For Professor KimWood

SECURITY A.ND EXCHANGE COMMISSION EDGAR - ANALYSIS

KhoaHong Luong

Assignment 5: Security and Exchange Commission EDGAR- Analysis

BUS 499

Professor Paul J. Hutter

06/0712016

SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION EDGAR - ANALYSIS2

The Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system, commonly referred to as

EDGAR, performs a wide variety of automated collection, validation, indexing, and acceptance,

as well as forwarding of submissions different companies and others that are required to file

fggns witf US Securities and Exchange (SEC) (United States, 2004).The company is primarily Grr,r'4aL c^<-\ et++g€dfi-increasing the efficiency, as well as the fairness of the securities market to benefit

investors, corporations, and economy through acceleration of receipt, acceptance, dissemination,

and analysis of the time sensitive information about corporates that is filed with the EDGAR

agency. It is essential to acknowledge that not all

arwPuUrrvwwLLlPa'LllgYD4v4ll.1UlEUlIDl-,\JAIltUIItcuDtit[gS'zvU+).l\SareSusKUffi'e5u'n

has put in place various mechanisms that are aimed at ensuring it is the most prefemed{n filing\

forms. It is essential to note that all companies, either foreign or domestic, are required to file

their registration statements, periodic reports, as well as other forms through EDGAR (Scherer & s-upV

PaIazzo,2008).@EDGA\teenhanceitsservicestomaintainagood ,/ r^ri\.rtr.

/reputation f tt eUS Securities and Exchange Commission.

Impact of the company's mission, vision, and primary stakeholders on its overall success

"/UdEOCan's mission, vision, and its primary stakeholders are crucial factors that ./

determine its success in the market. Both the mission and vision of t*dpOCan emphasizes the

importance of increasing the accessibility and efficiency of corporate fillings in the United

States. The effect ofbot core values ofthe agency CbY.^Y-Y\-4t\4.

as a crucial partner in the US Securities and Exchanggq It is the mission and vision of the

orgarization that declares the commitment of EDGAR in its works of filling forms for different

;rX{fforeign and domestic companies. Its major stakeholder is the US govemment through the US,e3: ,F;;ty

and Exchange Commission (SEC). It is thus dictated by the US government that both

SECURITY AND EXCIIANGE COMMISSION EDGAR - ANALYSIS3

domestic and foreign companies are required to file their documents through EDGAR(Scherer &

Palazzo,2008).

Analysis of five forces of competition and their impact

There are five significant forces that are the main determiners of competitive power and can be

used in EDGAR's business situation. These fives forces can be analyzed as follows:

(a) Supplier power - in this force the company evaluates how simple it is for distributers to

drive up prices. The number of distributers of every key input drives this, the uniqueness of their ././J sewiceland producf their abilities and control over the company, the expense of shifting from

;",":*,-"-,- ::;;" ; :"x**;;ffi:_",#,il .(b)Buyer power - In this forpthe EDGAR Company questions how simple it is for buyers to (

.r ' er- bH6 their prices. Also, the number of buyers drive this, the signific^4;f every buyer to

€Sg$?ts- .q/s the company, the cost of shifting from#products and services to those of other comparyf .If a

company deals with less, powerful buyerp, then they have the capability to dictat-e the terms tq

-.* \D'.^) d[N]D -\A^.* L-.-..^.-.--oF6\q+E] bo"ot"

thecomPanY '\F.-." ?3R*%"; (c) Competitive rivalry - The most important thing here is the EDGAR Company's n@._gl

"g-p"ttt"Is and their-gapab:!1itles. If a company has many competitors, and they provide equally

good products and services, then most likely the company will have liule power in the situation,

simply because suppliers and buyers will shift elsewhere if they do not get a nice deal from the

company. On the other hand, if no other company can do what EDGAR'S company does then it

can often have tremendous strength.-- i*. C;;""":-X*,- {.* -\.1^,*- Ldr-*\\ \-+'&^^\\>16 'l"tt -L"^c=;\^

G.*ro'\'-lg o\ \{,r-- o r:^ . .=uS:,:<-;a ;-\ effiL l\Ah$eJ\"E"$gF\S:F:^krw "Yffi>\

SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION EDGAR - ANALYSIS4

(d) Threat of substitution - This is affected by the capability of the company's clients finding a

different way of doing what the company does. For instance, if the company distributes a unique

software product that automates an important process, individuals may substitute by outsourcing

the process or may be doing it manually. If the substitution is simple and viable, then this

weakensthecompanyrn"*;. ff^*t;'-'? t *-"fp'*''\s*-^o es'--*-L

(e) The threat of new entry @,r,Xf"ah"fficompany,s market arso affects po:..:Jlf it takes little time and money to get into company's market and compete

effectively ,/f A" economies of scale in place are few, or if the company has little protection for

its key technologies, then this means that new competitors can swiftly get into company's market

and weaken its position. If the company has strong and durable protection to entry, then the

company can preserve a favorable position and take fair advantage of it.

SWOT analysis of the company

As part of the accomplishments to be observed, the objectives of the organization will

ensure that the analysis conducted can certainly be achieved. One of the objectives is to ensure

that protocols regarding US Securities and in the EDGAR agency are thoroughly

observed. This is a concern that is most as more companies desire to process their

frlling forms through the EDGAR agency. Additionally, problems of employee morale in the

company are also another objective to be achieved. This is to ensure that the employees are

trained properly on how to use techniques that enhance increasing performance and production

of the agency in the uS Securities and Exchange market (Jnited States, 2004).

4-A- k * J-a\a 6T^-trf €Strq*{}s'^

*-'"t=g$--.-$-^'

A). Strengths

SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION EDGAR - ANALYSISs

According to Maslow's hierarchy, the EDGAR's managers have various needs within

which would be needed to meet for the company stay relevant in the competitive in the US ;--'

Securities and Exchange market share. First$ the manager usually considers the specific

preferences of customers regarding the products the company offers to the market. It is essential

'p"'' v ^--// v'

to acknowledge that *,ffi meeting needs of quality would ;;L -.-* .

I '{- \:*l\1i'r\ " + 'Yl\,L}{. t-X(h& ! w '"-Je=: ""-.

incorporating elements that would makdth-ejr/products more attractivb woild boost its sales in vS-

competitive market share. In addition, irgr"S91ryJbS:tyrnqllql=-ofits employees would also

increase the performance of the company's workforce. Notably, the EDGAR agency has a very

ht€! grybyggluryQ$ which could be one of the reasons for its high motivated workforce. ' arr'Ai'\ '

.\L\ Hen&, its performance is adequately exploited to the maximum (United States, 2004).

i (-' -',r--=\Y+\

\\ lr' \

r."

- ;F_

: -^ci*iGs*\*.-tsor. , *_^.}- * *G*-<*K*

n , rnQ s.r"-r-{offi

EsEentially,

concern :{c4\

would be less pry€b€*=

to participate in their duties in the organization. This is based on how employees are likely to

increase their performance upon being given good retums for the work done within an

otganization. Most employees are cofirmonly motivated to work hard by the amount of financial

remuneration they get from the company as a way of appreciating their good work. In order to

curb this problem, the managers at EDGAR should provide solutions that address the issqe of

employee performance in respect to their turnover values (United States, 1996).In this case, the

deep ,.4J-A

a

}-*

"-b-rL

vation levels of some employees in the EDGAR. v.. .r^'-', _ ."**.*; \\-*i. \^.\ v*-o\n t{-.^$, ,--:Fe-- -=4\

-. it ^O *i* SECURITYANDEXCHANGECOMMISSIONEDGAR-ANALYSIS6 *}*W:.:$QJ

-.--qs mangers should be able to create u:lgfggg:giving ince ntiveytud'employees who

,s ".aa"'/

"/demonstrate good skills and hard worldwithin their areas of duty within the company.

C). Opportunities

The biggest challenge in the competitive US Securities and Exchange is keeping Vt*=.

customet, as well as attracting more companies to fill their forms through the EDGAR. To

*z/"n ur"that the company maintains good performa DGAR focuses on motivating employees

within the company such they ise the turn-over of its entire workforce. This is maiply.\F:7:]- k\.** &e-i"'\r-.a **3*&.. ..- # \+FFd c.&r.i} €\--* l**s+{)\ \ } )that need

"q,iuiiy some good amount, as it +)119{l

involves one percent of the company's profits. ially, employees are commonly motivated

assigned to a team of employees in the EDGAR agency might find it

" difficult to push the entire workforce to make *:{*1d

extra sales. snce ffi are not rewarded" {. ''/^* tor extra dutres, icd. To keep the team motivated,

.t ,[i K-. oC;'*A "e"' most sal$ as a way of increasing the morale and motivation of the entire team. :{(5

Levels and types of strategies to maximize competitiveness and profitabilitv . \^r**rs i-- I'fA^-*\->

These strategies are similar to9ye{forate strategies because their focus is based on overall

performance and can be app)1ad'in the case of EDGAR Company. Contrary to corporate-level

/"'-.:'"1 \na: strategy, tnoroover,ltheir focus is based on only one rather than a portfolio of businesses. TFffi b \*'r /usiness-level strategy common focus is at times on a specific product or selice line and it

€

v- ./., / *1 Vv ,4 The EDGAR organizatio n "unfutQ$recific communication plarrrto "ngug" lk3

SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION EDGAR _ ANALYSIST

commonly involves decisions based on one's products within this product or service line(Jnited

States, 1996). Functional-level strategies are majorly concerned with coordinating

organizational, functional areas, which include marketing, human resources, research and

development, finance, production, and so on, so that every functional area contributes to one's

iness-level strategies and the overall corporate-level strategy. The primary concern of

functional strategies includes; (A) Utilizing specialists efficiently within the functional area.

(B)Integration of activities within the functional area, for example, promotion, coordinating {.7{*z 6t \d; advertisement, purchasing, inventory control and shipping operations. (C)Ensurinalmesh

JY"^--$aween functional strategies and business-level strategies and the overall corporate-level-! lvJll-Ct vqo'rvro-rwYwr Jlr*rwSrer oru

Y-*# {&4tegy.Mostly functional strategies are concerned with appropriate timing. L

stakeholders. The bsgalmepbe{e representatives of both EDGAR and its stakeholders

should represent gger equat.fuy This is commonly referred to as board diversity. Board

diversity is a mainstream corporate governance issue that has been in existence for a very long

time. This is an issue entails performance of firms as an aspect that directly affected by board

diversity. Essentially, it is a natural consequence of various questions being asked about the

new communication platform that will respond to a new fact or reality by recognizing how board

diversity can easily contribute to corporate govemance and frm performance. { {:*-

-P"u\o"'6 Corporate governance mechanisms e"br{X

\Ar'r-

*:.=-.*-> }{Yrr*&G#fis*_!s

SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION EDGAR - ANALYSIS8

Corporate governance mechanisms in performance of EDGAR can be discussed with a I

consideration of the board diversity/ Based on a corporate governance perspective, the various \/'

ways in which board diversity contributes to an excellent corporate gove$ance, as well as */

increased firm value, finds that consequently emerge are not altogether clear{ From the evidence

-\ that is drawn from empirical research, the results that emerge are usually mixed and

inconclusive. Although academics it may be presumed to be the cause for the disconnection from

the practical elements of everyday life in most corporations, the business practitioners seem not

to be wiser. Recent studies show that despite showing universal assent to the diversity value

abstract, corporate directors, as well as officers have commonly experienced difficulties in

providing specific examples of instances in which diversity adds value to their respective bgards rou6

(Shim & Siesel- 2001). .,\ .e-, \,q, V-J)-i- -y-+ \ t'. *t'V :^ *3Y-- J I

(Shim & Sieger. 2oot). D,:X< H+* ffi

L \"=-J<" .^ \&+:;. p${"t='. -\1<\}-:-

ov r,r,''\( ytt z*-e*51*,S-*\ vlp.,' ';* ''.-*.-- ^ \ eg-,1*"*==*.-:

-:)+ _' \_- :-

{,

\

Ir\ /j

/ (

Studies that seek the relation between board diversity and corporate perfo

severally identified various major benefits, as well as costs of diversity. Such board diversity canla*A

also be beneficial in the case of EDGAR agency. In relation to the benefits expected, the positive

business of the element of diversity of boards includes numerous aspects. Firstly, board diversity

is projected to i , yield more e-f&c1_ilg p{oblglqgkbg and rryse

creativity. Secondly, it can * rs, marketplace, and

r"ppli1 . Also, board diversity can also Vi es in a

corporation by signaling that the given organization or company values diversity and equally

offers mentoring, as well as advancement of opportunities for all employee groups (Shim &

Siegel, 2001). Lastly, board diversity also ensures improv"d publtgj*gggjpg.ifically by

conformity of the societal expectations. --)

\ i(' * -$-= = i'"J-:e$-{.-- providing

\(1'-' _ \

: ,l*_'f,\

--,\.a*-* n F-' '#;\ .?>-,-"s -:.,L-^--1 -'r # -'<et \

SECURITY AND EXCI{ANGE COMMISSION EDGAR - ANALYSIS9

The EDGAR may consider the cost perspective of board diversity, where the potential

downsides are as follows. Firstly, it is projected yield a decre_as1l col_resion in organizations

boards, subsequently resulting in distrust among individuals in the company, lack of cooperation,

as well as a breakdown in communication. Secondly, the implementation of board diversity in

corporatesiuulA1so,qualityofdecisionmakingcan

also decrease due to insufficient business of directors that are chosen on the suggested diversity

From a perspective of corporate governance, some of the major promising arguments that

support diversity are commonly those that link diversity with the improved ability by directors to

discharge their main duties. In this case, the first duty that comes into the argument is the duty of

skill, care, and diligence. Moreover, the improved access to information, viewpoints of diversity

and the greater scope for debates could easily increase the quality of the judgment of business, as

well as the outcomes of board deliberations. For instance, a good example is the duty of directors

to take into account specific interest of stakeholders, while at the same time promoting the

success of the organization as a whole. In such a scenario, board diversity may be helpful to

directors in weighing more accurately any relevant considerations by aiding in correction of

some of their biases and prejudices (Shim & Siegel, 2001). Moreover, the diverse traits

associated a certain gender or ethnicity create behavioral and cognitive diversity in the

boardroom, which in turn could lead to more balanced assessment of relevant considerations for

each decision.

Efforts to being responsible corporate citizen

SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION EDGAR - ANALYSIS1O

Lastly, there are three characters that can be used to define responsible corporate citizens.

These characters can be applicable in the case of EDGAR Company and include: truth, shared ;6*

value, and impact. Corporales--such as EDGAR should always strive to observing and

demonstrating the three characters to enhance their performance, reputation, and productivity.

SECURITY AND EXCI{ANGE COMMISSION EDGAR - ANALYSIS1 l

References

Leary, M. (2003, June 1). Free Sites for EDGAR Data. (Database Review).Information Today

Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Handbook of research on global corporate citizenship.

Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Shim, J. K., & Siegel, J. G. (2001). Handbook of financial analysis, forecasting, and modeling.

Paramus, NJ: Prentice Hall Press.

United States. (2004)- Securities and Exchange Commission: Review of fiscal year 2003 and

2004 budget allocations: report to congressional requesfers. Washington, D.C: GAO.

United States. (1996). Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (EDGAR): EDGAR

filer manual: guide for electronic filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Washington, D.C: The Commission.

6t5t2016 https://www.usaa.com/ineVent-multipay/SingleBillPayConf rm?action=SingleBillPayPrintTask

Paid Bill: USAA Signature Visa 42** **** **** 2123 You successfully scheduled the following payment on Jun. 5. 2016 at 10:06 p.m. CT

Summary Today's Date 06105/2016 Bill USAA Signature Visa 42*x x*xx x*xx 2123 Pay From USAA SECURE CHECKING x4829 Payment Amount 9280.50 Payment Arrival Date 06/06/20L6 Confirmation Number 1085202361

What Happens Next . Payments made to your USAA Credit Card before 5pm CST will be effective today. The payment may take up to two

business days to reflect in your account.

CopyrightO20l6 USAA.