Governance Failure at Satyam.

Governance Failure at Satyam.

I.    Case synopsis – case summary (This should be a synopsis of the main points so that the reader may fully understand the pertinent case facts = please include ALL of the major points, so this section may be longer than you might originally think)
II.    What were the circumstances under which SATYAM’S FRAUD WAS EXPOSED? What do you think were the reasons for the fraud? Could this fraud have been prevented? Evaluate the statements made by the chairman in his resignation.
III.    Critically evaluate the corporate governance mechanisms adopted by Satyam. Define and fully discuss the (4) corporate governance mechanisms (from our text) in relation to the Satyam case. Were the corporate governance mechanisms at Satyam ADEQUATE? Why or why not? Specifically discuss each governance mechanism in detail, addressing the Adequacy OF EACH RELATIVE TO Satyam.
IV.    Examine the role of internal controls in the prevention of fraud. What characteristics of the board of directors play a role in preventing financial statement fraud?
V.    Assess the responsibility of audit committees as well as internal auditors in relation to the Satyam scandal. Do you think making regulatory changes would help in preventing such fraud?
VI.    LEGAL and ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS – Develop two persuasive arguments regarding the legal and ethical implications for this case (at least one legal and at least one ethical, with support for each). Please use separate subheadings and clearly designate which are the legal vs. ethical issues, as well as your arguments and supporting evidence for each.
VII.    CRITICAL THINKING QUESTION – Craft a meaningful / critical thinking question for this case and provide what you consider to be an EXCELLENT answer.
VIII.    EPILOGUE : Update the case from the time that the case ended Please include:
Strategic milestones (separate heading / list several) and
Financial milestones – i.e. performance measures (separate heading / list several)
What are the lessons learned from this case?