EVERY corporate manager creates sustainable corporate strategies whose objective is to make the company grow, survive, prosper, and in so doing, avert corporate failure.
Medical and conventional wisdom holds that, just as the antidote for a snake bite can be found in its venom, the solution to a problem too, lies within and following on, the remedy for a disease lies within the disease itself.
We can therefore, learn from business research which reveals that the identified causes of corporate failure could be used to minimise its incidence.
We should note that the most effective measure of averting corporate failure is the institution of a very effective management.
Essentially, the responsibility of management would be to look at all areas of operations to see how efficiency could be fostered:
1) Ensure the company obtains and maintains key skills and competences  to manage its functions, products, processes and markets.
2) Enhancement of productivity and business process re-engineering.
3) Effective management of the product and product market.
4) Compliance with the Companies Act, other relevant legislation including tax laws, deed covenants etc.
The product market is where the firm generates its income, attains its strategic objectives and goals as well as achieves long-term success.
External auditors too, are well placed in a position to forewarn management on financial, accounting and management problems inherent in a firm.
Recent case studies from Enron and Tesco reveal that auditors in some cases have abrogated this responsibility entrusted in them.
No matter the type of window-dressing that is done to the accounts of the company, outright failure that will be known to everybody is imminent.
Another important way of averting corporate failure is through the strategic performance measurement.
This is an accounting system used by top management to evaluate well-known strategic business units (SBUs).
These remedial measures cannot be effectively carried out if a corporate body does not institute an effective and functioning research and development department (R & D).
The absence of the R&D department would in addition, give rise to poor product conceptualisation which would be at variance with what the consumers demand.
On the other hand, many companies are family owned businesses which suffer a significant setback after the demise of the founder.
Strategic knowledge is usually not transferred from the founder to the successor of the business.
Consequently, research indicates that family owned and controlled companies face a considerable challenge of continuity in the face of such crisis.
Additionally, many family owned companies face significant difficulties when raising additional finances to grow the business for further expansion.
Expanding the business to manufacturing or factory capability requires enormous sums of capital which usually goes beyond the ability of family members.
A number of Zambian companies have approached the Lusaka Stock exchange (LuSE) but at this point two issues arise:
(1)    Many family owned companies are not ready to admit additional capital by relinquishing some considerable amount of ownership and control in the company
(2)    A number of family owned companies are not ready to “strip naked” before the stock exchange.
Strip naked? Yes! We are figuratively referring to the onerous requirement for companies to comply with inn terms of transparency and accountability in stock exchange listing.
The Lusaka Stock Exchange (LuSE) stock exchange listing regulations, for instance, require prospective clients for stock listing to demonstrate commitment to embrace corporate governance codes through admission of at least two-thirds of non-family members as directors of the company.
The prospective clients must also demonstrate commitment to the principles of transparency and accountability to a wider group of stakeholders.
Experience shows that at such a point when companies learn that they are required to adhere to stock exchange listing requirements, they become reluctant, while their pressing need for recapitalisation persists, and consequently they cease operating.
It is imperative for corporate managers and other stakeholders to embrace the stock exchange as a viable alternative for raising enormous sums of capital for expansionary business growth.
At the same time, they must embrace the reality that stock exchange governance codes require them to embrace principles of transparency and accountability to a wider group of stake holders rather than just themselves.
Competitive pressures and need to pursue expansionary growth strategies has forced some Zambian companies to expand their scale of operations beyond their capital and managerial ability.
Again, it is critical for corporate managers to craft credible strategies that are appropriate for the company’s capital and managerial capabilities.
A lot of factors, internal and external, to the firm could be responsible for corporate failure.
Corporate failure exerts negative impact on both local and international economic environments.
As we noted earlier, many corporate failures occur silently without any publicity and efforts to seek collaboration to research, have usually been met with resistance.
However, the country has experienced a high incidence of micro, small and medium business failure which has exerted disastrous negative impact on the business environment, economy and social setting.
It is imperative on corporate managers to increasingly awaken to the reality that even the most admirable of corporate organisations face such failures.
For comments email: ntumbograndy@yahoo.com. Mobile +260977403113 or +260955403113
The author is the Managing consultant at GN Grant Business Consultant, a fellow of the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), a Master of Business Administration (MBA) holder and a candidate for the Herriot Watt University (Scotland) Doctor of Business Administration (DBA)