A large company can look steady from the outside while one of its parts carries serious risk.

Wikipedia's current-events log for September 29, 2008 recorded that the German government and private banks inject 35 billion Euros into the struggling Hypo Real Estate. The log said the bank had been struggling because its Irish subsidiary, Depfa Bank, had suffered massive losses during the subprime mortgage crisis.

It added that the HRE is the first company from the DAX that had to be rescued by the government in recent memory.

Why Separate Units May Not Separate Risk

In this account, the trouble was traced to a subsidiary in another country. That raises a broader question about how far a company's structure really contains a loss.

Companies often set up separate units to keep focus and to limit liability. Even so, a loss in one unit may not stay there, since the group as a whole may still be expected to answer for it. A well-known parent company is not necessarily protected from trouble in a business it owns abroad.

For anyone who runs a large organization or designs a complex system, one possible lesson is about visibility. A risk that is not watched may be hard to manage. Handing work to a separate unit may not hand over the consequences if that work goes wrong.

Perhaps stability depends as much on knowing the weakest part of a group as on counting its strongest assets.

Sources

  • Systems Thinking
  • Decision Making

Back to all articles