Profit After Tax

3,995,697

4,020,664

-0.6

Tax Paid

2,236,696

3,185,895

EBITDA

20,401,802

Assets Equity

152,785,986

146,490,814

4.3

Profit After Tax

3,995,697

4,195,038

-4.8

-29.8

Tax Paid

2,236,696

3,221,893

-30.6

19,077,519

6.9

EBITDA

20,401,802

19,595,732

4.1

227,008,987

210,512,989

7.8

Assets

227,008,987

211,863,337

7.1

107,431,521

100,868,879

6.5

Equity

107,431,521

101,508,524

5.8

TOP 30 FINANCE COMPANIES

TOP 30 FINANCE COMPANIES

2011 $000s

2010 $000s % Change

26,689,951

29,372,656

-9.1

Profit After Tax

2,606,267

500,548

420.7

Tax Paid

1,019,035

3,044,266

EBITDA

17,340,245

Assets Equity

Revenue

2011 $000s

2010 $000s % Change

26,689,951

29,635,445

-9.9

Profit After Tax

2,606,267

442,793

488.6

-66.5

Tax Paid

1,019,035

3,026,095

-66.3

20,456,748

-15.2

EBITDA

17,340,245

20,875,166

-16.9

385,279,930

382,465,546

0.7

Assets

385,279,930

385,121,417

0.0

27,671,209

25,865,452

7.0

Equity

27,671,209

26,384,157

4.9

TOP 230 COMPANIES 2011 $000s Revenue

2010 $000s % Change

Revenue

TOP 230 COMPANIES 2010 $000s % Change

179,475,937

170,915,691

5.0

Profit After Tax

6,601,964

4,521,212

46.0

Tax Paid

3,255,731

6,230,161

EBITDA

37,742,047

Assets Equity

2011 $000s 179,475,937

176,126,259

1.9

Profit After Tax

6,601,964

4,637,831

42.4

-47.7

Tax Paid

3,255,731

6,247,988

-47.9

39,534,267

-4.5

EBITDA

37,742,047

40,470,898

-6.7

612,288,917

592,978,535

3.3

Assets

612,288,917

596,984,754

2.6

135,102,730

126,734,331

6.6

Equity

135,102,730

127,892,681

5.6

68 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

Revenue

2010 $000s % Change


>> FROM STRENGTH TO STRENGTH

Kensington Swan builds on the specialist expertise it provides to clients. We welcome a new Partner to our Auckland Property team, Matthew Ockleston, and new Senior Associate, Karen Dwyer. Matthew brings considerable experience and expertise in public works and infrastructure to these sectors. Other talent recently recruited from New Zealand and globally are Greg Cain, Employment Partner, Wellington; and Jenni Rutter, Special Counsel, Intellectual Property. In addition Greg Milner-White is now Partner, Environment and Resource Management, where his leading expertise helps clients resolve complex issues in a cost-effective manner. Find out how these top specialists can help you to shape your business future.

Matthew Ockleston | Partner Property

Greg Cain | Partner Employment

Jenni Rutter | Special Counsel , Intellectual Property

AU C K L A N D

W E L L I N G TO N

Greg Milner-White | Partner Resource Management

Karen Dwyer | Senior Associate, Property

K E N S I N G TO N S WA N . C OM


ANALYSIS

MOST IMPROVED REVENUE Top 200 Rank

MOST IMPROVED PROFITS % Change

Top 200 Rank

% Change

68

Open Country Dairy

93.0

38

16,993.4

91

Watercare Services (100% AC)

87.3

178

Seeka Kiwifruit Industries

2217.6

42

Hewlett-Packard New Zealand

51.6

138

Landcorp Farming

2061.9

37

Combined Rural Traders Society

37.6

192

Kimbyr Investments

1433.3

178

Seeka Kiwifruit Industries

35.8

199

Goodman Property Trust

1210.7

138

Landcorp Farming

34.6

132

Weyville Holdings

806.6

119

Viterra (NZ)

34.0

f6

Rabobank New Zealand

747.4

158

Rakon

32.9

71

The Colonial Motor Company

722.0

110

Apple Sales New Zealand

30.9

109

Holden New Zealand

685.7

55

Methanex New Zealand

27.3

189

Airways Corporation of New Zealand

600.7

31

RTA Pacific (NZ)

26.8

134

Delegat's Group

575.4

61

Ravensdown Fertiliser Co-operative

Westland Co-operative Dairy Company

24.5

f 15

IAG (NZ) Holdings

528.6

153

Port of Tauranga

24.4

f3

Bank of New Zealand

432.6

107

Kathmandu Holdings

23.5

48

Ballance Agri-Nutrients

375.3

Farmlands Trading Society

21.7

107

Kathmandu Holdings

316.2

Livestock Improvement Corporation

21.5

158

Rakon

258.2

Solid Energy NZ

20.2

f2

Westpac New Zealand

254.5

Ryman Healthcare

19.6

85

Auckland International Airport

239.3

52

Christchurch City Holdings

18.5

53

Farmlands Trading Society

231.0

26

Mainfreight

18.4

3

Woolworths New Zealand Group

204.9

53 176 41 143

BIGGEST PROFIT MAKERS Top 200 Rank f1

BIGGEST LOSS MAKERS Profit $000s

Top 200 Rank

Loss $000s

ANZ National Bank

827,000

115

YPG Holdings

(1,445,247)

Fonterra Co-operative Group

771,000

f 13

AMI Insurance

(705,015)

f2

Westpac New Zealand

763,000

81

Transpacific Industries Group Finance (NZ)

(242,507)

f3

Bank of New Zealand

602,000

100

Millstream Equities

(183,244)

f4

ASB Bank

568,000

58

13

Meridian Energy

303,111

6

35

Housing New Zealand

293,000

51

2

Fletcher Building

291,000

f 28

8

Aotea Energy

226,200

f9

Vector

203,847

1

29 4

Blue Star Group Holdings

(84,894)

Foodstuffs (Auckland)

(75,878)

Telstra New Zealand Holdings

(65,145)

American Home Assurance Co (NZ)

(63,438)

Deutsche Bank AG New Zealand

(54,000)

174

GR Media Holdings

(50,531)

SCA Hygiene Holding

(47,038)

Foodstuffs (Wellington) Co-operative

(37,513)

Telecom Corporation of New Zealand

166,000

114

18

Vodafone New Zealand

151,500

11

12

Contact Energy

150,294

163

Bupa Healthcare New Zealand

(36,909)

Orica Investments (NZ)

146,646

28

New Zealand Post

(35,642)

22

Mighty River Power

127,073

27

PGG Wrightson

(30,667)

43

SKYCITY Entertainment Group

123,003

98

Toll Group (NZ)

(30,485)

44

Sky Network Television

120,326

156

Tourism Holdings

(27,344)

14

RTA Pacific (NZ)

(26,919)

Kiwi Income Property Trust

(26,406)

NZ Poultry Enterprises

(25,938)

102

Infratil

119,600

31

108

British American Tobacco Holdings (NZ)

116,045

157

138

Landcorp Farming

114,592

77

F = Financial organisations ranked by total assets. Page 66. 70 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


TOP RETURNS ON TOTAL EQUITY Top 200 Rank 76 7 16 108 27 171 78

TOP RETURNS ON TOTAL ASSETS % Return on Equity

Nestle New Zealand

Top 200 Rank

286.9

78

The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation

f 205.9

108

The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi

f 114.4

76

81.3

British American Tobacco Holdings (NZ) Kookmin Bank Auckland Branch

% Return on Assets

Beca Group

26.5

British American Tobacco Holdings (NZ)

25.9

Nestle New Zealand

25.0

146

Hallenstein Glasson Holdings

23.4

f 78.3

103

Restaurant Brands NZ

22.4

New Zealand Investment Holdings

60.2

160

MARS New Zealand

19.1

Beca Group

45.5

118

Siemens (NZ)

17.4

103

Restaurant Brands NZ

44.7

102

Orica Investments (NZ)

15.5

18

Vodafone New Zealand

40.2

120

New Zealand Sugar Company

14.9

15

IAG (NZ) Holdings

40.2

117

Allied Foods (NZ)

14.1

MARS New Zealand

35.7

39

DGL Investments

13.6

Compass Group New Zealand

13.1

Michael Hill International

12.5

160

BP New Zealand Holdings

35.5

198

173

7

Mercedes-Benz New Zealand

34.8

70

118

Siemens (NZ)

34.6

145

Mazda Motors of New Zealand

12.5

Opus International (NZ)

33.1

137

ABB

12.2

188

92

ITW New Zealand

33.0

20

The Warehouse Group

11.9

106

Kathmandu Holdings

11.9

Briscoe Group

11.8

Pact Group (NZ)

31.8

107

87

Spotless Facility Services (NZ)

31.7

80

146

Hallenstein Glasson Holdings

31.5

154

McDonald's Restaurants (New Zealand)

11.7

198

Compass Group New Zealand

30.0

159

Skellerup Holdings

11.7

Supporting the

Top 200 for

20 years

In 2011 we reached and celebrated our 20th anniversary. In that time we have guided our clients towards their strategic achievement and success. This through our portfolio, programme and project management services. The path to strategic success is tricky. Let us assist you. Contact us on 04 495 9100 or visit www.projectplusgroup.com

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 71


PERFORMANCE BY SECTOR AUTOMOTIVE

COMMUNICATIONS | MEDIA Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

Profit $000s

Top 200 Top 200 Profit Revenue Rank Rank

Mercedes-Benz New Zealand

10,438

99

173

Telecom Corporation of New Zealand

166,000

7

4

The Colonial Motor Company

8,534

104

71

Vodafone New Zealand

151,500

8

18

120,326

13

44

25,308

56

57

2,080

133

93

Mazda Motors of New Zealand

8,158

107

145

Sky Network Television

Holden New Zealand

5,374

120

109

Fairfax New Zealand Holdings

Honda New Zealand

2,214

132

194

Television New Zealand

Ford Motor Company of New Zealand

1,891

136

94

CablePrice (NZ)

1,380

139

186

COMMUNITY SERVICES

BANKING | FINANCE Profit $000s

Top 30 Top 30 Profit Asset Rank Rank

ANZ National Bank

827,000

1

1

Westpac New Zealand

763,000

2

2

Bank of New Zealand

602,000

3

3

ASB Bank

568,000

4

4

Rabobank New Zealand

71,989

7

6

GE Finance and Insurance Group

65,447

8

19

The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp

56,189

10

7

TSB Bank

39,847

11

8

Toyota Finance New Zealand

26,921

13

21

Kiwibank

21,228

14

5

Citibank NA New Zealand

15,676

16

11

Southland Building Society

14,250

17

10

Fisher & Paykel Finance

14,173

18

25

The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi

12,896

19

16

Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

Housing New Zealand

293,000

3

35

Ryman Healthcare

100,177

22

143

Retirement Care (NZ)

16,189

83

152

Spotless Facility Services (NZ)

14,597

88

87

Abano Healthcare Group

13,494

93

170

Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

77,322

29

52 128

DIVERSIFIED CORPORATES

Christchurch City Holdings Dunedin City Holdings

16,244

81

Hellaby Holdings

15,348

85

74

8,941

102

105

Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

47,892

37

66

Unilever New Zealand

FOOD (PROCESSED) | BEVERAGES

CHEMICAL | PHARMACEUTICALS Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

146,646

10

102

31,579

50

25

Nestle New Zealand

31,652

49

76

Dow AgroSciences (NZ)

6,827

114

197

Frucor Beverages

25,373

55

82

Aperio Group (New Zealand)

5,061

122

195

Restaurant Brands NZ

24,017

59

103

Orica Investments (NZ) Ebos Group

CONSTRUCTION | ENGINEERING

Fletcher Building

Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

291,000

4

2

Coca-Cola Amatil (NZ) McDonald's Restaurants (New Zealand)

35,884

42

154

Delegat's Group

31,939

48

134

New Zealand Breweries

22,709

61

86

New Zealand Sugar Company

19,211

71

120 117

Allied Foods (NZ)

17,654

76

DB Breweries

16,750

80

73

NZ Snack Food Holdings

16,198

82

123

DGL Investments

87,337

23

39

MARS New Zealand

14,821

86

160

Fulton Hogan

73,949

30

10

Goodman Fielder New Zealand

14,737

87

34

Beca Group

44,962

38

78

Nobilo Holdings

11,325

96

151

Opus International (NZ)

22,067

63

92

Cerebos Gregg's

10,780

98

182

Transfield Services (New Zealand)

13,863

91

65

Lion Nathan Wines and Spirits NZ

7,928

108

141

72 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


Companies listed under the various industry sectors are ranked on their profit after tax, except for insurance which is ranked on revenue. Ranking in the Top 200 or Top 30 is also provided.

INSURANCE

PRIMARY PRODUCTION Top 30 Revenue Revenue $000s Rank

IAG (NZ) Holdings Tower

Top 30 Asset Rank

Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

1,323,800

5

15

Fonterra Co-operative Group

771,000

1

1

604,636

7

18

Landcorp Farming

114,592

16

138

AMP Life (NZ Branch)

537,380

8

12

Pan Pac Forest Products

41,980

39

113

AMI Insurance

388,282

10

13

Ravensdown Fertiliser Co-operative

33,503

47

38

AXA Asia Pacific Holdings

371,000

11

17

Sanford

25,025

57

79

QBE Insurance (International) NZ

250,220

15

29

AFFCO Holdings

21,010

66

33

Fidelity Life Assurance Company

165,163

20

24

Kura

18,399

74

62

American Home Assurance Co (NZ)

136,235

22

28

IT | COMPUTER HARDWARE Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

Datacom Group

22,266

62

50

IBM New Zealand

20,207

68

90

Alcatel-Lucent New Zealand

11,273

97

121

Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

103,497

19

45

69,271

31

21

MANUFACTURING

Tasman Steel Holdings Nuplex Industries

Livestock Improvement Corporation

17,634

77

176

Juken New Zealand

15,521

84

122 178

Seeka Kiwifruit Industries

8,575

103

ZESPRI Group

7,257

111

23

Alliance Group

6,318

117

24

Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

AgResearch

6,209

118

183

AsureQuality

5,149

121

196

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

15

108

RESEARCH

RETAIL | WHOLESALE

Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Corporation

52,466

36

67

Profit $000s

Pact Group (NZ)

35,605

43

106

British American Tobacco Holdings (NZ) 116,045

Fisher & Paykel Appliances Holdings

33,545

46

32

Woolworths New Zealand Group

100,740

21

3

Ballance Agri-Nutrients

26,340

53

48

The Warehouse Group

78,145

28

20

Sealed Air (New Zealand)

20,245

67

162

Kathmandu Holdings

39,066

40

107

Skellerup Holdings

20,200

69

159

Michael Hill International

34,499

44

70

Siemens (NZ)

18,590

72

118

Harvey Norman Stores (NZ)

24,528

58

46

Cavalier Corporation

18,180

75

136

Steel & Tube Holdings

17,041

78

89

OIL | GAS | MINERALS | ELECTRICITY | WATER

Meridian Energy

Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

303,111

2

13

Briscoe Group

21,612

65

80

OfficeMax Holdings

13,119

94

88

Bidvest New Zealand

8,330

106

72

DSE (NZ)

7,097

113

99

Profit $000s

Top 200 Profit Rank

Top 200 Revenue Rank

100,761

20

85

81,000

25

5 153

TRANSPORTATION

Aotea Energy

226,200

5

8

Vector

203,847

6

29

Auckland International Airport

9

12

Air New Zealand

Contact Energy

150,294

Mighty River Power

127,073

11

22

BP New Zealand Holdings

112,589

17

7

TrustPower Solid Energy NZ Transpower New Zealand

Port of Tauranga

58,398

32

New Zealand Railways Corporation

34,000

45

36

Freightways

29,899

51

97

112,369

18

47

87,184

24

41

Mainfreight

25,715

54

26

49

Ports of Auckland

23,326

60

167

78,500

27

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 73


MISSING, MERGED, MISCELLANEOUS JUST MISSED THE TOP 200 LIST Rank Previous This Year Year Company 201 195 GlaxoSmithKline NZ

Revenue % Profit After ($000s) Change Tax ($000s) 136,826 -7.5 5,736

Rank 126

% Change -12.0

EBIT % Return Balance ($000s) on Revenue Date 8,406 6.1 12/10

202

206

Johnson & Johnson (New Zealand)

135,655

3.3

4,588

135

-47.9

6,318

4.7

12/10

203

(-)

Hansells Food Group

134,677

1.0

(51)

175

-101.3

-830

2.3

03/10

204

(-)

Fujitsu New Zealand

131,642

12.9

2,103

149

40.6

2,274

1.9

03/11

205

186

Paperlinx (NZ)

130,307

-16.5

4,800

131

101.7

6,986

6.6

06/10

206

204

Armourguard Security

129,661

-3.4

1,263

159

1,126.8

1,810

2.5

09/10

207

(-)

Suzuki New Zealand

128,598

11.9

2,600

147

53.2

4,077

3.3

12/10

208

(-)

New Zealand Radio Network

127,547

1.6

9,077

106

-11.3

12,293

9.7

12/10

209

(-)

Bayer New Zealand

127,200

3.7

1,205

160

42.1

3,754

3.8

12/10

210

185

Pacific Brands Holdings (NZ)

125,368

-19.7

3,543

143

140.1

6,058

4.8

06/10

211

173

DFS New Zealand

122,387

-30.1

2,626

146

-78.4

3,820

3.2

12/10

212

(-)

Methven

122,127

-5.9

4,749

132

-39.3

6,789

6.6

03/11

213

(-)

Rayonier New Zealand

121,439

136.7

528

168

113.7

532

0.4

12/10

214

(-)

New Zealand Oil and Gas

119,517

31.5

(75,887)

227 -1,841.3

-62,627

-49.0

06/11

215

(-)

CDL Hotels Holdings New Zealand

118,143

5.2

(12,272)

205

-179.5

14,780

14.0

12/10

216

(-)

National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research

117,843

-7.9

1,266

158

-71.8

1,860

2.0

06/11

217

(-)

Avis Rent A Car

117,527

0.4

11,983

98

51.0

13,027

11.9

12/10

218

(-)

Postie Plus Group

113,774

3.1

415

170

-32.5

781

1.5

08/10

219

(-)

ACP Media

112,034

-6.5

(6,641)

195

-407.0

-5,323

-4.8

06/10

220

(-)

Alsco Investments NZ

111,071

-1.0

5,474

127

-10.1

8,057

10.9

12/10

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO‌ Company Canterbury Building Society (CBS Canterbury) Geon Group NZ Limited H. J. Heinz Company (New Zealand)

Prev Year Rank F23 Amalgamated to form Heartland 103 Figures not available. received after list closed. Revenue of 43 Figures $736m to April 11.

Last Recorded Revenue ($000s)

Last Balance Date

$540,845 (Assets, $000s)

3/10

$335,007

06/09

$782,958

04/10

Lumley General Insurance (NZ)

F28 Figures not available.

$425,115 (Assets, $000s)

06/10

Nissan New Zealand Limited

176 Figures not available.

$171,531

03/10

South Canterbury Finance

F12 In receivership

$2,354,890 (Assets, $000s)

06/09

WGL Retail Holdings

132 In receivership.

$246,934

08/09

Alesco New Zealand

180 Revenue below Top 200 qualifying level.

$56,436

05/10

Imperial Tobacco New Zealand

120 Change to basis of reporting revenue.

$88,515

09/10

$555,221

06/09

G E Crane NZ

74 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

over by Fletcher Building and now a 60 Taken subsidiary of that company.


M

INBOX

Amanda Jongeneel... Focus on the positive.

Link RWC win to profits

T

he All Blacks’ Rugby World Cup win is just the ticket out of the doldrums for many companies. So says Amanda Jongeneel, a London-based specialist whose company Jongeneel & Associates focuses on complex change and employee engagement. Jongeneel says the RWC win provides the perfect opportunity for organisations to leverage the nation’s increased sense of pride and community spirit. This, she says, can make a tangible difference to a corporate’s bottom line. According to Jongeneel, now is the perfect time to:

• Introduce changes to business as people will be more resilient; • Increase sales targets as employees will be more optimistic and more focused on achieving goals; and • Introduce new strategies as teams will be feeling an increased sense of shared goals and responsibilities. “With morale at an all-time high, now is the perfect time to be talking to teams about their successes in 2011,” she says. “Get discussions going on how to build on that success for 2012 or how to deal positively with

76 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

any changes you’re thinking of introducing.” She suggests executives harness current high levels of optimism and resilience as building blocks for next year’s change plan or strategy. “Discuss ways to build on successes, focus on your combined strengths rather than on what’s weak or what went wrong. Focus on the positive, keep productivity up, keep morale high and it will keep customer service levels high.” Jongeneel suggests executives work with their teams using

tools such as World Cafes or appreciative enquiry questions, or pick up on learnings from the All Blacks win. • Talk about the All Blacks as a team: what was it about their teamwork that won them the world cup? • What elements of that teamwork do we/should we be using in our own workplace to drive success? • What did we do in the team/ business really well this year? • What can we do in the team/business to build on those successes in 2012? M


INBOX

M

Jenni Rutter (left) and Nura Taefi... Draft proper restraint of trade clauses.

LinkedIn or -out?

W

ho ‘owns’ LinkedIn data when an employee departs the company? According to two specialists at Kensington Swan, this question has not yet reached the courts in New Zealand but there are clues to the likely answer. Jenni Rutter is a special counsel – intellectual property and Nura Taefi, a solicitor – employment at the law firm. They say that in a 1991 case two Christchurch real estate agents left their employer, taking photocopied client contact lists with them to use in a competing business. “An injunction followed and the court said that there was nothing wrong with an ex-employee who

is not under a restraint of trade making use of the names of his former employer’s clients. “But the line would be drawn against an employee taking a list of business records or even deliberately memorising the information.” Rutter and Taefi say control over LinkedIn contacts has been dealt with specifically in the UK. “Hays Specialist Recruitment had encouraged its employees to create LinkedIn accounts for employment purposes. But when one of its employees left to carry on a competing business, he began using his LinkedIn account to invite Hays’ clients to join his network. “The court ordered the employee

to return all the contact information he obtained in his capacity as an employee of Hays and said that contact details on a LinkedIn account gathered in the course of employment are confidential information, which remained the property of the employer.” According to Rutter and Taefi, it is not clear how a similar case would be decided by the New Zealand courts. “Generally, contacts on an employee’s LinkedIn account would not be deemed confidential information, especially in circumstances where the account has been set up and managed by the employee,” they say.

Manage your Taxi Spend with Innovation and Technology

Rutter’s and Taefi’s recommendations to managers: • Properly drafted restraint of trade and non-solicitation clauses are a must. But pursuing an exemployee through the courts to enforce restraints is costly and may attract bad publicity. • Make sure employment agreements contain express obligations that describe the types of information considered to be confidential. A good start would be stating that contact details acquired on company time, or provided by the company, are company information and must be returned to the company at the end of the employment relationship. M

tel: 09 306 1790 email: enquiries@taxicharge.co.nz

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 77


M

INBOX

Kiwi expats keen to invest

OPUS: A LEADER IN

A

local study says Kiwi expats might be the key to addressing New Zealand’s lack of investment capital. Kea New Zealand recently conducted a survey that reveals many overseas-based Kiwis are willing to commit time and money to the growth of New Zealand business.

INFRASTRUCTURAL SERVICES Opus is a leading professional services consultancy, providing state-of-the-art innovative solutions for local authorities and institutions throughout New Zealand.

Almost three-quarters (72.8 percent) of those surveyed said they would be willing to help mentor or manage a New Zealand small to medium enterprise and at least 15 percent said they are strongly motivated to invest in New Zealand companies. Entitled ‘Foreign Investment

from Kiwis: The potential for New Zealand’s diaspora to invest in our productive economy’, the research included interviews and insights from more than 500 people in New Zealand and offshore, including 469 Kiwi expats who identified themselves as prospective investors. M

Services we provide include: Architecture Heritage Engineering Planning Property Management Water and Environmental We have offices throughout New Zealand. Contact an office near you.

78 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

Youth programmes help economy

I

nvesting in young people early is a no-brainer, according to Foundation for Youth Development (FYD) co-founder Graeme Dingle. This is a view shared by key sponsor, Deloitte, who has supported FYD from its beginnings. FYD, a home-grown charity, has been working with Kiwi kids for over 16 years. It says its preventative approach has a huge impact on the New Zealand economy. “The cost of a child participating every year of their school life in our school-based programmes, for example, averages less than $1000 per annum,” says Dingle. “This means that they are supported from the start of primary school right through to the end of high school with effective interventions that keep them engaged and achieving. “Compare this to a student leaving school early, with no qualifications and getting into trouble. The direct cost of

intervening with a programme to try to keep them out of prison is up to $28,000 per six months per person. “Should that intervention fail and the individual end up in jail, the cost to the country escalates to over $100,000 per year per prisoner and this does not include court costs, welfare costs or the costs to the victim/s.” Deloitte partner and FYD chair Dean Ellwood notes there is a global war for talent. “Our ‘product’ is our people, and their skills and abilities. New Zealand is a small country and the corresponding talent pool is also small, with significant competition. “It makes sense to invest in something that keeps as many young people as possible engaged and focused on their future.” The collaboration also aligns well with Deloitte’s global CSR strategy, Deloitte 21, to drive innovations in education and skills for underserved young people that will help them

succeed in the 21st-century economy. Both Dingle and Ellwood are advocates of holistic programmes that envelope young people from an early age right through to the end of high school and beyond. “We recently took part in a four-year pilot project in Northland which saw three organisations collaborating so that four programmes ran throughout the community, from pre-school right through to a parenting programme, and the results were excellent,” says Dingle. “It has prompted FYD to invest in the sequencing of our own school-based programmes in areas of most need.” FYD’s Community Development Strategy (CDS) has now commenced in Mataura and Huntly, and plans for Manurewa are underway. FYD currently works with over 18,000 young people across New Zealand from age 5 to 18. M


New business plans. The perfect business partner.

New Business Smart plans Group calling, one Frequently Called Number and included calls to voicemail on all plans. Visit us instore or at vodafone.co.nz/business Get great value with Vodafone

Terms and conditions apply See vodafone co nz for details


M

INBOX

Specifically Pacific

L

ooking for ways to help young Pacific employees make the most of their talents? There are plenty of ideas in the Equal Employment Opportunities Trust’s latest research report, Specifically Pacific: Engaging Young Pacific Workers. The EEO Trust commissioned the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs research group to undertake the study. The aim: to better understand what drives young Pacific employees in the workplace, their career expectations and aspirations, and what helps and hinders their participation and success. The project involved face-to-face, in-depth interviews with 20 young employees of Pacific heritage and six managers of young Pacific staff. All those interviewed worked for EEO Trust member organisations in finance, retail, manufacturing, health, transport and media. In short, bosses who recognised family and cultural values, fostered positive relationships between managers and staff, created Pacific rolemodels, and offered opportunities for career development helped build young Pacific workers’ engagement and commitment. EEO Trust chief executive Dr Philippa Reed says the research was

80 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

something of a first. “Until it was carried out, there was very little information about Pacific young people and their engagement at work.” Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs chief executive Dr Colin Tukuitonga says the fast-growing Pacific population means an increasing Pacific labour force. “Predictions are that in 2026, one in eight 15 to 39-yearolds will be of Pacific descent.” The report suggests that organisations: • Draw on Pacific values by getting to know young Pacific workers’ families and involving them in resolving work issues. • Recognise the potential of young Pacific workers and actively motivate them through approaches such as clearly-defined roles and expectations, on-the-job training, opportunities to continue education, two-way communication, and opportunities to grow mutual trust and respect. • Develop career pathways that match young Pacific workers’ aspirations and competencies. • Provide opportunities for senior Pacific managers to mentor young people. M


INBOX

M

Kiwis value privacy

N

ew Zealanders won’t tolerate privacy breaches no matter the circumstances, according to a recent Unisys Security Index study. The study, conducted by Consumerlink, showed that 80 percent of Kiwis surveyed would cease dealings with businesses and other organisations if they became aware that their personal information had been accessed by unauthorised people. It also found that 48 percent would publically expose the issue and 36 percent said they would take legal action. “New Zealanders are telling us that unauthorised access to their personal information will be viewed as a fundamental breach of trust with significant consequences,” said Unisys New Zealand managing director Brett Hodgson. “These findings are a warning to any organisation holding personal data that customers will walk away if they become aware that their private information has been accessed by unauthorised people – whether accidentally or as part of a malicious attack. Data breaches can have a direct impact on the bottom line.” Of respondents in the 12 countries surveyed in the global research study, those in New Zealand were among the most likely to say they will stop dealing with an organisation responsible for a data breach. Only 26 percent of New Zealanders surveyed said that they would continue dealing in any manner, online or otherwise, with an organisation

responsible for a breach of their personal data. By contrast, almost half of Kiwis surveyed say they would publicly expose a data breach if it happened – making them the least likely of the 12 countries surveyed to take this action. Kiwis are also among the least likely of respondents from the 12 countries surveyed to say they will take legal action in the event of a data breach. “Compared to other countries, Kiwis prefer to let their actions do their talking and will simply stop dealing with an organisation if they become aware of a data breach,” Hodgson explained. M

Leadership Psychology

Conference 2012 28 & 29 February 2012, Rydges Auckland Applying the Tools of Evidence-Based Leadership Development and Psychology to Develop Resilient Leaders that Positively Influence Culture and Organisational Effectiveness

Register for this event at: www.liquidlearning.co.nz, phone +64 9 927 1500 or email: marketing@liquidlearning.co.nz

EVENT PARTNER

MEDIA PARTNER

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 81


M

FOCUS

1

3

2

4

5 1 Victoria Park Tunnel Charity Dinner: 27 October. 2 Zein Hague, Jason Lawrence, Tina Mackay and Ash Marks (all from Contract Landscapes). 3 Annie and Wayne Boyd (Telecom). 4 Tony Parsons (Project Challenge Team VP Alliance), Richard Aitken (Beca), Richard Muggleston (Fletcher Construction) and Innes Flett (Parsons Brinkerhoff ). 5 Clive Fuhr (Auckland Property Council), Geoff Dangerfield (New Zealand Transport Agency) and Mark Binns (Fletcher Building).

1

2

3

4

5

82 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

1 TIN100 2011 Report Launch: 31 October. 2 John Ascroft and Dan Clouston (Jade Software). 3 Mike Hibbert (Augen Software Group), Steve Corbett (Massey University’s ecentre) and Mitchell Pham (Augen Software Group). 4 Brett O’Riley (Ministry of Science and Innovation), Angela Pantano (Medical Technology Association of NZ) and Wayne Oxenham (Orion Health). 5 Lady Judi and Sir William Gallagher (Gallagher Group) and Paul Bosher (QPod Systems). 6 Greg Shanahan (Technology Investment Network), Gavin Mitchell (IRL), Rob O’Neill (Sunday Star-Times) and Sir Paul Callaghan.

6


ASB Institutional delivers capital and transactional banking solutions for corporate and institutional clients with ambitious plans and wide horizons. We’re determined to provide you with every resource you need – creating customised answers for complex financial needs. This includes transactional banking, corporate finance, advisory services, risk management and global market services. We’ll also provide a team of experienced, committed people with both industry and market knowledge. While we have powerful Commonwealth Bank connections, our local decision-making structure makes sure things get done fast. It all adds up to a better way to raise and manage capital. So talk to ASB Institutional now for total capital solutions and businesschanging ideas.

MANAGE AND RAISE CAPITAL, WITH RAISED Kerry Francis, Executive General Manager, Institutional Banking & Markets

ASB Institutional is an undertaking of ASB Bank Limited and Commonwealth Bank of Australia (incorporated in Australia, ABN 48 123 123 124) | asbinstitutional.co.nz


M

AS I SEE IT

Sam Johnson A law and politics student at Canterbury University, Sam Johnson rose to prominence as the organiser of the Student Volunteer Army in the immediate aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes of September 2010 and February 2011. How do you describe New Zealand identity? New Zealand is a country the world wants to visit with people the world wants to befriend. We’re small enough to be rare yet strong enough to compete on the world stage. We are known to be clean and green and have a distinct ‘get it done’ attitude. We have advantages above so many countries in that we are young and are able to learn from international experience and best practice. Our identity will be shaped by how we use and learn from these advantages!

84 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

Photo: Caroline Ducobu

What are the greatest challenges facing New Zealand? Maintaining and building on our unique identity while responding to world pressures and adapting to the mentality of today’s young people; the digital generation. We are caught between international pressure to commit our resources to an unsustainable world and the desire to build a sustainable, clean and green country. The fine balance of priorities in this area will greatly influence the future of New Zealand and the lens the digital generation views the world through. We’re experiencing the effects of the Global Economic Crisis but await the impacts of other international movements and disasters. Everything from the Arab Spring to Occupy Wall Street to the hunger strike in the horn of Africa is influencing the digital generation. Technology now effortlessly unites young people and empowers them to achieve change, protect their future and be the change they want to see. As a nation the best preparation we can do for major challenges is allow, encourage and inspire creativity. New Zealanders are renowned for our ‘Kiwi ingenuity’ and that piece of no.8 wire. We need to encourage and build on that attitude in young people, but do so through the technology already in their pockets. Rapid and positive change can happen if we are supportive, open and accepting to a new way of life. It’s an exciting future we’ve got ahead of us! M


MANAGERS ABROAD

M

An engaging expat Stephen Dee has lived outside NZ for 24 of the last 30 years. For much of his career he has worked in the live entertainment industry, having run opera companies, managed and programmed theatres and concert halls, and been involved in producing operas and concerts, music festivals, touring shows and a West End musical. Dee has lived in London for 7½ years, and for the past 15 months has been UK Regional Manager for Kea. At the end of 2011, he is returning to take up a position at Kea HQ in Auckland. What prompted you to seek work out of New Zealand? Well, I’m something of a serial expat because I’ve left New Zealand three times over the last 30 years! Each time, I have left to take up opportunities that were not available to me in New Zealand. Can you provide a sketch of your current role? Kea has regional managers in the US, China, Australia and the UK – that’s me. The job is about finding ways for expats to engage with New Zealand and contribute towards its growth, whether through mentoring and helping companies that are trying to expand internationally, or by investing in New Zealand enterprises or by moving back and running businesses that generate employment and tax revenue. What are its main challenges? Because this is a sole charge operation, the main challenge is trying to figure out how to generate the best value from a limited resource (ie, my time). We have 8000 members in the UK, and it’s important to try to run a programme that makes engagement easy for as many people as possible. In addition to running a variety of events through the year, I have chosen to replace the monthly newsletter with a fact-filled weekly e-shot that is designed to be read on a smartphone during a three tube-stop commute. How do you view New Zealand both as a country and economic/business entity from where you stand now? Whereas I often feel that the UK is being dragged down by the dead weight of history and tradition, New Zealand has cast off its colonial shackles and its institutionalised lack of ambition. It has a fast-developing entrepreneurial culture, and a developing understanding of how to succeed globally without sacrificing quality of life. New Zealand is realising that it has to think smart, run fast and get out in the world in order to get ahead. We’ll get there. The future is all positive. M Stephen Dee is a member of Kea, New Zealand’s global talent community. www.keanewzealand.com

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 85


What does it mean to inherit global leadership? This was the question Professor Chung Min Lee put to 500 handpicked future leaders at a Harvard conference in Asia recently. Most of them from Asia and in their early 20s, Lee contends these young thinkers will inherit both the world’s future and its problems. Professor Lee is dean of the Graduate School of International Studies and the Underwood International College at South Korea’s prestigious Yonsei University in Seoul. He has served as the Republic of Korea’s ambassador for International Security Affairs and as a member of Korean President Lee Myung-bak’s Foreign Policy Advisory Council. He was speaking at the Harvard Project on Asian and International Relations (HPAIR) in Seoul. The following is extracted from his speech.


IMPACT ASIA

What will happen after

Asia’s rise? On current projections, Asia is set to soon inherit the mantle of economic global leadership. So is there such a thing as Asian values, as some would contend, or simply universal values? Korean leader Chung Min Lee addresses young Asian leaders.

E

ven if Asia succeeds in all of its endeavours, it will create unparalleled, unprecedented problems for the world. Everything in Asia has implications for the world and vice versa. So by the time you become leaders in the private and public sector in the next 20 or 30 years all of these challenges will be yours. Asia has grown ferociously over the past two or three decades. People have said Asia’s growth is linear, that it is relentless and that we will see hundreds of millions of Asians being lifted out of poverty. The last part is true. But my main point is two-fold. First, the rise of Asia is not linear. There will be huge dislocations and bumps along the way. Second, you must understand that Asia’s solutions equal global solutions. And Asia’s problems equal global problems. Asia is now joined at the hip with the rest of the world. Many people simply don’t understand this. It’s not enough to tell the west, “You guys are gone, you’re losers, now it’s Asia’s turn.” You can’t just say, “This

is China, India, Korea and Japan: the rest of you white people can go back home.” Why? Because, number one, that is simply racist and, second, it’s factually untrue. How many Asians do you know who are truly global leaders? How many Asian leaders really spend time thinking about global issues? How many of them really reach out for human rights? How many of Asia’s leaders spoke out about Libya in defence of freedom and democracy? Earlier this year, President Barak Obama, Prime Minister Cameron and many other European leaders spoke out publicly on what was happening in Libya. Not a single Asian leader did. That, I think, is a disaster. It’s time that Asians spoke out forcefully about democracy and human rights: not just in this region but across the world as well. The rise of Asia is not new. In 1500, some 500-plus years ago, the world was dominated by the Chinese. The world is re-emerging into a multi-polar system that will have China, the US and Europe at the forefront. So we in Asia have our homework cut out for us.

How many of you really want to delve into the problems of Asia? Over the next 40 years, China will need 35 new international airports. Some 50 cities will each be home to over five million people in China. As China urbanises rapidly it is going to suck up energy resources for development. For me the key issue is, can Asia become wealthy, healthy and free at the same time? Can Asia become a true democratic zone? I believe firmly in Asia’s cultural heritages. I’ve lived in 10 countries. I’ve lived in Singapore, visited China many times, lived twice in Japan, and I’d be the last to say Asia doesn’t have its own intrinsic cultural value. We are Asian and we should be very proud of that. But Asia must also stand up for human rights. Whether it’s North Korea, Burma or other countries throughout the region, Asian leaders – young leaders such as yourselves – must be concerned about human rights. That’s why I reject the notion of so-called Asian values. I reject this exceptionalism that Asia simply cannot DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 87


IMPACT ASIA

have both wealth and freedom. That’s a bunch of baloney because the [South] Koreans, the Japanese and the Taiwanese have shown that Asia can be wealthy and free at the same time. Over the past 150 years much of Asia has moved from conflict to cooperation. It’s a remarkable transition. In the 100-plus years since the first Opium War of the 1830s and ’40s and until the end of World War II, Asia knew basically three things: conflict, civil wars and endemic poverty. For most of Asia, that’s now a thing of the past. There are, however, huge reservoirs of tension in the region: on the Korean Peninsula, in the Taiwan Straits and in Kashmir, for example. These are key concerns. Yet, writ large, I would argue that Asia has overcome its so-called conflict bubble. Still, that’s not enough. We must shape Asia and the world. You’re probably most familiar with the parts of Asia on the right hand

side of world maps: the countries from Singapore to the right. This is the Asia that is basically freer: has a free market, is tied to the world, has rapid growth, and whose citizens are highly mobile and global. But the countries to the left of Singapore through to Afghanistan are in another part of Asia that will have huge repercussions and implications for these Asian countries to their east. They’re Asia’s energy belt. If our part

of Asia wants to grow, we have no choice but to work with this other part of Asia. The problem is that most of us are very unfamiliar with that part of the world and, more importantly, they face huge domestic challenges including the fact that many of them are failed states. Asia faces twin challenges which represent the two faces of the region’s rise. In essence, every single good thing about the world can be found in Asia. We have innovation, creative technologies, free

Making up leeway The US has lost its economic and political credibility in recent times. What impact can the US now have on countries such as China or other countries in East Asia that have growing credibility? And how can the US ensure it provides freedom and capitalism in a more responsible way in a global economy? Everyone knows the US has to get its finances in order. But I’m absolutely against the whole notion that the US is somehow a failure and no longer a beacon in the world. It might not be as strong as it was but I assure you the US has great reservoirs of innovation. It has freedom of ideas that are unparalleled in many other large societies. It remains primarily a positive force for the world. What specific advice would you give to young leaders? I once saw a bumper sticker in the US that said, “Live simpler so that others can simply live.” There are consequences for the richer countries – or ones like China that aspire to be richer – of wanting to have more wealth. So I’d say two things. First, there is only so much more that money can buy. Success, wellbeing and happiness don’t depend entirely on money. You can’t monetise happiness. Second, all of us in our individual social and other capacities must do at least one thing for somebody else. That’s what I’d argue that

88 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

Professor Chung Min Lee.

you as Asians really need to do. Economic prosperity is not necessarily inherently good. What is the biggest threat to Asia at the moment and what can we do to prevent it? More than anything else, Asia must be concerned about what’s happening outside our borders. Asia has become so used to focusing on national strategies and national development that we just don’t see the world outside of us. We need to change our DNA. We have enough money. We’ve made enough technology. We have enough armies. We have enough hard power. It’s time that Asia becomes smarter. All of you must play a key role in making sure that happens. The key words are a smarter Asia and a smarter world.


IMPACT ASIA

markets and entrepreneurial leadership. Yet, if you want to find every bad thing about the world it’s also here in Asia. We have high emissions – the greatest implications for climate change are happening here in Asia. Our region has high poverty demographics. The world’s five largest standing armies are in Asia, and we also have the world’s largest proliferators of arms. All the major geopolitical hotspots are here. All the major territorial disputes of the world are here too. Asia’s rise is not just about high-rise buildings, urban centres and exhibition halls. It’s about realising that Asian problems are here to stay unless all of you are able to provide solutions. Is Asia’s future going to be robust, totally bust or turbulent? I would argue we’ll see a middle-of-the-road scenario. It depends primarily on the choices that all of you make. The first choice is around money. It’s

great to make lots of money. I’m a big fan of it. But I hope many of you will opt for careers other than in the private sector. That you will serve in NGOs, work in education and serve outside of your countries. That you will be concerned about human rights, poverty and all of the other issues that impact our human race. Should you join Goldman Sachs or the World Food Programme? You can do both: make money first, then join the WFP. Second, you must internalise global issues as though they were your own. In other words, there’s no difference any more between a Swedish problem and a Japanese one. Certainly, for those of us who live in Asia there’s no difference between a Chinese problem and a Korean one. It’s one global problem. Third, you must build demographic shifts into your thinking. If this room were the entire planet, in 30 years’ time one third more of these seats would need

to be reserved for people who are yet to be born. We have to give them healthcare, educate and feed them. Finally, we have to create and foster new values. I’m a firm believer in human rights and democracy. In my lifetime, Asia has shown the world that we can build ourselves out of poverty but that’s not enough. As Deng Xiaoping said, getting rich is glorious. But we need a new paradigm, a new vision for the world and for Asia; one that matches wealth and wellbeing for ourselves with wealth and wellbeing for the rest of the human race. I hope you understand that unless we are able to transform ourselves, we cannot transform Asia and, by logic, we cannot transform the world. M Ruth Le Pla attended the Harvard Project on Asian and International Relations in the Republic of Korea with the help of an Asia New Zealand Foundation Media Advisory Grant.

I was one of those kids who hated school, but I couldn’t tell you why. I’d say I had better things to do than my work. But I didn’t. I was just difficult. Back then, school was about hanging out with my mates, talking to girls and lunchtime. I didn’t like learning, so I didn’t do any. Luckily I’m different now. Everything changed when FYD came to my schoo l. They showed me that learning could be fun and that I had lots of potential. They gave me new opportunities and taught me that anyth ing’s possible. You just have to work hard. That’s what I do now and it’s way better. If you want to help, please make a donation at fyd.org.nz or call 0800 435 775. If they can change me, I think they can change anyone. My name is James and I wrote this. build ing bigge r futur es, now.

Kiwi CAn • stArs • ProJeCt K • MYnd

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 89


McLeay’s Way

Lotteries Commission CEO Todd McLeay has racked up stints at both Vodafone and NZ Post. Now, as he prepares to take on a new role at APN News & Media, he talks with Nick Grant about what he’s learnt in these very different organisations.

90 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


FACE TO FACE

ing across as both casual and measured, speaking with a drawl and turn of phrase that are redolent of his Invercargill roots. Asked whether his current position represents a realisation of his early career aspirations, he good-naturedly scoffs at the thought. “You can’t really predict the future, you just need to have some general idea about what you want to do,” he says. He readily admits that when, in the late ’80s, he “rolled out of school and took the well trodden path of loading everything you own into a small bag and heading up to Dunedin”, he only signed up for the commerce course at Otago University because he couldn’t think of anything else to study. He calls it “quite a boring sort of degree” and reckons “it gets you ready for the first six months of your first job and that’s about it”. But it did furnish him with an insight that evidently remains fundamental to the way he approaches business today. “I really liked marketing subjects,

tion to run “a decent-sized company”, because surely that was the point of getting a commerce degree, and spent a year in a graduate programme at Unisys in Philadelphia. He followed that with some time in the UK, before fetching up back in Invercargill due to family circumstances. After five years back in his hometown his appetite for a fresh challenge was well and truly whetted. Happily one materialised in the form of a job running a product management area for telco BellSouth, which soon evolved into Vodafone. “It was quite a catalyst for me,” McLeay recalls. “It was a very fast growth, dynamic industry, and Vodafone in particular was very aggressive, with a lot of young people. There was a real attitude that it was better to ask for forgiveness than permission, and it was all about the accelerator and really nothing about all the other pedals. “That approach worked for years but then it reached the point it had to change.

My focus was to try and create a more inclusive, collaborative culture.

A

s he strides across the New Zealand Lotteries Commission’s reception area with hand outstretched, Todd McLeay already looks enviably alert an hour before the business day officially begins. We’re meeting early because he’s got an unusually hectic week. It includes two presentations at Human Synergistics’ 7th NZ Conference on Culture and Leadership, and meeting with an 18-strong delegation from Thailand. They’re turning up at nine this morning to try to glean what makes the business he’s led for the past five years so successful. Dressed in a sharp dark suit with open-neck checked shirt, in conversation McLeay manages the neat trick of com-

because basically it came down to the philosophy of trying to really get inside the head of the person you’re dealing with, whether they’re a customer, or another person in a negotiation, or whatever. “The better you can see the world through their eyes, the more likely you are to manage a good outcome. “Once I got that, it made the subject seem quite enjoyable. And it wasn’t too taxing either, which is quite important to students,” he laughs. He also took some accounting papers, “because as someone told me at the time, accounting is the language of business and you’ll reach a point where, if you don’t know it, you’ll have some problems”, and later picked up a postgraduate qualification in finance. McLeay left Otago with an ambi-

I think Vodafone has now become much more reflective of what you’d describe as global business standards. “But back then it was very entrepreneurial, and it was a great environment to learn in – you could do a lot of things, make some mistakes, and have a lot of success, which really encouraged you to try new things. “And there were some great leaders there, so it was also a good opportunity to learn both by talking and watching how people operated.” One of the key observations McLeay took from his Vodafone experience was that, in such an environment, experience was less important than talent and cultural fit. “I still think that, when you’re building an organisation, those qualities count DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 91


for more in terms of your long-term advantage,” he says. Next stop on McLeay’s career path was three years in a senior marketing position at NZ Post, an organisation moving in the opposite direction to the one he’d just left. “That was a really interesting experience, and a very different one from Vodafone, as NZ Post started to change with the way consumers’ lives were being affected by technology. “There was a lot of change management involved and I wouldn’t say it was all beer and skittles,” he says, “because it’s always challenging when an organisation like that has to start thinking differently after doing one thing for a long time. By this stage McLeay had also been involved in various ventures as a director, and when he left NZ Post became involved “as a director in a materials handling and solution business of all things”. Before too long the role of CEO of the NZ Lotteries Commission came up, although initially he wasn’t too sure it was for him. “I thought, ‘Oh, that sounds a bit government-y’,” he says, “but I liked the board and I immediately realised I could learn a lot off chairman Sir John Goulter; there’s no substitute for the level of experience someone like him had to offer someone like me, going into my first CEO role. “I just soaked up as much information from him as I could. That’s not to say I just became a clone. We’re very different and I’ve got my own style, but he was really helpful.” The key lesson he learnt from Goulter? “It was around understanding what’s really important. Some things you’ve got to nail 100 percent and other things are not so important, and it’s a matter of getting clear about what those priorities are. McLeay is also quick to pay tribute to Judy Kirk, Lotteries’ chair for the past three years and someone with a “very affiliative style” that he’s naturally inclined to practise himself. At the time McLeay took up the mantle of Lotteries CEO, the organisation had just experienced seven to nine years of flat or declining revenues, “though the performance had already 92 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

started to lift thanks to the leadership of the previous CEO, Trevor Hall, a really great guy”, he notes. “That turnaround had been pretty project-driven – it had to be, because it’d been quite a crisis situation – with the expansion of the retail network and introduction of a midweek game, Big Wednesday, amongst other things. “So when I arrived, I thought, ‘Wow, there’s a much greater likelihood that I’ll just stuff things up than improve it anytime soon,’” he laughs. “And it also looked to me like the low-hanging fruit may well have been plucked. “So my approach for pretty much the first six months, as the business ticked over, was to have lots of conversations with the people here to try and understand how they thought the business might be better and where the opportunities to continue to grow were.” This half-year of due diligence played to the first of what McLeay sees as his two strengths: “getting lots of information from different sources and putting it together in order to work out what the business needs to do”. His conclusion? “We needed all the staff to start using a bit more initiative in every part of the business, rather than senior management lining up people around some goals. So my focus was to try and create a more inclusive, collaborative culture where people could do more and perform better, although clearly we still needed to have some overall goals around that.” Then it was a matter of explaining the goal and motivating staff to achieve it – McLeay’s second strength as a leader. “To do that I spend most of my effort trying to understand two things. The way I look at it, everyone’s got natural strengths, things they’re better at than other people or that just seem easy to them. So, first thing is, what are they really good at? “The second thing I do is try to understand what it is they want. Once you understand both those things, then hopefully you can find an alignment with what it is as an organisation


FACE TO FACE

that you’re trying to achieve. And I’ll move people around to try and make that fit as well as I can. “But here’s the critical piece: if I think I can help the people I work with achieve their goals somewhere else, I’ll use all my energies to help them do that somewhere else. That’s part of the deal. People won’t be honest with you if they think you’re in it just to manipulate it to your purposes.” He sees his approach as being very much in keeping with modern trends in people management, which he illustrates by invoking the currently unimpeachable example of Graham Henry. “In an interview I saw recently, Graham Henry was saying that 20 years ago he was a hard leader, and quite directive in the way he dealt with his teams. But the way he describes what his style is now is very, very different. It’s about getting alongside the players, understanding them and giving them a lot more autonomy to work out how they’re actually going to play the game. “I found it interesting that this year the Hurricanes rugby franchise seemed to have problems in terms of getting the team to gel, but when their entire backline was transposed into the All Blacks they performed really well,” McLeay laughs. “What’s that about? It’s a change to an environment where this leader has created a place where people feel comfortable and which enables them to perform at a higher level.” While McLeay acknowledges it’s been a slow and steady journey to achieve that cultural shift, he’s now able to point to a plethora of indicators that the Lotteries Commission team is well and truly on the right track. Chief amongst these is the growth in the business’ revenue by more than $200 million per annum during his tenure and racking up a record $183.3 million in profit during the latest financial year. Now he’s moving on, having accepted the newly-created position of chief operating officer of APN News & Media in New Zealand. “It’s important for everybody, no matter who you are or what you’re doing, to continue to learn and grow and reinvent yourself,” he says by way of explanation. “I’ve done this role for fiveand-a-half years and I think the organisation’s in good shape. “We’ve got great people here and hopefully there’s an opportunity for one or all of them to step up in different capacities, and carry it on and do different things. And I’ll go and learn and grow in a different space.” That space is currently in the midst of a major upheaval: a fact that McLeay clearly relishes. “Look, there’s no doubt there’s some really big challenges. But they’re there to be solved, and they will be solved one way or another. “There are 14,500 newspapers in the world. Quite a lot of them are growing quite dramatically, and quite a lot of them are being affected by substitution, particularly in highly digitised countries. We just have to work out what that means. “I think it’s going to be fun.” M

3,000 TAXIS! 23

Partner Taxi Companies Nationwide

1 TaxiCharge eTaxi online account management Fully customised reporting Secure payment technology Partner taxi companies in every region

With TaxiCharge you are in control!

www.taxicharge.co.nz Telephone: 09 306 1790 email: enquiries@taxicharge.co.nz

Nick Grant is a freelance business journalist. nof.grant@gmail.com

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 93


New

‘three Bs’ The issue of succession planning is vexed and complex. There is rarely an easy fix for any company. Headhunter Don Jaine spells out the risks of not tackling succession.

94 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


THOUGHT LEADER

BOUGHT – For the very good businesses (<10 percent of the market) that are always positioned as ready for sale, there will be opportunities to be sold to competitor organisations in the same sector. The private-equity-backed businesses and the effective business leaders who are prepared to invest in acquisitions and market consolidations are likely to be in acquisition mode over the next three to five years. However, they will be acquiring businesses for much lower earnings multiples

very little financial legacy, a broken or broke business – and potentially a load of issues to resolve. It might seem a sensible idea to potentially wind a business down by not investing, and failing to grow, in favour of the immediate return of a comfortable lifestyle. But the upshot is often an uncomfortable lifestyle for the dependents of a business. The ANZ Business Barometer for 2011 shows companies that have truly independent board members or advisory boards are succeeding better and are more

New business models are burying unprepared business owners.

than were prevalent in the mid-2000s, pre-GFC. The PEs that were paid in that period were fuelled by cheap access to large levels of debt, which is now no longer available.

L

ately our company has been working with New Zealand Trade and Enterprise on how to solve the succession problem for business owners. This issue has occupied my colleagues and business acquaintances for a number of years. Of particular urgency is the lack of leaders to succeed baby boomers in the New Zealand market. The famous line about business owners wanting ‘the boat, the bach and the BMW’ is outdated. The new, post-GFC paradigm is ‘bought, burned or buried’. That is, owners sitting around waiting for a buyer with a fat cheque are out of luck. Rather, their options in the new environment are the following:

BURNED – Most business owners are going to get burned off by businesses that are well advised, probably involve private equity, and have smart, independent board members and very effective executive teams. These businesses will burn off a large number of participants in each market sector by simply being better led, better managed, more agile, and more effective and active users of technology – GPS, CRM systems, successful ecommerce and more. Many business owners of mediumsized organisations which are smaller participants in their sector will be burned off by more effective operators.

positive in outlook than those who are still “DIY”. Businesses with growth above four percent are much more likely to use external advice. Only those with clearly defined and realistic growth plans and people who can execute these plans will progress to the “bought” category. Who would have thought that a young upstart business like Fishpond could compete with Amazon.com, Whitcoulls or Paper Plus? – but they are. Or that you would go online to buy your authentic All Black supporters jersey. These new business models and methods are burning off old business models and burying unprepared business owners. Without an independent advisory board watching out for you, how can you be sure you won’t be the next to be burned off or buried? M

BURIED – Many businesses will die with the owner, leaving their families

Don Jaine is a co-founder of executive search firm SEQEL Partners.

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 95


NZIM

Ready to do better Year’s end is in sight. The New Zealand Institute of Management is a learning institution and this is report card time. By Reg Birchfield.

I

t has been another tough year. The prospects of it easing up much in 2012 aren’t promising either. But then, as the saying goes, who said life was supposed to be easy? Managers must get used to dealing with chaos and uncertainty – it is the way of the future and managers must prepare for it. NZIM kicked 2011 into life by applauding the New Zealand Institute’s just-released discussion paper on New Zealand’s need to develop international management and entrepreneurship skills. Managers should come up to speed if they wanted to compete in an increasingly competitive global world, said NZIM chief executive Kevin Gaunt. He added NZIM would partner with many organisations to help New Zealand lift its management capabilities and thereby its economic performance. NZIM also called for nominations for its Foundation Scholarships which directly contribute to developing managers’ international skills and understanding by sending scholarship winners to offshore management events. In March the organisation examined the consequences of changing management and leadership styles and approaches. A major Hay Group study on global trends in leadership found that hierarchical leadership is out and leader-

96 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

ship at all levels of the organisation is in. Gaunt said the changes in leadership and management were significant and suggested that the core elements of good leadership are: • The creation and communication of a vision of where the organisation is headed and which individuals can both align themselves with and support. • An ability to draw the various views and ideas generated by the organisation together and to then focus on what is needed and work collaboratively to agree on the decisions to be made. • A strong self awareness without egodriven decision-making. • An ability to see the wood for the trees. Being able to work in an ambiguous environment and understand the key issues. • Building effective and long-standing relationships. • Having high personal and group expectations. “The changes happening in society and business are impacting and altering the way organisations work. This puts increasing emphasis on the need for a different type of leadership – one that is more self-aware and involving,” Gaunt said. April produced NZIM’s latest Management Capability Index report. While it showed some improvement in management capability, Kiwi managers were reportedly still “too comfortable” and

needed to lift their game. Gaunt thought the recession had seriously impacted management performance and confidence. The lesson to managers was, therefore, to learn to cope with uncertainty, which is now simply part of doing business. Come May, NZIM pointed out that managers were under assault from head count choppers in both the private and public sectors. The country, however, needed managers to help rebuild the economy and re-shape organisations for the future. It was not time for short-term thinking, NZIM warned. Gaunt said NZIM would play a key role in pushing the management and leadership agenda, but he was not confident about seeing many government policies and strategies to create jobs, wealth and opportunities for managers to deliver the kind of economic performance New Zealand needed. “The politics are too strong and subject to short-term gains,” he said. “That’s why we need to strengthen NZIM and builds its leadership and management role in the economy.” And so it proved to be. Then came the results of Swissbased IMD’s annual global competitiveness survey which NZIM contributes to. It contained bad news with New Zealand again slipping in the rankings. New Zealand was in danger of becoming irrelevant to increasingly dynamic


Asian economies, said Gaunt. “Too few of our business leaders understand what is going on in Asia and are making little effort to learn. It will be to our collective cost,” he said. Then he announced that NZIM planned to help build relationships through the Asian Association of Management Organisations (AAMO) to encourage more effective management conversations and learning exchanges. NZIM’s ethos of practicality could, he said, work to its advantage by getting New Zealand management involved with other countries and using their management organisations to facilitate the process. In July, NZIM’s new national chairman Gary Sturgess outlined his vision of what NZIM might accomplish during his tenure. NZIM was, he said, “more relevant today” than it had ever been. Sturgess wanted NZIM to be recognised as the “go-to” management organisation to which all aspiring and practising managers and leaders want to belong. It would reach further into the regions to take new opportunities to businesses. He wanted to broaden and strengthen its membership base; offer a selection of programmes and courses that are nationally consistent, and to tailor learning solutions to meet the needs of members, managers and leaders. Then NZIM announced plans to have New Zealand managers compete in a panAsian management game as one step in its strategy to build stronger relationships with Asian managers. The internet, Gaunt reminded members, had made this and other communication and learning opportunities more accessible. Plans to integrate NZIM’s organisational structure were announced in September. NZIM would have one board and a single chief executive, providing a stronger and more effective leadership structure, enhanced decision-making and more effective customer service. The focus, said Sturgess, would be on building NZIM capability, its staff and its systems, to deliver relevant and high-value services to the whole New Zealand management community.

“The move to integrate is a positive one for an organisation that has served New Zealand well for almost 70 years but, which also needs to do a great deal better in the future.” Commenting on the impact and implications of newly-announced youth training and employment policies in October, NZIM spelled out its concerns and offered some fresh thinking. It suggested the introduction of practical trades training at intermediate schools so kids and parents might be better equipped to make informed decisions about secondary school choices. It also suggested more specialist technical colleges, equipped with the best resources for trade training and attractive to properly trained workshop practice teachers. The lack of properly qualified and trained trades people “seriously hampers management in New Zealand”, said Gaunt. “It makes it difficult for companies to progress. It forces them to spend time focused inwardly to create their own training solutions, rather than being externally focused on customers and the marketplace.” In the same month, NZIM announced Gaunt’s appointment as NZIM’s national CEO. He was formerly chief executive of NZIM Northern. Last month NZIM explained why it has, for 16 years, supported and promoted its annual NZIM/Eagle Technology Young Executive of the Year Award, the winner of which is announced in this issue of NZ Management magazine. It is all about the future of management. “The Young Executive Award provides us with another opportunity to focus on and show New Zealand enterprise just how important our young leaders and the next generation of employees are to New Zealand,” said Gaunt. It’s not a bad report really. It shows a dedication to learning and, as chairman Gary Sturgess said, a commitment to do “a great deal better in future”. M Reg Birchfield LifeFNZIM is a writer on management and leadership. Email: reg@rjmedia.co.nz

LEADERS BUILDING LEADERS Our aim is to build management capability through Research, Learning, and Recognition. Our focus is to: • Research leading management trends and practice and promote a constantly developing model of best management capability for New Zealand. • Enable managers and aspiring managers to participate in learning programmes, mentoring, and events that provide the information and experience they need to develop their capability. • To identify leading management role models and provide awards that recognise the career and educational achievements of managers. NATIONAL BOARD GARY STURGESS LIFE FNZIM (CHAIRMAN) LYNDA CARROLL AFNZIM DAN COWARD AFNZIM MOHS BRIAN SOUTAR AFNZIM JOHN SANDFORD FNZIM ASH DIXON MNZIM JOANNE O’CONNOR MNZIM MARK WOODARD AFNZIM NZIM Inc Chairman: Gary Sturgess Life FNZIM Deputy Chair: Lynda Carroll AFNZIM PO Box 67, Wellington 6140 Ph 0-4-473 0470, Fax 0-4-473 0479 Email national_office@nzim.co.nz Website: www.nzim.co.nz CEO: Kevin Gaunt FNZIM, FAIM PO Box 6600, Wellesley St, Auckland 1141 Ph 0-9-303 9100, Fax 0-9-303 9109 Email kevin_gaunt@nzimnorthern.co.nz Northern Region Regional Director: John Sandford FNZIM Regional Contact: Tait Grindley PO Box 6600, Wellesley St, Auckland 1141 Ph 0-9-303 9100, Fax 0-9-303 9109 Email enquiries@nzimnorthern.co.nz Website www.nzimnorthern.co.nz Central Region Regional Director: Lynda Carroll AFNZIM Regional Contact: Susan Andrews PO Box 11781, Wellington 6142 Ph 0-4-495 8300, Fax 0-4-495 8301 Email enquiries@nzimcentral.co.nz Website www.nzimcentral.co.nz Southern Region Regional Director: Brian Soutar AFNZIM Regional CEO: Joseph Thomas AFNZIM PO Box 13044, Christchurch 8141 Ph 0-3-379 2302, Fax 0-3-357 8003 Email joseph@nzimsouthern.co.nz Website www.nzimsouthern.co.nz

NZIM FOUNDATION CHAIRPERSON: DAVID MOLONEY FNZIM SECRETARY: JIM THOMSON PO BOX 67 WELLINGTON, PH 0-4-473 0470 NATIONAL_OFFICE@NZIM.CO.NZ

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 97


The inaugural Premier

Taste of New Zealand

Awards The Premier Award is the highest achievable Taste of New Zealand Award (TONZA) and recognises only the finest expression of regional cuisine in the country. Te Whau Vineyard Restaurant, Waiheke Island Chef Marco Edwardes Te Whau Vineyard was established in 1993 by Tony, Moira and Caroline Forsyth. In January 2001 they opened the restaurant on the upper level of the winery, overlooking the Hauraki Gulf. The restaurant has won national and global recognition for the excellence of its cuisine. Te Whau offers fresh European-influenced New Zealand food, using the finest local ingredients and its wine list is recognised as one of the southern hemisphere’s finest. Winner - Best Rural Restaurant: Metro/AUDI Restaurant Awards 2010, 2009, 2008; 2011 Taste of New Zealand Awards (TONZA) for the finest culinary and dining experience in its region. www.tewhau.com

The Farm at Cape Kidnappers, Hawke’s Bay Chef Tim Pickering The Farm at Cape Kidnappers is one of the world’s extraordinary top luxury destinations, set on a 6000 acre sheep and cattle farm with breathtaking views over the Pacific Ocean in the Hawke’s Bay wine region. With 22 ultra-comfortable and spacious cottage suites, a four bedroom Owner’s Cottage, and a spectacular Tom Doak designed golf course, a stay at the Relais & Chateaux Cape Kidnappers is truly farm luxe at its best. This Relais & Chateaux lodge was named in the Condé Nast Traveller Hot List 2010 as Best for Food and more recently, The Lodge has been recognized as the finest culinary and dining experience in its region for the Taste of New Zealand Awards (TONZA) 2011. www.capekidnappers.com


True South Dining Room – The Rees Hotel and Luxury Apartments, Queenstown Chef Ben Batterbury The Rees Hotel and Apartments on the absolute lakefront overlooking Queenstown’s picturesque Lake Wakatipu, is an exquisite haven of luxury and the gateway to the True South.

out dining experience within New Zealand, by winning the highly coveted inaugural Taste of New Zealand Award 2011 for showing a dedication to crafting a New Zealand culinary identity.

The property’s premium award-winning restaurant, True South Dining Room, showcases the freshest and finest the region has to offer under the watchful eye of Executive Chef, Ben Batterbury.

Internationally, Chef Batterbury’s passionate dedication for local ingredients has piqued the palates of many from discerning international media like the Huffington Post, to the James Beard Foundation in New York – the latter’s awards dubbed the ‘Oscars of the Food World’ by Time magazine. www.therees.co.nz

Last month, True South Dining Room was recognised as a stand-

Restaurant Schwass, Christchurch Chef Jonny Schwass Sadly Restaurant Schwass was destroyed in the February quake but not Chef Schwass. The minor glitch of losing a restaurant now allows this marvellous exponent of regional cuisine to take his exquisite expressions of fine Canterbury products to discerning diners around the country. Using locally sourced food of integrity with a belief that it is his responsibility to use the finest produce, Chef Schwass’ cooking is about the beauty of well chosen ingredients and simply prepared food. Restaurant Schwass quickly became a major success and the restaurant went on to receive local, national and international recognition. The art of Chef Jonny Schwass has been recognized as the finest culinary and dining experience of the Canterbury region for the Taste of New Zealand Awards (TONZA) 2011. www.jonnyschwass.com


M

POLITICS COLIN JAMES

The new term: time for strategic policy

J

100 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011

Photo: Massey University

ohn Key took office three years ago amid global financial and economic mayhem. Then came earthquakes in Christchurch, a mine disaster and a ship grounding causing widespread environmental damage. Another such concatenation of disasters is unlikely in the next three years – though financial and economic mayhem cannot be ruled out (whether the Greek crisis had really been resolved was unclear when this was written). The lesson for the 2011-14 government from disasters and the global financial crisis (GFC): build resilience into the economy so it is strong and flexible enough to trade through big shocks. A GFC2 would slow world trade and production and this time governments and central banks, including China’s, don’t have the wherewithal to offset it effectively. To handle disasters requires fixing the sorts of regulatory gaps exposed by the earthquakes, Pike River and the ship grounding. To handle a GFC2 – or just to adapt to the global power shift – requires cutting the towering debt to foreigners and banks’ dependence on foreign funding. That demands two rebalancings: of the budget (called “fiscal consolidation”); and from domestic spending and consumer imports to exports. There will be two counter-balances: from that section of the public, widening as stringency bites, who link fiscal constraint to foreign banks’ arrogance and self-indulgence and therefore think it inappropriate or immoral; and from those who think that when employment is weak and real incomes are stagnant or falling, the government should spend more to pick up the economic slack. Fiscal consolidation in part requires public service reform – as, for example, outlined in this column last month – not just to save money and improve

international competitiveness but to meet rising generations’ expectations of more customised public services. We are in transition from the baby-boom generation to the next one and 2011-14 policy needs to reflect and anticipate the next generations’ needs and aspirations. One of those next-generation needs is to address the steep rise in the cost of pensions and health services in the 2020s as baby-boomers swell the over-70s. The 2011-14 term is the last chance to make a measured start on that. After that the policies needed to tame these voracious programmes and avert serious intergenerational inequities get progressively more expensive and/or painful. So a strategic approach to policy is needed in 2011-14. That is not usually a strong point of ministers. Take innovation, which is the central ingredient in getting richer. From 1999 to 2008 ministers did mainly frameworks and plans and in 2008-11 ministers mainly reorganised state agencies. A test of the 2011-14 government will be how much investment it directs into innovation and away from short-term focus-group-driven fixes. Another test will be how seriously ministers tackle the embedded inequalities in incomes, health, education and opportunity which make New

Zealand one of the OECD’s most unequal societies and which a growing body of economic evidence indicates affects economic growth. Will ministers extend the analysis used in the youth policy announced in August – actuarially assessing the wholeof-life income support, health services and crime costs of a life gone wrong and investing early to avoid that cost? Both major parties have been moving that way. It is hard to do, results are not visible for five parliamentary terms and voters aren’t patient. But the strategic case is strong: the earlier the action the earlier the returns. Some other strategic issues: modernising tertiary education so crossboundary rigidities biodegrade; reframing environment and economic policies as mutually reinforcing, not as alternatives; settling employment relations law so it isn’t getting reworked with every change of government; doing the bits of tax reform Bill English left out; working out for the rest of the country the logic of the Auckland local body reorganisation. It was a busy government in 2008-11, mostly focused on near-term need. The challenge for this term’s busy government will be to focus on the 2020s. M Colin James is New Zealand’s leading political commentator and NZ Management’s regular political columnist. ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz


BOB EDLIN ECONOMICS

M

Mind the gap

A

Photo: thinkstockphotos.com

political spat was triggered earlier this year over the wage gap between New Zealand and Australia: was it shrinking or growing? Before the 2008 general election, it was recalled at that time, National leader John Key had promised to close the gap. But maybe there was economic advantage in not closing the gap, because Finance Minister Bill English had talked of the competitive edge offered by cheaper wages. Key, meanwhile, insisted the gap was being closed on the strength of increases in after-tax average wages on his watch. Council of Trade Unions economist Bill Rosenberg’s calculations, to the contrary, showed the average Australian wage had surged 41 percent ahead of the New Zealand wage by June 2010; the gap had been 35 percent in June 2009. His figures did not include more generous employer superannuation contributions across the Tasman, but did take purchasing power parity into account. Yes, our after-tax wages indeed had risen by around 16 percent since 2008, Rosenberg conceded, but “we cannot tax-cut our way to higher wages – tax cuts are a large part of the reason for the increasing government debt”. Key’s commitment to close the trans-Tasman wage gap was a variant of the previous government’s pledge to edge New Zealand back up the OECD economic growth ladder. As measured by growth in gross domestic product, our ranking has slumped since 1960, when we were fourth out of 24 OECD countries. Our annual average growth in real GDP has been consistently below the OECD average for the past five decades. The International Monetary Fund ranked us 33rd out of 183 countries for GDP per capita last year. But as the Waikato Times mused

in an editorial last month, maybe we were using the wrong measure. It drew attention to our ranking – a creditable fifth place – on the Human Development Index, a product of the United Nations Development Programme. The HDI ranked 187 nations according to three criteria: the standard of living of its people, its population’s access to knowledge and its population’s chance of living a long and healthy life. Human development, according to the report, is the expansion of people’s freedoms and capabilities to lead lives that they value and have reason to value. “It is about expanding choices. Freedoms and capabilities are a more expansive notion than basic needs.” Norway took the gold for 2011, on the HDI measure. The Democratic Republic of the Congo, Niger and Burundi were at the bottom of the heap. In contrast to our fall on OECD rankings based on GDP growth, the HDI gives New Zealand more comforting data. Between 1980 and 2011, our HDI value has increased from 0.800 to 0.908, an annual increase of about 0.4 percent. In that period, life expectancy at birth has increased by 7.6 years, mean years of schooling have increased by 0.9 years and expected years of schooling have

increased by 4.5 years. Gross national income per capita increased by 42 percent. While this suggests our country is a much better place to live in than the GDP growth measure alone implies, the Ministry of Education’s recently published Civic and Citizenship Education Study showed almost one in three Year 9 students want to live permanently in another country. Mostly they go to Australia – so how come they aren’t flocking to Norway? Norway’s GNI per capita is US$47,557 (compared with New Zealand’s US$23,737 ), its life expectancy at birth is 81.1 years (ours is 80.7) and they clock in at 0.943 on the HDI (we clock in at 0.908). Distance is a deterrent to Kiwis wanting a share of Norway’s good life. The need to learn a new language would be another. And Norwegians kill whales. It’s much easier to cross the ditch to Australia, which happens to sit in second place on the HDI index. Its GNI per capita is US$34,431, its life expectancy at birth is 81.9 years, and its HDI reading is 0.929. That means several gaps need closing. M Bob Edlin is a leading economic commentator and NZ Management’s regular economics columnist.

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 101


M

LEADERSHIP REG BIRCHFIELD

Leading by relinquishing

S

ome interesting leadership research by global business consultancy Hay Group crossed my desk recently. It underpins what seems glaringly obvious but which is not gaining rapid traction – specifically, leaders must acquire a host of new skills and competencies to lead successfully in our fast changing world. Leaders must become adept “conceptual and strategic thinkers”, says the research. But the other qualities it identifies and which seem to me even more important because they are missing in the majority of our corporate directors and senior executives, are “deep integrity and intellectual openness”. Leaders must, according to the study, find new ways to “create loyalty” and “lead increasingly diverse and independent teams over which they may not always have direct authority”. This is anathema to all but a tiny number of organisational exceptions. Leaders will increasingly need to “relinquish their own power in favour of collaborative approaches inside and outside the organisation”. Making fun of the wafer-thin competency of our current organisational leadership is probably a cheap shot, but the cost of sustaining our old-style leadership is, unfortunately, measurably real and climbs higher by the day. The study identifies six megatrends as the drivers of the need for a dramatic change in leadership style and approach.

Those trends, already well known and extensively researched, are accelerating globalisation (globalisation 2.0); climate change; demographic change; individualisation and values pluralism; increasingly digital lifestyles; and technology convergence. The competencies required to lead in a world dominated by these trends form what Hay calls a “post-heroic” leadership style. To accomplish it, today’s leaders must abandon most of the thinking and behaviour that has hitherto propelled them to the top of their organisations. Because they will feel uncomfortable at the prospect, most individuals will continue to lead as they have for as long as they can. The study doesn’t, however, think leaders will have much choice but to change their ways. Leaders worth their salt will radically adapt their organisational cultures, structures, systems and processes to survive in the new world order. According to the Hay researchers, they will have to manage in matrix structures where information flows around the organisation and the globe in ways that render “traditional hierarchies and reporting lines redundant”. If, as they suggest, leaders will in future manage through influence rather than authority, something must give in the now. The demands the changing business climate will have on leaders at cognitive,

emotional and behavioural level will, Hay predicts, be unprecedented. And while the study doesn’t say so, it seems inevitable that any revolution in leadership style and approach will be led by women. Governance, as we have suffered it, must change dramatically and increasingly, women are showing the silly old male fools of yesteryear what it takes. A transition to more women at the top might be what, at least in part, prompted the leadership researchers to suggest that while organisations and their leaders face tough challenges, those challenges are “not insurmountable”. As they also say, the best led companies are already in the vanguard of a “post-heroic leadership approach”. These companies are becoming more effective because they embrace leadership and workforce diversity which, in turn, reflects the increasing diversity of their markets. They are also “improving their cross-cultural leadership and collaboration”. And finally, they are more socially and environmentally responsible than their peers, ensuring that their employees can strike a good balance between work and the rest of their lives. I agree with the study’s final conclusion. “Old structures and leadership styles just won’t cut it any longer.” Hallelujah – but don’t hold your breath! M Reg Birchfield is a writer on management, governance and leadership. reg@rjmedia.co.nz

Improving leadership performance If performance is a key to your organisation’s success, equipping your managers with the tools to improve it is smart business. To find out how we can help your leaders step up to the next level, call us or visit our website.

Helping New Zealand’s best performers go further 09 522 9409 | www.steel ip.com

102 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


BOOKCASE

WHAT WOULD DRUCKER DO NOW? By Rick Wartzman • McGrawHill • RRP $44.99

At its core, management “deals with people, their values, their growth and development – and this makes it a humanity,” Peter Drucker, the greatest management guru of them all, once wrote. He continued: “So does its [management’s] concern with, and impact on, social structure and community.” Management, he concluded, is “deeply involved in moral concerns – the nature of man, good and evil”. Prompts and insights like these, pepper this delightfully useful book. Rick Wartzman, like Drucker, is a writer. He’s also the executive director of Claremont Graduate University’s Drucker Institute – an organisation that advances P2 1 8 4 6 7 C R R Ma n Drucker’s teachings. He’s a former

reporter and editor and a columnist who has written around 100 “The Drucker Difference” columns for BusinessWeek magazine. He never met his meal ticket but he is totally immersed in his legacy of management literature. The reason this book, a collection of 80 of Wartzman’s columns, is so relevant to every manager everywhere, is that the need for effective management and ethical leadership has never been more pressing. And here in 247 pages are many of the perspicacious observations of the world’s greatest management mind. The book is compiled as seven subject themes: Management as a discipline; The practice of management; Management challenges for the 21st century; On Wall Street and finance; On values and responsibility; The public and social pdf P 1 1 / 1 1 sectors; Art, music and sports.

M

Wartzman concedes that he really has no idea what Drucker would do about so many of today’s testing issues. But his four years of writing “The Drucker Difference” columns has seeped him sufficiently to “provide a sense of how Drucker might react to issues dominating today’s headlines”. He has mined Drucker’s 39 books and countless magazine and newspaper articles from which he has crafted his columns. Writing The Drucker Difference columns became his “biweekly attempt to achieve some kind of mind meld with one of the greatest minds of the 20th century”. And he does a true craftsman’s job. For a columnist to hit upon a means of keeping one of the world’s best minds alive and ever relevant is a journalistic masterstroke, the result of which is there for managers worthy of the title, to access, reflect on and learn from. Drucker may be gone but, thanks to Wartzman, his writing, which is so foundational, timeless and insightful, is 8 M not forgotten. – Reg Birchfield

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 103


M

EXEC HEALTH

The

A

heat is on

ccording to NIWA’s latest climate outlook, New Zealand is on track for another scorching summer. But while good news for holidaymakers, the heat and dry weather can pose productivity issues for businesses. Ironically, balmy days can lead to chilly temperatures in the office. In many workplaces around New Zealand, office temperature is a wellchewed-upon bone of contention. In fact, in the ’90s the Department of Labour had so many complaints from office workers on this subject, it released an employers’ guide to ‘thermal comfort’ in the workplace. Thermal comfort is defined as a state where a person is not conscious of either being too hot or too cold. When thermally comfortable, people are able to work more effectively and are less likely to make mistakes.

A HAPPY MEDIUM When the heat comes on, our first instinct might be to crank the air conditioning up a notch or two. But while being too hot can make us feel lethargic, it doesn’t necessarily follow that cooler temperatures make for better output. A 2004 Cornell University study on the effect of environmental factors on productivity found that when office temperatures increased from 20°C to

25°C, typing errors fell by 44 percent and typing output jumped by 150 percent. The study argued that not only would business owners boost productivity by allowing for a higher temperature, they would also save on energy costs. Because each person’s response to temperature is so individual, it’s nigh-on impossible to find a temperature that suits everyone. However, if you do notice some grumblings around the office, a quick poll can help to find a happy medium that most find comfortable. Reaching optimal thermal comfort is dependent on a balancing act of six main factors – air temperature, relative humidity, air flow, sources of radiant heat, physical activity and clothing – so altering just one of these might be enough to improve general comfort levels.

SOAK IT UP Even mild dehydration can cause fatigue, irritability and loss of concentration, so it’s important people are encouraged to keep well hydrated all year round, and even more so in summer. According to the Ministry of Health, men require around three litres and women 2.2 litres of water a day. While around a third of this comes from food sources, general advice is to drink the fluid equivalent of six to eight glasses a day – preferably water or other lowcalorie choices.

TAKING IT EASY It’s also worth thinking about how you can mitigate another liquid-based issue. Summer tends to create more opportunities for social drinking in New Zealand – and hangovers can have a serious impact on productivity and workplace safety. A number of employers are already taking steps to address this issue. A survey conducted by Southern Cross of 400 employers in January 2011 found that one in five employers offered their employees information and support on responsible alcohol use. However, alcohol use can be a difficult area for some employers to broach. You may feel it’s a personal choice, or feel uncomfortable with any perception of taking the moral high ground. One approach could be to include education on responsible drinking as part of any workplace health initiative you undertake – for example, as part of a nutrition seminar or through an annual health check. Setting a tone of moderation at workplace functions is another very important way you can quietly support a responsible approach to alcohol. Happy holidays everyone. Let’s hope the weather predictions ring true – and you’re not reading this from the confines of a slightly leaky tent. M Peter Tynan is chief executive of Southern Cross Health Society.

Healthy staff means higher productivity Covering staff with Southern Cross health insurance means less sick days, quicker return to work1 and it’s an attractive incentive for retaining and recruiting employees. It all adds up to a more

productive and profitable business. Your profits, not ours. Because we’re not for profit, we’re for you. To find out more, call Southern Cross Health Society on 0800 323 555 or visit our website healthybusiness.co.nz

1 TNS research 2004

Healthy people healthy business Southern Cross Medical Care Society, Level 1, Ernst & Young Building, 2 Takutai Square, Auckland 1010

104 | management.co.nz | DECEMBER 2011


EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT Sponsored by The University of Auckland Business School Short Courses www.shortcourses.ac.nz 0800 800 875

NZIM Courses SEE PAGE 111 January www.nzimnorthern.co.nz www.nzimcentral.co.nz www.nzimsouthern.co.nz

25 SOCIAL MEDIA 101. SKILLS. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nzz

December

31-Feb 1 PROJECT LEADERSHIP. Project Plus Group. www.projectplusgroup.co.nz

1 INCUBATOR WORKSHOPS. Auckland. The TechnoPolicy Network. www.technopolicy.net/sbi/ 1-2 TRAIN THE TRAINER. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz 5-6 BUSINESS SKILLS FOR NEW MANAGERS. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz 5-6 INFLUENCING & PERSUADING SKILLS. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz 5-6 PRACTICAL RESILIENCE. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz 5-6 EMPOWERING INDIVIDUALS AND TEAMS. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz 6-7 BUSINESS CONTINUITY MANAGEMENT AND DISASTER RECOVERY. Auckland. Conferenz. www.conferenz.co.nz/bcm 7-8 MIND MAPPING™. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

February 1-2 BUSINESS SKILLS FOR NEW MANAGERS. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz 1-2 INFLUENCING & PERSUADING SKILLS. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz 8-9 STRATEGIC PLANNING. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

SHORT COURSES smarter faster

20-21 FROM TEAM MEMBER TO TEAM LEADER. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz 22 GOVERNANCE ESSENTIALS. Auckland. Institute of Directors. www.iod.org.nz 22-23 MARKETING MANAGEMENT. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz 22-23 NEGOTIATION SKILLS. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz 23 FINANCE ESSENTIALS. Auckland. Institute of Directors. www.iod.org.nz 24 STRATEGY ESSENTIALS. Auckland. Institute of Directors. www.iod.org.nz

13-14 MOTIVATION AND LEADERSHIP. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

27-28 PROJECT MANAGEMENT. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

13-14 MANAGING PEOPLE. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

27-28 BUSINESS WRITING SKILLS. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

13-18 COMPANY DIRECTOR’S COURSE. Wellington. Institute of Directors. www.iod.org.nz

27-28 MASTERING NEGOTIATION SKILLS. Auckland. Bright*Star Training. www.brightstar.co.nz

13-Mar 6 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONAL (GAINING PMP CREDENTIAL). Project Plus Group. www.projectplusgroup.co.nz

M

28-29 LEADERSHIP FOR WOMEN. Wellington. Bright*Star Training. www.brightstar.co.nz

7-8 STRATEGIC PLANNING. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

16-17 ACHIEVING SUCCESS: THE ART OF DELIBERATE SUCCESS. Wellington. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

29-Mar 1 BUILDING A COMPELLING BUSINESS CASE. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

12-13 PROJECT MANAGEMENT. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

16-17 DEALING WITH DIFFICULT & DIFFERENT PERSONALITIES. Auckland. Bright*Star Training. www.brightstar.co.nz

29-Mar 1 TIME MANAGEMENT. Auckland. University of Auckland Short Courses. www.shortcourses.ac.nz

To Darren Levy, The University of Auckland Business School Thank you for tailoring a leadership programme for our organisation. New insights were gained that are closely aligned with our business strategies and values. Your team have motivated and engaged our people. Michelle McBride, Southern Cross Health Society

Make a REAL difference to your organisation 0800 800 875 | www.shortcourses.ac.nz

DECEMBER 2011

| management.co.nz | 105


DECEMBER 2011 VOL 06 NUMBER 06

ISSNÊ 1177-5815

ONÊ MANAGEMENT

NEW ZEALAND INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT IN ACTION

Get ready – get through T

he Christchurch earthquakes shook New Zealanders out of any complacency about their ability to cope with natural disasters. Snow, floods, power outages, tsunami, industrial and environmental disasters, even the prospect of an influenza pandemic – in recent times we’ve been reminded all too often how vulnerable we are to surprisingly frequent natural and man-made events. As a manager or business owner, the civil defence message get ready, get through means much more than having a first aid kit and meeting your basic legal obligations. Without comprehensive planning, including business recovery, the reality is you and your co-workers might survive but your business or organisation may well not. It’s all about planning to manage risk – for safety and survival, to ensure business continuity and assist in a speedy recovery. The good news is there are plenty of useful (free) resources available. The process starts with hazard assessment, identifying hazards both within your workplace and in the area. Planning and getting ready – documenting policies, procedures, roles and responsibilities – is your key to survival on the day and beyond, and ranges from setting up your emergency response team and resources including equipment, food and first aid through to planning how to communicate with staff, and protect and back up vulnerable areas such as data/IT, telecommunications and power. “When these things hit, everything shifts and people change – their personalities, their ability to cope, their reactions,” recalls NZIM Southern CEO Joseph Thomas, looking back to 22 February. “You can have the best planned evacuation or survival framework in the world but when the proverbial hits the fan, things can go completely... different.” The key is training and practice. Make sure that your staff have very clear instructions about their priorities and what actions to take in a real emergency – and rehearse regularly. “Obviously your first priority is with your people – their welfare and their families’ welfare. It wasn’t until that night I sat and thought what does this mean? By then we knew the CBD had been cordoned off, and I realised we were highly unlikely to get back into our building. Our servers were sitting in there, although we had backups off site, we needed an alternative space to work from... you had to start making strategic decisions.”

The Canterbury Employers’ Chamber of Commerce (CECC) has since developed a Crisis Recovery Manual to help businesses plan, prepare and understand what is involved in a recovery plan following a disaster. “Following a crisis, it’s anything but ‘business as usual’, but the faster you can return your business to some level of ‘normal’ operation, the quicker you can restore your income, jobs and the goods and services you supply to your customers,” says CECC CEO Peter Townsend. “However, every business is unique, and in some cases recovery might not be a viable option.” Businesses affected by a disaster need to evaluate their financial position and how they should operate in the new environment before deciding whether to re-open. A recovery plan identifying the critical processes and resources required and recovery objectives, together with cash flow forecasts and profit and loss forecasts, will help determine whether re-opening is viable and how this will be financed. Don’t just cut costs – look for underlying improvements in the business, advises Peter Townsend. “Become adaptable and innovative and think about what will help you improve your business.” As part of your business continuity planning, key operating and emergency management information will need to be stored both on and off site for the recovery team to tap into. It is critically important to protect your base assets with adequate insurance – your place of business, contents and inventory and/or production processes. “Despite the devastation, despite the mental and physical challenges, you have to see the opportunities and make the hard but necessary decisions in a timely manner,” says Joseph Thomas. “It’s been hard work, but we’ve taken some calculated risk to position NZIM Southern very well for 2012, and it’s brought the team closer together.” Useful resources: • Hazard assessment, planning and preparedness: www.civildefence.govt.nz/ memwebsite.nsf/wpg_URL/Being-PreparedHow-to-be-prepared-in-your-business-Index? OpenDocument, also wellington.govt.nz/ services/emergencymgmt/pdfs/busguide.pdf • Managing loss and trauma in the workplace: www.skylight.org.nz • Recovery planning: www.recovercanterbury. co.nz/content/moving-forward/default.aspx

Are you ready? Are you concerned business operations might be interrupted by a natural or human-caused disaster? Yes No Unsure Have you determined what parts of your business need to be operational as soon as possible following a disaster, and planned how to resume them? Yes No Unsure Do you have a disaster response plan to help assure your employees’ safety until help can arrive? Yes No Unsure Could you communicate with your employees if a disaster happened during or after work hours? Yes No Unsure Can your building withstand the impact of a natural disaster, and are your contents and inventory sufficiently protected against damage? Yes No Unsure Are your vital records protected from harm? Yes No Unsure Are you prepared to stay open for business if your suppliers cannot deliver, your markets are inaccessible, or basic needs (eg, water, electricity, transport) are unavailable? Yes No Unsure Do you have plans to stay open for business, even if you cannot use your primary place of business? Yes No Unsure Have you worked with public officials and other businesses to promote disaster preparedness and plan for community recovery? Yes No Unsure Have you consulted an insurance professional to determine if your cover is adequate to get you back in business following a disaster? Yes No Unsure Your score indicates how well prepared you are for the disruption caused by a disaster. 7 – 10 Yes: You are well on your way. 4 – 6 Yes: You have lots of work to do. 1 – 3 Yes: You should get started immediately! (With acknowledgements to the Canterbury Employers’ Chamber of Commerce) Focus on Management


IN MEMORIAM N ZIM Northern wishes to acknowledge the passing of one of its most respected facilitators. Lesley Coleman sadly lost her battle on 30 September after bravely fighting breast cancer since the beginning of the year. Lesley will be remembered for her vibrant spirit, her positive attitude and her genuine passion for developing and training individuals to their full potential. Lesley had an infectious smile and sense of humour and always led her sessions with a positive and entertaining approach that saw her become a favourite and requested facilitator by many who worked with her. Our thoughts are with her employer and NZIM Facilitator Jan Alley and her team and of course Lesley’s family. On behalf of NZIM Northern, we thank Lesley for the positive footprint she has left with colleagues and clients. She will be missed greatly by all who worked with her.

TETRAMAP NOW AVAILABLE AS A PUBLIC PROGRAMME FOR 2012 T

he TetraMap revolution is in full effect at NZIM as yet another cohort of Certified TetraMap Facilitators has completed facilitator accreditation in a public course recently in Auckland. One of the latest graduates is none other than NZIM Northern L&D specialist Stacey Coulthard.

From left to right: Newly accredited Tetramap facilitators Alex Warriner, Craig Bleakley, Karen Walmsley, Stacey Coulthard (NZIM), Clare O’Shaunessy, Margot Minet, Samantha McKenzie, Blair Parkin, David Randall and (front) Dave Litherland.

NZIM Northern is committed to using the TetraMap’s nature of behaviour instrument as a key learning tool within a number of communications and management programmes

for 2012. We have now released public programme dates for participants to learn the many applications of this Kiwi-designed tool as a separate and specific one-day course to be held at NZIM Northern next year. Participants will experience the powerful nature of these applications and how they can be used with ease in all areas of business, management, conflict, planning and of course communication. Understand the elements that effect human interaction to create more communication: less conflict – more collaboration; less silo-working – more results; less time – more engagement; less wasted potential and energy – more creativity; less anxiety. It’s a win-win programme for you and your staff or colleagues so get on board and register for one of the programmes scheduled for next year. It’s also a great opportunity to enjoy the variety of passionate facilitators on this programme, as many of the NZIM staff and facilitators are also certified TetraMap facilitators, so give us a call! For more information talk to Stacey Coulthard at NZIM Northern on 09 303 9106.

NZIM NORTHERN LAUNCHES NEW LOOK PUBLIC PROGRAMME PLANNER FOR 2012

A

s businesses around New Zealand prepare for 2012, the New Zealand Institute of Management has recently undertaken a major project to ensure its public programme planner for 2012 meets the expectations of an ever changing business market. This has been a particularly challenging year for many organisations, however the need to upskill in Focus on Management

key management areas or gain business-related qualifications has been prevalent across all industry sectors. NZIM Northern has been speaking to its clients over the last 12 months to find out exactly where the gaps are and how their business can meet that need with relevant up-to-date public course options as well as customised in-company programmes. The NZIM Northern region has now launched its 2012 Public Programme Planner and believes that the introduction of a number of new courses and extended programme options reflects the current business challenges that are being faced in both in commercial and government circles. NZIM’s main goal is to provide a full range of relevant management and leadership programmes that can provide a clear pathway for academic and practical management application, for emerging talent and established managers. The programme categories for the coming year will fit these learning options into clear groups depending on the participant’s specific training requirements. Senior Leadership candidates will

have a wide range of new programmes, as does the new category of Emerging Leadership. This has been designed purely for up and coming managers and team leaders. There is a focus on business communications skills, and there has been significant development of the project management framework, which will see participants able to be formally recognised in this area. The category of financial management has a clear staircase as does the introduction of two key categories – human resources and recruitment and also in the specialist field of learning and development. Sales management and a range of in-company only programmes round out the new look programme planner. Take a look at all of the programmes being offered at NZIM Northern and throughout the region, via the updated website at www.nzimnorthern.co.nz. Please feel free to make contact with one of the very capable learning and development specialists in Auckland on 0800 800 NZIM or 09 303 9100.


Celebration & Farewell O

n 1 October 2011 NZIM Northern, NZIM Central and the NZIM national body became one integrated legal entity â&#x20AC;&#x201C; NZIM Inc. A celebration and farewell was held after the Extraordinary General Meeting on Tuesday 27th September at which the Confirming Motion was carried. Karin Callaghan who has led NZIM Central for the past five years with energy, dedication and integrity was farewelled and a warm welcome extended to Kevin Gaunt who has been appointed Chief Executive of NZIM Inc.

Introduction to

Management Chair of NZIM Central Lynda Carroll AFNZIM.

NZIM Central Chair Lynda Carroll AFNZIM, Karin Callaghan FNZIM, Phil Hartwick MNZIM and Philip Meyer FNZIM.

Tony Hassed Life Fellow.

T

oo many new managers and team leaders try to manage staff without having any background or support. This is stressful for them and their staff and ultimately bad for the organisation they represent. The Introduction to Management course provides new or prospective managers with formal training in basic, practical management skills. It is designed to launch new managers with the knowledge and confidence to start them on the road to success. The programmeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s objective is to enable the new manager to set high standards early, practise good management habits, and learn effective approaches to get the best from themselves and from the people they manage in the shortest possible time. Participants will benefit if they have recently become a manager or team leader, or are about to be promoted into a management position. This is also a good starting programme for any manager who lacks formal training or anyone seeking a career in management. This programme is run as two concurrent days followed by a third day three to four weeks later. This is to encourage participants to apply concepts and return to report on their progress. The workshops involve working in small groups with ample classroom discussion. A variety of techniques are used to stimulate group interaction and allow participants to contribute their own experiences. Participants are expected to consider personal behaviour change and how they can implement the best practices conveyed in the workshop upon their return to their workplace.

Date: 25 January & 8 February 2012 Members: $1600 + GST Non-members: $2000 + GST Facilitator: Phil Hartwick MNZIM

Chief Executive NZIM Inc. Kevin Gaunt FNZIM and Mark Woodard AFNZIM.

Focus on Management


Future is bright and exciting for NZIM Southern Inc A

Therese La Porte.

Karen Eastwood-Robinson.

Debra Buckley.

Focus on Management

fter what can only be described as the most disruptive year in the history of NZIM Southern, it is now moving forward in very positive ways. On Wednesday 12 October the Southern team moved into newly rented premises at Unit 4a, 303 Blenheim Road in Christchurch. This has been a very positive move and provides a modern office environment from which the team now operates. It’s part of a strategy to refresh NZIM Southern post the 22 February earthquake and to lift its profile and visibility in the market. Since being displaced from Management House in the Christchurch CBD, the Southern team had operated from a 95 square metre Portacom located at the Christchurch International Airport. “We are eternally grateful to the Christchurch Engine Centre who kindly made office space available at a time of need,” says CEO Joseph Thomas. “The generosity and hospitality of Mike Eller, Brendon McWilliam and their team at the CEC has been greatly appreciated. There is still much uncertainty regarding the future of NZIM Southern’s CBD property so when the opportunity to rent modern office space in a business park was presented to us in early September, an informed decision was made to relocate our operation to Blenheim Road.” Like many Canterbury organisations, NZIM Southern has had to review its strategic direction, consider its position in the market and restructure the organisation to align to current needs and to position the business well for the future. One outcome from this process has been the recruitment of a Learning and Development Manager and two Learning and Development Consultants. We have the pleasure of now introducing our new team members as follows: Therese La Porte is experienced in educational management, programme design and the practical implementation of workplace learning. She has had a number of years’ experience in vocational educational management in not-for-profit organisations in the UK and New Zealand, developing quality systems, tutor professional development and curriculum design, as well as working as an external moderator in adult education and training for the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. Based at the former Christchurch College of Education then later the University of Canterbury, she was responsible for developing qualifications, short courses and consultancy work in adult and workplace learning. She has mentored an extensive

number of workplace learning projects for educators, managers and human resources staff. Therese remains focused on maximising learning opportunities within the workplace, developing programmes to support, coach and enhance the professional development of staff, and developing supportive networks for workplace learning and development practitioners. She is on the steering committee for the International Consortium of Experiential Learning, is active in research in professional development and has a particular interest in exploring everyday creativity in the workplace. Karen Eastwood-Robinson has had a varied and interesting career including management positions in accountancy, account management, administration and sales within a varied range of industries. This has given Karen experience in service, manufacturing, wholesale and retailbased organisations. For the past 12 years she has followed her passion for learning and development, as a facilitator, course developer and workplace training needs assessor. From this experience Karen has gained an in-depth understanding of the crucial role learning can play in increasing the efficiency and productivity of an organisation. As she says, “When we empower staff by teaching them all the skills needed for the job, the results are almost magical.” Debra Buckley has worked in New Zealand, Australia and United Kingdom and brings facilitation, training and coaching expertise from her varied roles in the corporate, retail and direct sales sectors. Debra believes strongly in the concepts of leadership development and emotional intelligence, and incorporates these into her coaching and consulting, helping executives identify their own personal leadership effectiveness and the skills required of their team and direct reports. Having consulted to a wide range of organisations and individuals she is experienced in the relationship between manager and staff and how this impacts on individual and organisational performance. Debra’s areas of interest include creating a successful succession plan within organisations through an investment in learning and development and organisational change. With a new structure and direction, NZIM Southern is looking forward with positive anticipation to a much more settled and prosperous year in 2012. The organisation has survived, revived and is now well positioned to thrive. Watch this space!


NORTHERN

CENTRAL

All courses shown are in Auckland. For more information phone 0800 800 694 or visit www.nzimnorthern.co.nz

All courses shown are in Wellington unless otherwise indicated. For more information phone 0800 373 700 or visit www.nzimcentral.co.nz

JANUARY 2012

DECEMBER

19-20

24 25 25-27

Recruitment Frameworks for Success (HR1) Speed and Power Reading Effective Business Writing Essential Skills (Team Leader 1)

FEBRUARY

1-2

1-2 2-3 7-8 7-9 13 15-17 20-21 20-22 22-24 23-24 28-29

Developing a High Performing Team Assertiveness Skills Dealing with Difficult Behaviours Developing Influencing and Motivating Skills Project Management Fundamentals Emotional Intelligence Accounting for Non Accountants Interpersonal Communication Skills Building Effective Teams (Team Leader 2) Introduction to Management Consultative Sales Skills Coaching and Mentoring

5-6 6 7-8 13

13-14

Advanced Project Risk Management Managing your Time Marketing, Planning & Control Practical Finance for Owners and Managers – Manufacturing Advanced Negotiation Skills

JANUARY 2012 25 25-27 31

Introduction to Management (begins) Project Management Diploma in Management Advanced (Presentation Day)

FEBRUARY 21 24 27 27-29 28-29 28

Effective Business Writing Managing Your Time Report Writing Project Management Business Ethics (Dip Mgmt Advanced) NZIM Diploma in Management Advanced (begins)

SOUTHERN

For more information phone 03 379 2302 (Christchurch C), 03 455 5165 (Dunedin D) or 03 218 7451 (Invercargill I & Queenstown Q) or visit www.nzimsouthern.co.nz

DECEMBER 5-6 7-8

7-8 9 12-14

Coaching for Performance C Quality Management – An Introduction C ANA Stage 2 C Business Ethics C Team Leader – Building Effective Teams C

FEBRUARY 13

14-15 15-16 16 17 17 20-22 27-28 27-29

Project Management for Administrators C Accounting for Non Accountants 1 C How to Manage + Lead Successfully D Effective Use of Time C The Aging Workforce – Challenges + Options (New) D The Generation Challenge D Team Leader – The Essential Skills C Practical Project Management C Four Quadrant Leadership I

MARCH

1 1

MARCH

MARCH

1-2 1-2 5-6 5-6 7 7-9 8-9 12-14 14-15 19-20 19-20 19-21

5-6 7 8

7

1-2

22-23 26-28 26-28 29-30

Corporate Storytelling with Wade Jackson Negotiating for Results Presentation Skills Conflict Resolution Strategies Think on Your Feet Conducting Effective Meetings Professional Administrator Skills Essential Sales Fundamentals Business Ethics Facilitation Skills Key Account Management Managing Performance (HR2) Operational Management (Team Leader 3) Train the Trainer Four Quadrant Leadership Leadership, Motivation and Team Building Train the Trainer

12-13 12-13 14-15 15-16 19-20 19-21 21-23 26-27 26-27 29 29-30

Speed & Power Reading Introduction to Management (starts) Presentation Skills Emotional Intelligence Train the Trainer (NCAET Paper) (starts) Human Resource Management (Dip in Management Advanced) Negotiation Skills Advanced Negotiation Skills Strategic Management (Dip in Management Advanced) Budgeting for Non-Financial Managers Professional Administrator Skills Accounting for Non Accountants Coaching & Mentoring Skills for Managers Diploma in Project Management Managing Your Time Strategic Thinking Tools

1-2 5-6 6

8 15 15-16 19 19 20 21 22 23

APRIL

18 18

Essential Selling Skills I Presentation Skills D Managing the Performance of Your Staff I Essential People + Communication Skills I Effective Business Writing I Effective Use of Time Q Accounting for Non Accountants Stage One I Effective Meeting Management (New) D Email Etiquette (New) D Professional Reception Skills D Essential Skills for the Administrator D The Art of Minute Taking D Project Management for Administrators D Delivering Great Customer Care I How to Handle Difficult Customers I

Professional Qualifications T

he NZIM professional qualification system lies at the heart of NZIM membership, publicly recognising members’ experience, capability and achievement in the field of management. Managerial success today is measured by achievement and ability, not only time served in the job, and the NZIM professional qualification system is likewise merit and competency based. The NZIM professional qualification system is divided into four categories –

Associate, Member, Associate Fellow, and Fellow – and provides members with: • A series of objectives they can strive to achieve, with meaningful recognition at each stage. • A measure of their ability as managers and leaders and a means of reviewing their achievements and contributions. • An enhanced professional image which signals to the business community that members are part of a recognised organisation dedicated to improving

the quality of management in New Zealand. It also provides employers and boards with an objective measure of the abilities of applicants for promotion or employment, up to the most senior executive and board appointments. To find out more about NZIM membership criteria visit http:// www.nzim.co.nz/Site/members/ professional_qualification.aspx. Focus on Management


LEADERS BUILDING LEADERS OurÊ aimÊ isÊ toÊ buildÊ managementÊ capabilityÊ throughÊ Research,Ê Ê Learning,Ê andÊ Recognition.

MEMBER COMMENT:

Tony Hassed, Life Fellow

OUR FOCUS IS TO: • Research leading management trends andÊ practiceÊ andÊ promoteÊ aÊ constantlyÊ developingÊ modelÊ ofÊ bestÊ managementÊ capabilityÊ forÊ NewÊ Zealand. • Enable managers and aspiring managers toÊ participateÊ inÊ learningÊ programmes,Ê mentoring,Ê andÊ eventsÊ thatÊ provideÊ theÊ informationÊ andÊ experienceÊ theyÊ needÊ toÊ developÊ theirÊ capability. • Identify leading management role models andÊ provideÊ awardsÊ thatÊ recogniseÊ theÊ careerÊ andÊ educationalÊ achievementsÊ ofÊ managers. NATIONAL BOARD Gary Sturgess Life FNZIM (Chairman) Lynda Carroll AFNZIM Mark Woodard AFNZIM Brian Soutar AFNZIM Dan Coward AFNZIM John Sandford FNZIM Joanne O’Connor MNZIM Ash Dixon MNZIM NZIM Inc Chairman: Gary Sturgess Life FNZIM Deputy Chair: Lynda Carroll AFNZIM PO Box 67, Wellington 6140 Ph 0-4-473 0470, Fax 0-4-473 0479 Email national_office@nzim.co.nz Website: www.nzim.co.nz CEO: Kevin Gaunt FNZIM, FAIM PO Box 6600, Wellesley St, Auckland 1141 Ph 0-9-303 9100, Fax 0-9-303 9109 Email kevin_gaunt@nzimnorthern.co.nz Northern Region Regional Director: John Sandford FNZIM Regional Contact: Tait Grindley PO Box 6600, Wellesley St, Auckland 1141 Ph 0-9-303 9100, Fax 0-9-303 9109 Email enquiries@nzimnorthern.co.nz Website www.nzimnorthern.co.nz Central Region Regional Director: Lynda Carroll AFNZIM Regional Contact: Susan Andrews PO Box 11781, Wellington 6142 Ph 0-4-495 8300, Fax 0-4-495 8301 Email enquiries@nzimcentral.co nz Website www.nzimcentral.co nz Southern Region Regional Director: Brian Soutar AFNZIM Regional CEO: Joseph Thomas AFNZIM PO Box 13044, Christchurch 8141 Ph 0-3-379 2302, Fax 0-3-357 8003 Email joseph@nzimsouthern.co nz Website www.nzimsouthern.co.nz

I

got involved initially [in NZIM] in the mid70s when I was working at IBM. Our CEO Bas Logan, who was also national president of NZIM, asked me if I’d like to be national treasurer (a role which has long since disappeared). When your boss asks you if you would like to do something the tendency is to say yes three bags full! Very shortly after, I got elected to what was then the Wellington board and I was on that for 20-something years. When the national board was established I was selected as one of the inaugural members, and was on the board for about nine years. I was national president in 1985-86 and again in 2004-05. That’s how I got started in NZIM. It wasn’t a typical introduction – but more recently there’s been a few who’ve followed a similar path. The Central region board had several who had very little association with NZIM prior to getting shoulder tapped. Targeting people for their specific competencies could well be a feature of the new national board, and I think that’s absolutely essential in today’s environment. NZIM is not only under pressure from other institutions offering equivalent or lookalike courses but, from a wider perspective, is facing similar challenges to other membership-based institutions, in that membership – whether of NZIM or the local tennis club – seems to be a declining pastime for younger people. It’s a common cry right throughout the country, particularly the not-for-profit boards I talk to... we just haven’t got the membership numbers to keep bringing good people through to our board. But it can be done – Canterbury (NZIM Southern) has done a very good job of cultivating its membership and building strong networks over the years. Other changing business dynamics, including the now almost complete absence of significant private sector business in Wellington and the overseas ownership of many New Zealand companies, are also having an impact on management development, and pose a challenge to NZIM. But despite this, and despite the fact that today we’re in a very different technological environment, we still need the four basics of management – planning, leading, organising and controlling. These are still relevant even though we might implement them in a slightly different way. But who is talking to our aspiring and new managers about those four characteristics of

management... where do they pick them up from? If you look at the Management Capability Index developed by Doug Matheson and particularly at the performance of New Zealand managers, it’s absolutely appalling in comparison to managers elsewhere in the world. I believe a lot of this is can be laid at the door of poor planning, and I see it from another perspective in the governance programmes that I run. So many of our boards – and I’ve spoken to probably at least 500 over the last few years – have no strategic capability whatsoever, hence no long-term perspective. I can live with three years as long term although I’d rather have five, but the number of boards which have been able to show me their plan for the next three to five years... well it’s minuscule. A lot of boards spend far too much time controlling and not enough time thinking about the future, partly because they feel more comfortable in a control mode but partly because they just don’t know how to think about the future. It’s a pretty common issue (worldwide). I think the problem lies in that we don’t spend enough time with our young people getting them to peer around corners or at what’s going on over the horizon. I don’t even think our young people read widely enough, whether on the internet or by way of newspapers or magazines or whatever, about the environment in which we operate. So in terms of what’s ahead for NZIM I think there’s a huge requirement for our younger people to get these basic principles established. How that happens is the bit that I’m concerned about. One of the valuable things in my career was having mentors, albeit informal and nowhere near as structured as mentoring is today. If an employer is not prepared to fund managers or aspiring managers to learn, then maybe it’s incumbent on those individuals to say I want to be a good manager and I need to link up with a mentor who’s going to help me through the basic principles and some of the issues I’m going to run into as I undertake my management career. Mentors might be a particularly valuable option where employers think that sending people off to a course is just too difficult – they’re running on the smell of an oily rag, can’t afford it financially and from a time point of view. After all, coming around the other side of the counter, can you afford to have someone in a management position who doesn’t understand the principles of management? You don’t want them to bureaucratise the place but to understand, what are the things you need to do when you’re thinking about future planning? What are the things that constitute leadership? What are the things that constitute organisational capability and what does controlling mean in today’s environment? I think one of the real challenges for NZIM is that its philosophy is pretty much right – it’s an enduring philosophy – but it’s how we implement that in today’s changing environment. It’s not easy given the depressed economy. So the future for NZIM I believe is about going back to basics. Getting back into New Zealand enterprises with the research to show that adequately trained managers make a huge difference to their organisations – people who understand those four basic principles, and have a mentor alongside them to make sure they don’t run themselves into difficulties.


Singapore Airlines

First Class More exclusive than you could ever imagine Savour the finer things in life in our exquisite First Class cabin, where every detail is thoughtfully designed for you. Unwind in our spacious seat or revel in the luxury of a fully flat bed. En route, enjoy a movie on the widest screen in the sky, or simply take pleasure in the inflight service even other airlines talk about.

Available onboard the Singapore Airlines Boeing 777-300ER and selected 777-300 flights.


In the future, there will be no markets left waiting to emerge. Even as soon as 2050, 19 of the top 30 economies by GDP are forecast to be countries that we currently describe as ‘emerging’.* HSBC was established to finance and facilitate the growing trade between China and Europe. That’s why we have Trade and Supply Chain teams on the ground in the major and emerging trading economies all around the globe, helping you make new business connections and navigate local regulations. So when you are thinking of emerging markets we can provide all the support you need. For details, contact our Corporate Banking team on corporatebanking@hsbc.co.nz or visit hsbc.co.nz/corporatebanking *Source: HSBC ‘The world in 2050’

Issued by The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited, incorporated in the Hong Kong SAR with limited liability, acting through its New Zealand branch (“HSBC”).

NZ Management Magazine December 2011  

NZ Management Magazine December 2011

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you