Graziadio School of Business and Management | Pepperdine University

• Subscribe
• iTunesU
• YouTube

Price Fixing and Minimum Resale Price Restrictions Are Two Different Animals

The term “price fixing” has a strong negative connotation, and deservedly so. However, it is frequently misused by politicians, the media, and lawyers in reference to manufacturer-imposed, minimum resale price restrictions, which can actually be beneficial for business and consumers.

The world of minimum resale price maintenance (RPM) has been in flux in recent years. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court relaxed antitrust restrictions on the practice, and in response, legislation was introduced in the U.S. Senate to change the antitrust laws and re-strengthen regulation in this area.[1] This article informs managers about the differences between price fixing and minimum RPM; the potential risks and rewards of employing a minimum RPM strategy; and the state of the economic, legal, and political environment with respect to minimum RPM. Consequently, managers should be able to make better decisions regarding “one of the hottest issues in retailing: whether manufacturers can force retailers to charge customers a minimum . . . price.”[2]

Horizontal Conspiracy among Competitors

Classic price fixing is typically referred to as horizontal price fixing in supply chain terminology, horizontal arrangements are those between competitors operating at the same level of distribution, and vertical arrangements are those between businesses operating at distinct levels of distribution. Horizontal price fixing is an agreement among competitors to restrain price competition in some way. Two examples of such agreements were in the mid-1990s, when Archer Daniels Midland executives were caught on FBI surveillance tapes fixing the price of lysine, a feed additive, with competitors across the globe, and in 2007, when multiple airlines were fined more than $1 billion for colluding to fix fuel surcharges from 2004 to 2006.[3]

Price-fixing arrangements are agreements among competitors to compete less vigorously; they can affect prices, price formulas, margins, discounts, or wages. They also can allocate customers or sales volume across competitors without explicit discussion of prices. One company’s unilateral conduct, which involves no explicit or implicit agreement among competitors, does not constitute price fixing.

Social Harm

An economic analysis of price fixing is relatively simple. In a quest for enhanced profits, conspirators agree to set prices above levels obtained in a competitive environment, thereby minimizing competition and reducing output. This harms both consumers and overall economic wellbeing there are no consumer or social benefits from price fixing.

Legal Status of Price Fixing

Typical of antitrust legislation, economic analysis of conduct is the impetus for law. The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that price fixing agreements are “per se” unlawful; that is, they are illegal “without elaborate inquiry as to the precise harm they have caused or the business excuse for their use.”[4] According to the Court, per se rules should be confined to business conduct “that would always or almost always tend to restrict competition and decrease output.”[5] Price-fixing agreements do exactly this and pose an “actual or potential threat to the central nervous system of the economy.”[6] The free-market competitive process in the United States is the foundation of the enormous growth in standard of living over the past 200-plus years. As price fixing threatens that process, it is taken very seriously and punished strictly.

Businesspeople should expect legal repercussions, even incarceration, if they engage in price fixing. Businesspeople with advanced degrees, such as MBAs, should expect more severe penalties, such as longer prison sentences, as they “should know better.” The rule of thumb is to never discuss prices with competitors do not even appear to discuss prices. Price fixing should be painstakingly avoided in business.

Minimum RPM is Vertical and is Not an Agreement among Competitors

Minimum RPM is a vertical price restriction imposed by an upstream manufacturer on downstream distributors, dealers, or retailers (henceforth, all will be referred to as “retailers”). Typically, a manufacturer specifies a minimum price above which its retailers must sell its product(s). The manufacturer monitors the retailers or employs a monitoring agent[7] to ensure their performance. If retailers are discovered pricing below the specified minimum price, they are terminated or threatened with termination.

Sony, LeapFrog, Black & Decker, Cisco Systems, JVC, Samsung, and Panasonic have all employed minimum RPM strategies.[8] Other examples include:

• In 1997, Leegin Creative Leather Products instituted a “Brighton Retail Pricing and Promotion Policy” for retailers selling their women’s fashion accessories. Leegin terminated retailers who priced below the suggested level.[9]
• From 1988 to 1999, Nine West Group used minimum RPM to restrict the retail prices of their women’s shoes and their dealers’ promotional periods.

Minimum RPM is frequently referred to by politicians, members of the media, and sometimes lawyers as vertical price fixing;[10] but that terminology is inaccurate and misleading as it imparts the negative connotation of horizontal price fixing conspiracies on a non-conspiratorial practice that often has legitimate business purposes and consumer benefits.[11] While use of minimum RPM is sometimes alleged in the operation of price-fixing conspiracies,[12] in and of itself no other competitors are involved in the decision. Minimum RPM is a vertical price restriction, not a price-fixing arrangement.

Photo: Dragan Trifunovic

Uses and Abuses of Minimum RPM

Possible Benefits

Minimum RPM arrangements can prevent consumers from “free-riding” on retailers’ provision of special services. For example, take the case of a high-tech camera manufacturer. Full-service retailers providing well-trained sales personnel, well-staffed sales floors, product demonstrations, and other promotional services are unlikely to be able to compete on price with discount retailers who provide few or no services. If the price difference is large enough, consumers have an incentive to obtain services at a full-service retailer before buying the camera from a discount retailer. Over the long run, this discourages full-service retailers from providing special services, and consequently, harms the manufacturer via lost incremental sales and competitive disadvantage.  Minimum RPM can prevent this type of consumer free-riding by restricting the ability of discount retailers to undercut full-service retailers.

Minimum RPM can mitigate problems between manufacturers and retailers even when consumers are unlikely to free-ride. For example, when retailers decide on the level and types of services and sales effort to provide for a product, they consider their own markup, not the manufacturer’s. Suppose that Levi Strauss & Co, a popular denim wear manufacturer, has a $50 wholesale markup on a brand of women’s jeans while its retailer has a $10 retail markup. The retailer would not spend $15 on promotional displays or extra sales efforts that would induce one additional consumer to buy; however, Levi’s profits would increase, so it is in Levi’s interest to motivate the retailer to invest and compete for incremental sales.[13] This example illustrates just how easily the private interests of retailers and manufacturers can be misaligned, especially when there is a large difference in markups. In stark contrast to price-fixing arrangements, promotional, brand image, or sales-effort investments are competitive and geared towards incremental sales.

To address the incentive problem, minimum RPM arrangements would offer larger discount-restricted markups to retailers; convey the types of services, effort, and brand image desired;[14] monitor retail prices, and terminate retailers who do not comply. They serve as a “premium-termination” contract enforcement mechanism by restricting price at the retail level in order to enhance other forms of non-price competition.[15] If a manufacturer were interested in using its market power to raise consumer prices, it could simply increase its wholesale prices to retailers. In the end, minimum RPM yields a larger markup for retailers as opposed to manufacturers. This is a common phenomenon in economics: a business practice that appears to harm competition actually has a legitimate, competitive justification when analyzed more exhaustively.[16]

In price-fixing conspiracies, the initiators are competitors who realize that they will be better off if they minimize group competition. With minimum RPM, a single manufacturer influences downstream retailers’ behavior through an increased markup, so they will compete more aggressively on non-price dimensions; meanwhile, competition amongst manufacturers is not affected. This enhances intra-brand non-price competition and overall inter-brand competition via a non-conspiratorial restriction of intra-brand price competition. The net effect on consumers and social wellbeing requires a deeper analysis and more careful consideration than is currently provided by those who label minimum RPM “vertical price fixing.”[17]

Possible Harm

The common scenarios in which minimum RPM purportedly harms the market involve price fixing and exclusion of rivals. Minimum RPM is sometimes alleged to support a price-fixing conspiracy between competing manufacturers or a price-fixing conspiracy between retailers who collectively pressure the manufacturer to implement minimum RPM. A 1991 study in the Journal of Law & Economics estimated that only 13 percent of minimum RPM cases filed over a seven-year period included allegations of horizontal price fixing.[18] Even so, price fixing should never be undertaken, whether or not the conspiracy involves minimum RPM. If a businessperson’s retailers apply pressure to implement minimum RPM or increase minimum prices, the businessperson may be accused of facilitating a retail price fixing conspiracy. Do not take part in this. Immediately seek legal counsel.

Another scenario in which minimum RPM may harm the competitive process is when attractive retail markups, provided by minimum RPM, induce retailers not to stock the products of a manufacturer’s competitors. Such exclusion is similar to a manufacturer using exclusive contracts at the retail level to exclude rivals from “retail space” critical to competition. This scenario requires that a manufacturer have a substantial market share.

Legal Status of Minimum RPM

In 1911, the U.S. Supreme Court held that minimum RPM arrangements are per se illegal when a manufacturer agrees with retailers on a minimum retail price.[19] A loophole was created in 1919 when the Court allowed manufacturers to unilaterally impose minimum RPM, provided there was no agreement with retailers. In what is known as the “Colgate Doctrine,” the Court noted that antitrust law, in particular the Sherman Act, “does not prevent a manufacturer engaged in a private business from announcing in advance the prices at which his goods may be resold and refusing to deal with wholesalers and retailers who do not conform to such prices.”[20] Passed in 1890, the Sherman Act was the first U.S. federal antitrust statute.  It was designed to promote competition by limiting the monopolistic restraint of trade and certain types of monopolization of markets.

Over time, antitrust laws evolve as economic knowledge and research progress and new insights are gleaned into procompetitive reasons for hard-to-understand business practices. Since “the economics literature is replete with procompetitive justifications”[21] for minimum RPM, the practice can offer business and consumer benefits, and does not “always or almost always” restrict competition. The Supreme Court determined that minimum RPM agreements should be judged according to the “rule of reason” in a landmark June 2007 decision (Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., i.e. the Leegin decision).[22]

“Rule of reason” determines illegality on a case-by-case basis, whereby “the factfinder weighs all of the circumstances of a case in deciding whether a restrictive practice should be prohibited as imposing an unreasonable restraint on competition.”[23] This rule not only examines circumstances, but also weighs likely harm as well as legitimate business justifications and consumer benefits (i.e., procompetitive justifications). Thus, minimum RPM is not always legal or illegal, but each case will be analyzed on an individual basis, taking all relevant factors into consideration. It is worth noting that a significant amount of U.S. state law and legislation conforms to the new federal standard, but not all do.[24]

Recent Developments in Minimum RPM

In 2007, U.S. senators sponsored the Discount Pricing Consumer Protection Act as a bill “to correct the Supreme Court’s mistaken interpretation of the Sherman Act in the Leegin decision.”[25] The bill did not pass by the end of the 110^th Congress, but has already been re-sponsored in the current 111^th Congress. It would amend the antitrust laws to restore the rule that minimum RPM agreements violate the Sherman Act.[26] The attorneys general of 35 states support the bill, while the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) support the Leegin decision.[27]

The Leegin decision is already affecting business practices in the United States. In March 2000, Nine West settled its use of minimum RPM agreements with the FTC. In May 2008, after the Leegin decision, the FTC modified its order and allowed Nine West to use minimum RPM agreements, subject to periodic reports. Relying on the rule of reason rationale, the FTC evaluated the merits of this particular case, and determined that Nine West’s use of minimum RPM agreements did not “pose any potential competitive concerns” because of “among other things, ‘its modest market share.’”[28] Because of the Leegin decision, the courts and the FTC are not forced to prohibit business decisions that are competitive in nature and they can study those that fall into a shade of gray.

Summary and Conclusions

To associate minimum RPM with the term “price fixing” is improper and flat-out wrong. Minimum RPM is a business practice that can benefit companies and consumers in stark contrast to price-fixing conspiracies. With the Leegin decision, federal law conformed to economic analysis, recognizing minimum RPM’s potential benefits and the reality that it does not “always or almost always” restrict competition. Thus, managers should treat minimum RPM as any other strategic business practice that has potential benefits but can be abused, such as exclusive contracts, tie-in sales, exclusive territories, and maximum RPM.

Minimum RPM arrangements should be carefully analyzed to predict and weigh all of the risks and rewards. If a manager has a competitive interest in a minimum RPM strategy, expert antitrust legal advice should be obtained, especially considering the pending bill (which will affect agreements, as opposed to unilateral conduct, if passed) and the different state laws that may be inconsistent with federal law.

Remember, minimum RPM is not price fixing in the economic sense, no matter what politicians say or the media writes. If fully informed and strategically employed, minimum RPM can solve a company’s incentive problems with retailers, enabling it to more effectively compete against rival brands by better managing its brand image and providing desired promotional services and sales effort.

---

[1] Joseph Pereira, “Group Hits Manufacturers’ Minimum Pricing,” The Wall Street Journal, December, 4, 2008, at A4; GovTrack.us, S. 2261: Discount Pricing Consumer Protection Act, http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-2261; and Joseph Pereira, “Discounters, Monitors Face Battle on Minimum Pricing,” The Wall Street Journal, December, 4, 2008, at A1.

[2] Joseph Pereira, John R. Wilke, “Instruments, Audio Gear Scrutinized In Price Probe,” The Wall Street Journal, October, 23, 2008, at B1.

[3] The Associated Press, “British Airways and Korean Air Lines Fined in Fuel Collusion,”The New York Times, August, 2, 2007, at 6.

[4] Northern Pacific R. Co. v. United States, 356 U.S. 1 at 5 (1958).

[5] Business Electronics Corp. v. Sharp Electronics Corp., 485 U.S. 717 at 723 (1988).

[6] United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., Inc., 310 U.S. 150 at 224 (1940).

[7] For examples of monitoring agents, see Joseph Pereira, “Discounters, Monitors Face Battle on Minimum Pricing,” The Wall Street Journal, December, 4, 2008, at A1.

[8] Joseph Pereira, “Why Some Toys Don’t Get Discounted,” The Wall Street Journal, December, 24, 2008, at D1; Joseph Pereira, “Discounters, Monitors Face Battle on Minimum Pricing,” The Wall Street Journal, December, 4, 2008, at A1.

[9] Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 2705 (2007).

[10] Joseph Pereira, “Price-Fixing Makes Comeback After Supreme Court Ruling,” The Wall Street Journal, August, 18, 2008, at A1; Andrew Noyes, “Senate Judiciary Starting To Build Agenda For Next Session,” CongressDaily/P.M., December 8, 2008; and J.L. Himes, “New York’s Prohibition of Vertical Price-Fixing,” New York Law Journal, 239, no. 19 (2008).

[11] In fact, in the Supreme Court’s 2007 Leegin decision, they used the terminology “vertical price fixing” twice, while using the terminology “vertical price restraint”and “resale price maintenance” numerous times.

[12] P. Ippolito, “Resale Price Maintenance: Empirical Evidence from Litigation,” Journal of Law & Economics, 34, no. 2 (1991): 263–294.

[13] Notice that this is similar to the real estate agent incentive incompatibility described in Steven D. Levitt, Stephen J. Dubner, Freakonomics, (New York: HarperCollins, 2005).

[14] For example, the “Brighton Retail Pricing and Promotion Policy” of the Leegin case.

[15] B. Klein, K.M. Murphy, “Vertical Restraints as Contract Enforcement Mechanisms,” Journal of Law & Economics, 31, no. 2 (1988): 265–296 at 295.

[16] For more information on the economics of minimum RPM, see Kenneth G. Elzinga, David E. Mills, “The Economics of Resale Price Maintenance,” in ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Issues in Competition Law and Policy, Wayne D. Collins (Ed.) (Chicago: ABA Book Publishing, 2008); B. Klein, K.M. Murphy, “Vertical Restraints as Contract Enforcement Mechanisms,” Journal of Law & Economics, 31, no. 2 (1988): 265–296; H.P. Marvel, S. McCafferty, “The Welfare Effects of Resale Price Maintenance,” Journal of Law & Economics, 28, no. 2 (1985): 363–379; and L.G. Telser, “Why Should Manufacturers Want Fair Trade?” Journal of Law & Economics, 3 (1960): 86–105.

[17] See, for example, R.A. Posner, “The Next Step in the Antitrust Treatment of Restricted Distribution: Per Se Legality,” University of Chicago Law Review, 48, no. 1 (1981): 6–26 at 21; B. Klein, K.M. Murphy, “Vertical Restraints as Contract Enforcement Mechanisms, “Journal of Law & Economics, 31, no. 2 (1988): 265–296 at 291.

[18] Supra note 12 at 281.

[19] Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., 220 U.S. 373 (1911).

[20] See Syllabus of United States v. Colgate & Co., 250 U.S. 300 (1919). Note that the legal distinction between an agreement with retailers and unilateral conduct can be a very thin line. If a unilateral minimum RPM policy is being considered, one should obtain expert antitrust legal advice, before the policy is implemented.

[21] Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 2705 at 2714 (2007).

[22] Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 2705 (2007).

[23] Continental T.V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania, Inc., 433 U.S. 36 at 49 (1977).

[24] For state-by-state information on resale price maintenance legislation and litigation, see M.A. Linsey, “Overview of State RPM (Complete),” Antitrust, 22, no. 1 (2007).

[25] GovTrack.us, S. 148: Discount Pricing Consumer Protection Act, http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-148.

[26] Note that the act intends to restore the Dr. Miles decision, with respect to agreements between manufacturers and retailers. It does not attack minimum RPM arrangements that are unilaterally imposed by a manufacturer, within the parameters of the Colgate Doctrine. This distinction is more of a legal issue, as the economic benefits of minimum RPM do not hinge on its unilateral imposition relative to an agreement with retailers, so long as a horizontal price fixing conspiracy is not involved.

[27] Supra note 22 at 2721.

[28] “FTC Modifies Order in Nine West Resale Price Maintenance Case,” press release, Federal Trade Commission, May 6, 2008. For more information on Nine West’s use of minimum RPM and the FTC’s lawsuit, settlement, and subsequent modification, see “In the Matter of Nine West Group Inc.,” Federal Trade Commission, File No. 981 0386, Docket No. C-3937.

2013 Volume 16 Issue 1

• Leading from Character Strength
• Private Businesses Predict Limited Growth for 2013
• Justice in Ethics Programs
• Moving from Misuse to Bricolage
• EDITORIAL: The New Paradigm for Management Education
• The Book Corner
• Video Library
• Dean’s Executive Leadership Series
• Graziadio School Business Programs

2012 Volume 15 Issue 3

• Facilitating the Inventor–Entrepreneur Interaction:
• Bridging the Complexity Gap:
• A No Fault Approach to Recouping Executive Compensation
• Implementing Intrapreneurship:
• Facebook: Data Mining the World’s Largest Focus Group
• The Four-Year U.S. Presidential Cycle and the Stock Market
• VIDEO – Wall of Worry: Elections and the Markets
• Editor’s Note

2012 Volume 15 Issue 2

• VIDEO – Wall of Worry: Elections and the Markets
• The Four-Year U.S. Presidential Cycle and the Stock Market
• CEO Performance of 125 of Northern California’s Largest Companies
• FOR SALE BY OWNER for Less than It Is Worth
• Beyond the Numbers
• Making Decisions with Multiple Attributes: A Case in Sustainability Planning
• The Ethics of Ethics Programs
• Transorganizations: Managing in a Complex and Uncertain World
• The Global Economy is Open for Business
• VIDEO: Leadership, Innovation and Disruption
• UPDATE: Benefits of International Portfolio Diversification
• Editorial: The World of Graduate Management Education Turned Up Side Down
• The Book Corner
• Editor’s Note

2012 Volume 15 Issue 1

• CEO Performance of 100 of Southern California’s Largest Companies
• Editor’s Note
• UPDATE: Reforming Corporate America
• UPDATE: Top 10 U.S. Economic Issues to Monitor
• UPDATE: Airline Industry Key Success Factors
• UPDATE: Management Skills for the 21st Century
• UPDATE: Creating and Sustaining an Ethical Workplace Culture
• UPDATE: The Dollar vs. the Euro
• UPDATE: Making Mergers a Growth Strategy
• UPDATE: The Employers’ Legal Obligations to Employees in the Military
• The Book Corner

2011 Volume 14 Issue 4

• Editor’s Note
• Financial Swiss Army Knife: A User-Friendly Tool for Facilitating Financial Analysis and Due Diligence
• Achieving Enterprise Stability Based on Economic Capital
• The Internet and Globalization: Ten Tips to Building an Effective Digital Strategy for Global Success
• Learn to Expect the Unexpected in Global Retail Expansion
• VIDEO: Stop the Madness: A Recipe to Jump-Start the Global Economy
• The Book Corner

2011 Volume 14 Issue 3

• Editor’s Note
• Labor Pains: The Recovery of the U.S. Labor Market is about to be Pushed Back
• Creating Advocates: A Values-Oriented Approach to Developing Brand Loyalty
• Leveraging Action Learning as a Talent Management Strategy during Economic Uncertainty
• Protecting Descriptive Brands in Trademark and Trade Dress Law:
• VIDEO: Transforming the Relationship between Business and IT Executives
• The Book Corner

2011 Volume 14 Issue 2

• Editor’s Note: Finding Distinctiveness
• Secondary Meaning in Trademark and Trade Dress Law
• Financial Elements of Business Resilience
• Positive Organizational Scholarship and Practice: A Dynamic Duo
• VIDEO: Currency Wars, a Faculty Panel
• The Book Corner

2011 Volume 14 Issue 1

• Editor’s Note
• A Consequence Analysis that Needs to be Shared
• Family Business Succession
• The Quest for Distinctiveness in Trademark and Trade Dress Law
• Self-Organizing Conversation as an Invitation to Serendipity
• The ABC’s of Effective Feedback
• “Spiritual Capital and Virtuous Business Leadership” with Yale’s Ted Malloch
• “The Role of the CIO” with Harvey Koeppel
• The Book Corner

2010 Volume 13 Issue 4

• Attn: The Corner Office – Why U.S. Firms Should Pay Special Dividends Before Year-End 2010
• The Charisma of Twitter
• Lessons from the New Dodd-Frank Financial Regulatory Reform Law
• The Changing Role of the Residential Real Estate Broker
• 2010 Student Paper Winner: Using Social Media to Grow Your Business
• Editor’s Note: New Look, New Name, Still Great Content
• What to Do when Traditional Diversification Strategies Fail – Revisited
• Great Leaders are Great Decision-Makers
• The Four Levels of Innovation
• The Book Corner

2010 Volume 13 Issue 3

• The Spoiled American
• Choosing Your Negotiation Site
• Editorial: Systems Thinking
• Improvisation as a Way of Dealing with Ambiguity and Complexity
• Economic Recovery Gaining Traction
• The Book Corner
• City National Bank’s Robert Iritani Discusses the Future of Financial Management
• An Interview with Clean Tech Start-up Advisor Susanna Kass
• Servanthood Leadership

2010 Volume 13 Issue 2

• Carl Schramm Talks Expeditionary Economics
• Highly Effective Technical Personnel Strategies
• Real Options: The Value Added through Optimal Decision Making
• 10 Lessons for Entrepreneurs
• Utilizing Business Service Management Concepts to Improve Healthcare Information Services
• Editor’s Note
• Strategies for Leading through Times of Change
• Editorial: Will commercial real estate will follow in the footsteps of the residential property market?
• The Book Corner

2010 Volume 13 Issue 1

• Six Steps for Confronting the Emerging Leadership Succession Crisis
• Interview with Robert Eckert, Chairman of the Board and CEO of Mattel, Incorporated
• Political Connections: The Missing Dimension in Leadership
• How Coach, H-P, Zara, and Ford Profited from a Comprehensive Application of Market Orientation
• Three Ways Larger Monitors Can Improve Productivity
• The Role of Finance in the Strategic-Planning and Decision-Making Process
• Editorial: Is Robotics America’s Ticket to Continued Global Competitiveness?
• The Power of Collective Wisdom and the Trap of Collective Folly By Alan Briskin, Sheryl Erickson, John Ott, and Tom Callanan
• The Book Corner

2009 Volume 12 Issue 4

• Women, the Recession, and the Impending Economic Recovery
• The Power of Sharing in an Uncertain World
• How to Communicate Change to Employees
• Five Tactics to Create a Sustainable Restaurant Business
• IT Solutions for SMBs in an Economic Downturn
• What’s Next, Hollywood?
• Eight Key Attributes of Effective Leaders
• What to Do When Traditional Diversification Strategies Fail
• Video Interview on Corporate Social Responsiblitiy with Golden State Foods
• The Book Corner

2009 Volume 12 Issue 3

• Offshoring May Slow Impending U.S. Economic Recovery
• In Memory of Luis Villalobos
• IT Outsourcing: China Grasps for the Lead
• The Buffett Approach to Valuing Stocks
• Audio Interview with BP’s Chief Economist Christof Ruhl
• Audio Interview with McKesson U.S. Pharmaceutical President John Figueroa
• Editorial: E-Learning is Green Learning
• Domestic Partner Benefits in the United States
• Examining the Role of Short-Term Correlation in Portfolio Diversification
• The Book Corner

2009 Volume 12 Issue 2

• The Root Causes of Unethical Behavior
• Price Fixing and Minimum Resale Price Restrictions Are Two Different Animals
• Investing for Income in a Down Economy
• What Determines Which Businesses Win and Which Lose?
• Leveraging Opportunities in the Current Economic Climate
• Editorial: Writing a Business Plan to Attract Investors
• What’s Next LA: The Road to Economic Recovery
• Owner-Occupied Commercial Real Estate for the Entrepreneur
• Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in the Workplace
• The Winner’s Curse and Optimal Auction Bidding Strategies
• The Book Corner

2009 Volume 12 Issue 1

• Private vs. Public Real Estate Markets
• More Than Money
• The Successful Expatriate Leader in China
• Recognizing Organizational Culture in Managing Change
• Editorial: Taking Advantage of California’s Retirees to Help Close the Budget Gap
• Believe It: Complaints Are Gifts
• An Alternative Way to Manage Equity Portfolios
• Active Alpha Portfolio Management: Appendix A
• Active Alpha Portfolio Management: Appendix B
• The Book Corner

2008 Volume 11 Issue 4

• Best Practices for Headcount Reporting
• 2008 Graziadio School Student Paper Competition – How Intercultural Competence Drives Success in Global Virtual Teams
• Discovering Leadership Potential
• Discovering Leadership Potential – Survey
• Discovering Leadership Potential – Evaluation Guidelines
• Corporate Governance, SOX, and the Business Judgment Rule
• What Will The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Mean to Businesses and Investors?
• Who are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
• Editorial: Crisis in America: A Nation at Risk
• The End of the Beginning for the Global Credit Crisis
• The Book Corner
• All IFRS-Compliant Statements Are Not Equal

2008 Volume 11 Issue 3

• The Book Corner
• IT-Enabled Information Transparency: A Strategic Approach
• Editorial: The Top 10 Embracements for Difficult Economic Times
• Servicing the Software Industry (SaaS)
• Where Do Older Workers Go?
• Creating Wealth in Low Income Communities
• Supplier Diversity and Competitive Advantage: New Opportunities in Emerging Domestic Markets
• The Last 100 Feet of the Supply Chain
• America’s Financial Crisis

2008 Volume 11 Issue 2

• The Tie-In Decision
• The Trybaby Syndrome
• Editorial: California Greening: Boom or Bust?
• High CEO Pay Could Draw Renewed Attention in Election Year
• The Book Corner
• Empowering Employees to Success
• Commercial Banking and Treasury Management in Mexico

2008 Volume 11 Issue 1

• Venture Capital Audio Interview
• Learning to Love Financial Market Barbarians
• The Top 10 U.S. Economic Issues to Monitor
• Putting Performance and Happiness Together in the Workplace
• Harassment Prevention Training 2008
• Editorial: No Child Left Behind-A Blueprint for Success
• A Class with Drucker by William A. Cohen
• The Book Corner
• Is Managed Futures an Asset Class?

2007 Volume 10 Issue 4

• Organizational Design and Implementation
• Managing the Critical Role of the Warehouse Supervisor
• Editorial
• Creating a Community in Southern California that Values Sharing Knowledge
• The Book Corner
• Commercial Banking in the U.S. Versus Canada

2007 Volume 10 Issue 3

• Developing a Barometer for Workplace Attitude (WPA)
• The Employers’ Legal Obligations to Employees in the Military
• Employee Incentives
• Will the Sub-Prime Meltdown Burst the Housing Bubble?
• Strategic Leadership – Part Two
• Editor’s Note
• Assertive Performance Feedback
• To Tell or Not to Tell?
• The Book Corner

2007 Volume 10 Issue 2

• The Trader Joe’s Experience
• Strategic Leadership
• Managing Organizational Knowledge
• The Family-Owned Business
• Editor’s Note
• Emotional Dynamism: Playing the Music of Leadership
• Benefits of International Portfolio Diversification
• Aligning Business with a Value Statement
• The Book Corner

2007 Volume 10 Issue 1

• The Death of Time and Distance
• The Moral and Financial Conflict of Socially Responsible Investing
• What You Need to Know about Labor Shortages
• Women Entrepreneurship
• SEC Quest to Regulate Hedge Funds Hits Speed Bump
• The Book Corner

2006 Volume 9 Issue 4

• Seasonality and the Stock Market
• Airline Industry Key Success Factors
• Seven Neurotic Styles of Management
• IT in Healthcare
• Wings of the Great Northwest
• Gratitude at Work
• Editor’s Note
• The Book Corner
• Using ADR to Resolve Worker’s Compensation Claims

2006 Volume 9 Issue 3

• Making Marketing Accountable
• Conversations about Conscientious Capitalism
• Gen Y and Organizational Life
• The Business Impact of Change Management
• Class Action Shareholder Suits Face Legal Setbacks
• The Book Corner
• Achieving Corporate Success and Maximized Value

2006 Volume 9 Issue 2

• Business Survival Skills
• Six Components of a Model for Workplace Spirituality
• HR’s Strategic Partnership with Line Management
• The Book Corner
• Obesity, Social Responsibility, and Economic Value
• Graziadio Faculty Discuss Ethics

2006 Volume 9 Issue 1

• A Winning Tool to Manage Price: The Pricing Checklist
• Update: The Price of Oil
• Mapping IT Resources for Successful Implementations
• Is the Real Estate Market a House of Cards?
• Whither Now Dow?
• The Book Corner

2005 Volume 8 Issue 4

• Whistleblowers
• Editorial: Does a Non-Public Business Need SOX?
• Am I My Brother’s Keeper?
• 5-Forces Industry Analysis
• IT MATTERS: Measuring Success
• A New Imperative for Management: Sexual Harassment Training
• The Company Director’s Role In Company Growth
• Editor’s Note
• The Book Corner

2005 Volume 8 Issue 3

• IT MATTERS: The IT Governance Road Map
• Fair Trade or Strategic Concern: The Unocal War
• Avoiding Ethical Misconduct Disasters
• The Positive Psychology Approach to Goal Management
• Antitrust Law in the European Union
• Editor’s Note
• The Book Corner
• D & O Policies: Greater Risks Less Coverage
• A Blueprint for Change: Appreciative Inquiry

2005 Volume 8 Issue 2

• Connecting Enterprise Information and People in a Web World
• The Leader’s Role in Strategy
• IT MATTERS: Ethics, Information Systems, and a Steel Ax
• Conversation with author and leadership scholar James M. Kouzes
• Will China Float the Yuan?
• Editorial
• Corruption Across Borders
• Resolving Intra-Organization Conflicts
• An Uphill Battle
• Leading and Managing Change
• The Book Corner

2005 Volume 8 Issue 1

• Managing Resistance to Change
• The Link Between Price and Profit Margin in a Global Market
• IT MATTERS: Or more correctly, use of IT matters…
• The Impact of Empowered Employees on Corporate Value
• What You Need to Know about Attorneys’ Fees
• Editor’s Note: Phishing
• The Book Corner
• Strengthening Value-Centered Ethics (Part 3)
• Will Your Company’s Electronic Records Storage Withstand Legal Scrutiny?
• Conversation with Gemstar-TV Guide International’s Jeff Shell

2004 Volume 7 Issue 3

• Litigate or Arbitrate?
• Presidential Elections and Stock Market Cycles
• Businesspersons Beware: Lying is a Crime
• Strengthening Value-Centered Ethics (Part 2)
• Attempting to Control Health Care Costs – Again
• Editor’s Note
• The Crude Facts About the Price of Oil
• Conversation with Sempra Energy’s Stephen Baum
• The Book Corner

2004 Volume 7 Issue 2

• The Uncertain World of Trademark Dilution
• Does Corporate Social Responsibility Pay Off
• Strengthening Values Centered Leadership
• Editor’s Note: Deeper Questions
• The Twin Deficits
• Conversation with Rite Aid’s Robert Miller
• The Book Corner
• From Michelangelo to the Modern Boardroom
• Preparing for a Future Labor Shortage

2004 Volume 7 Issue 1

• Slowing Runaway Juries
• Merger and Acquisition Strategies
• Slips, Trips, and Falls
• Using Conflict to Your Advantage
• Wired!
• Editorial: Don’t Panic!
• IT MATTERS: Seek and You Might Find
• Conversation with American Honda’s Tom Ross
• The Dollar vs. the Euro
• The Book Corner

2003 Volume 6 Issue 4

• Negotiating Effectively
• Why Good Leaders Do Bad Things
• Editorial: Cybersatire
• Main Street and Hedging
• IT MATTERS: Digital Indemnity
• What Stays and Who Pays?
• Inflation to Deflation and Back?
• Conversation with AT&T’s Betsy Bernard
• The Car Deal
• The Book Corner
• Using Dashboard Based Business Intelligence Systems

2003 Volume 6 Issue 3

• The Cost of Lost Data
• Consolidate All IT?
• Blowing the Whistle
• Hedging Strategies for Uncertain Times
• Creating and Sustaining an Ethical Workplace Culture
• Editorial: Onward and Upward?
• IT MATTERS: Portal Combat
• Facing Up to the Possibility of Deflation
• Dialogue With Four Executives

2003 Volume 6 Issue 2

• Do Not Call!*
• Improving Research Performance
• Just-in-Time to Just-in-Case
• Increasing the Firm’s Strategic IQ
• Special Purpose Entities
• Editorial: Shock and Awe
• IT MATTERS: Webhosting
• Conversation with Galpin Ford’s Bert Boeckmann

2003 Volume 6 Issue 1

• Communicating Your Strategy
• Reforming Corporate America
• Recognize the True Cost of Compensation
• Learn from Experience
• Use Emotional Intelligence to Cope in Tough Times
• Conversation with Evoke Software’s Lacy Edwards
• Editorial
• Predicting Bankruptcy in the WorldCom Age

2002 Volume 5 Issue 4

• Build Value in a Small Business
• Protect Your Trade Secrets
• Managing in an Era of Multiple Cultures
• Consider the Pros and Cons of Expensing Stock Options
• IT MATTERS: Web Services May Bridge the Great Culture Gap
• Editor’s Note
• Conversation with Kinko’s Paul Orfalea
• Calculating the Strategic Value of Customer Satisfaction

2002 Volume 5 Issue 3

• Encourage Your Employees to Play
• Managerial Leadership at Twelve O’Clock
• Remembering George L. Graziadio
• Editor’s Note: Bad Boys in the Board Room
• Who’s Driving American Firms?
• Supreme Court Sides With Business
• Using Asset Allocation Strategies to Recover from a Bear Hug
• Mediate, Arbitrate or Litigate?
• IT MATTERS: The Wonderful World of the Wireless Web

2002 Volume 5 Issue 2

• Does Market Efficiency Trump Behavioral Bias in Finance Decisions?
• Making Mergers a Growth Strategy
• Sealing Cracks in the Capital Markets
• Artificial Intelligence Techniques Enhance Business Forecasts
• Editor’s Note: Weapons of Mass Disruption
• E-Commerce Reboots
• IT MATTERS: Web Services Prevail Despite Travail
• Go Directly to Jail?
• Conversation with Trader Joe’s John Shields

2002 Volume 5 Issue 1

• Build a Culture of Value Creation
• Choose Tomorrow’s Leaders Today
• Small Firms Keep R&D Vibrant
• Teams Use IT to Manage Client Impressions
• Putting Spirituality to Work
• IT MATTERS: Fifty Years and Counting
• Defining Disability Under the ADA
• Conversation with Reid Plastics’ Joe Rokus
• Editor’s Note: Decisions, Decisions, Decisions

2001 Volume 4 Issue 4

• Gender Impacts Virtual Work Teams
• Doing Business in a Volatile World
• The Strategic Downside of Downsizing
• Editor’s Note: Corporate Citizenship in the Wake of September 11!
• The Economic Downturn is No Surprise
• IT MATTERS: ROI for Tech Deployments in the Downturn
• Supreme Court Faces Key Business Cases
• Conversation with Joseph and Edna Josephson Institute of Ethics’ Michael Josephson
• Are Workplace Bullies Sabotaging Your Ability to Compete?

2001 Volume 4 Issue 3

• Suddenly Unemployed?
• Too Late for an IPO?
• Electricity Price Gouging in California?
• Editor’s Note: Surf’s Up!
• The Fine Art of Delegation
• Waiting Games People Play
• Business at the Bar
• Conversation with California’s Senator Sandra Bowen

2001 Volume 4 Issue 2

• Knowledge Management and Business Portals
• Trust as a Competitive Advantage
• Is Price Everything?
• Editor’s Note: A Quarter Without Quarter
• Has the Dow Really Escaped the Bear?
• Dot.Gone
• IT MATTERS: E-Business is Definitely an E-Ticket Ride!
• Downsizing with Dignity
• Conversation with Salomon Smith Barney’s Mitchell J. Held
• The California Electricity Crisis

2001 Volume 4 Issue 1

• Repetition Leads To Innovation
• What’s the Problem?
• Editor’s Note: Quakes, Flakes, and Double Takes
• IT MATTERS: CRM Solution Seekers Beware!!!!
• Language, Culture and Global Business
• Conversation with WATTSHealth Systems’ Dr. Clyde Oden, Jr.
• Personality Traits and Workplace Culture
• Who Wants to Lose a Million?
• The Power of Performance Profiling

2000 Volume 3 Issue 4

• Building Wealth
• How Small Firms Plan to Grow
• Using Internet Portals to Manage the Information Deluge
• Editor’s Note: Messy Brains and Global Opportunities
• SEC Requires Fair Disclosure
• IT MATTERS: MP3.com Completes Settlements
• Conversation with Boyd Clarke of tompeters!
• Planning in a Complex World
• Business Be Advised!

2000 Volume 3 Issue 3

• Do Japan’s High Tech Failures Open Doors for Western Firms?
• Managing Earnings … or Cooking the Books?
• The Battle Over Merger Accounting
• Conversation with Development Bank of Japan’s Dr. Kazuyuki Matsumoto
• Editor’s Note: Friends, Romans & Countrymen…
• What Directors Need to Know
• Still Thinking of Doing an IPO?

2000 Volume 3 Issue 2

• Managing Innovation through Corporate Venturing
• The Death of the Sales Force
• Thinking of Doing an IPO?
• Serving Each Other on the Inside
• Editor’s Note: Screaming Into the Future!
• Conversation with Power-One’s Stephen J. Goldman
• Will Marketers Survive the Information Age?

2000 Volume 3 Issue 1

• Re-Assessing the Health of the Asian Tigers
• Knowledge Management and the Internet
• The Learning Organization in Practice
• Economic Forecasting
• Editor’s Note: A Short Hello!
• Are You Ready for E-Commerce?
• E-Business: The New Management Challenge
• Conversation with Raytheon’s Daniel Burhnam
• The Bull Market’s Flawed Foundation

1999 Volume 2 Issue 4

• The Electric Day Trader and Ruin
• Teambuilding for Competitive Advantage
• Parable of the Commons
• Preserve and Strengthen a Business Partnership
• Editor’s Note: Here to Be Thrilled!
• Conversation with McDonald’s Mike Roberts
• Telecommuting… Out of Sight, Out of Mind?

1999 Volume 2 Issue 3

• How Gerber Used a Decision Tree in Strategic Decision-Making
• Customer Satisfaction Measurement
• Get Your Message Across!
• Balancing Act for Employers in Today’s Labor Market
• Editor’s Note: Too Much Fun!
• E-Commerce & Taxation
• Conversation with Harvard’s Dr. Gary Hamel
• To Join or Not To Join..?

1999 Volume 2 Issue 2

• Defamation Vs. Negligent Referral
• Maximize Business Achievement
• Preserving Family & Business Assets
• Knowledge is Power…
• Editor’s Note: Welcome to the Graziadio Business Review
• E-Commerce & Taxation
• Conversation with Franchise Mortgage Acceptance Company’s Wayne “Buz” Knyal
• Cultivating the Customer Asset

1999 Volume 2 Issue 1

• Business and Universities Moving to Collaborative Technologies
• Tips for Reducing Executive Stress
• Russia at the Crossroads
• Editor’s Note: Volume 2, Issue 1
• GBR Case Study
• Launching an Effective Citizen Advisory Panel

1998 Volume 1 Issue 3

• T.I.P.S.
• Retirement Call to Action
• The European Directive On Data Privacy
• Editor’s Note: Welcome to the GBR, Volume I, Issue 3
• Debt Tied to Lower Firm Performance
• Conversation with Countrywide Credit Industries’ Angelo Mozilo
• Boosting Country Club Memberships With Innovative Marketing and Pricing Concepts

1998 Volume 1 Issue 2

• Management Skills for the 21st Century
• Middlaning
• Decision-Making in a Global Environment
• Editor’s Note: Welcome to the GBR, Volume I, Issue 2
• Conversation with Global Pacific Information Services’ Jeffrey Rigsby
• Cultural Insights on Doing Business in China
• When Worlds Collide

1998 Volume 1 Issue 1

• Editor’s Note: Welcome to the GBR
• Guide to Personal Investment Software
• Southeast Asia: Crisis To Recovery
• Growth Strategies for High Tech Firms
• Conversation with Imperial Bank’s George L. Graziadio
• The Human Realities of Corporate Downsizing
• AB Corporation Case Study

Editorial Review Board

• Editorials
• Interviews
• Book Corner

• Topics

  • ARCHIVE – VIDEO LIBRARY
  • Business Law
  • CEO Performance
  • Diversity
  • Economics
  • Entrepreneurship / Innovation
  • Ethics / Corporate Social Responsibility
  • Finance / Investing / Accounting
  • Global Business
  • Information Management
  • Leadership
  • Management
  • Marketing
  • Operations Management
  • Organizational Behavior
  • Strategy
  • Work-Life Balance

• Top Five Posts

  • City National Bank’s Robert Iritani Discusses the Future of Financial Management
  • Creating and Sustaining an Ethical Workplace Culture
  • Strategies for Leading through Times of Change
  • 5-Forces Industry Analysis
  • Reforming Corporate America

• New in the GBR Blog

  • Our Degree Is What We Make of It
    As I outlined in my Three Part MBA Philanthropy Series, alumni are a critical financial component to business schools.  However, alumni can contribute in many other ways. In addition to providing financial support to their alma mater, alumni also play an equally important role in pre-student recruiting and job placement. Why is pre-student recruiting importa […]

Graziadio School of Business and Management | 6100 Center Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90045-1590

Copyright © 2013 Pepperdine University

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

The opinions expressed are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Graziadio School of Business and Management nor Pepperdine University.