IACCM - International Association for Contract & Commercial Management

Contracting Excellence Magazine - Aug 2010

The Core of Contract & Commercial Management

During a series of recent update calls, IACCM CEO Tim Cummins reviewed the status of contract and commercial management. In this brief article, he sets out the progress that has been made and some of the next steps on the journey towards a more robust professional status.

Back in August 2009, I wrote about the future of contract management and discussed the importance of developing a common definition of the contract manager’s role (and for the sake of clarity, I include commercial managers in this definition). At that time, around 2,000 people had read my blog, The Role of a Contract Manager. Today, that number has increased to more than 10,000 (with many of these also having read the sequel ‘Role of a Contract Manager – Revisited’), indicating the growth of interest and – perhaps - continuing uncertainty over what exactly a Contract Manager does (interestingly, many readers are executive managers, perhaps considering organizational change).

Over the last year, IACCM has continued to capture and document ‘best practice’ To date, it has researched post-award contract management and negotiation; currently the focus has moved to pre-award / bid management activity. In recent months, more than 300 IACCM members have worked collaboratively in developing an Operational Guide to Contract Management (due for publication in November) and work is underway on a Strategic Guide (publication early 2011). IACCM’s topical research continues, looking at many aspects of the contract management role, contribution and changing business needs.

Last month, in response to a member question, IACCM set its members the challenge of coming up with a ’30 second elevator pitch’ for their role. The diversity of input makes fascinating reading; yet there was also a growing consistency in the themes. Frequently recurring words included:

contract
parties
relationship
managing
obligations
customer
supplier
risk
business
discipline
terms
appropriate
quality
process
performance
financial
legal

The results of the competition will be announced shortly. Interestingly, the winner is not from one of the countries that might be expected to have the most defined view of contract management. The diversity of input represents another step forward in creating a global community. In addition, real progress has been made with the international academic community and their recognition not only of the role, but also the development of specific programs that will enable the emergence of qualified practitioners.

Today, IACCM has more than 4,500 active participants in its Managed Learning and professional certification programs, with the numbers growing by the month. The Association’s membership continues to expand – currently by more than 600 a month – and it attracts newcomers from all around the world (over 120 nations now represented).

So when I look back at that post from exactly a year ago, I see significant progress in the development of Contract Management as a global profession. IACCM has been privileged in its opportunity to lead this movement and to coordinate the activities of so many dedicated and enthusiastic practitioners. Of course, there will never be one standardized job role that applies in every organization worldwide, any more than roles for sales, or marketing, or legal or finance professionals are standardized. Industry, culture, internal politics will all continue to play a part in determining the precise allocation of responsibilities. But we have achieved some important milestones on our journey and there is certainly no question about its continuation.

Contract management – and contract managers – are today an unstoppable force.

Ten Lessons to Improve Collaborative Outsourcing

IACCM recently partnered with a group of academics, led by Kate Vitasek at the University of Tennessee, to clarify the work of Nobel prize-winning economist Oliver Williamson and its relevance in the world of outsourcing contracts.

While most outsourcing agreements offer tangible benefits, a significant proportion of deals result in some level of disappointment. Calculations of this proportion vary, depending on criteria used, from a 'low' of around 30% to a 'high' of more than 80%.

It could be argued that just about every long-term relationship - business or personal - tends to generate some dissatisfaction. But whether or not this is inevitable, there are certainly grounds for believing that there is room for improvement. Part of the challenge is that requirements and goals are often inadequately defined. Another common problem is that requirements change over time, but the objectives and deliverables fail to keep pace. Many suppliers argue that the performance indicators are to blame - customers regularly measure the wrong things, then complain about the results.

There is plenty of evidence to show that the negotiation process - and the resulting contract - often fail to create the right framework for a healthy and open relationship. The governance principles are frequently compromised by aggressive battles over price and risk allocation. These are the types of weaknesses implicit in Williamson's analysis, given his recognition that organizations typically fail to distinguish the cost of transactional acquisition from the on-going cost of the required relationship. By failing to balance these factors, they prevent necessary investments in establishing relational capability - and that will surely undermine the results achieved.

In their paper, the combined forces of academia and IACCM seek to summarize a new and better way of developing outsourcing contracts. The paper can be accessed at www.vestedoutsourcing.com

Contract Management Defined; the Elevator Pitch

'Last month, IACCM members were challenged to provide a 30 second summary of the role and value of contract management. There were inputs from around the world, offering perspectives from both buy-side and sell-side. Here, we feature the winners.'

In June, we challenged members of the IACCM community to come up with an 'elevator pitch' of contract management. Imagine if, as you step into an elevator, someone says - "you're a contract manager - what exactly is contract management?” How would you sell the concept of contract management to them in no more than 3 or 4 sentences - you've only got about 30 seconds before they leave the lift!

We received many responses from around the world, which showed an interesting range of perspectives - and we are pleased to announce the three most popular submissions, as voted by a panel of judges made up of senior executives and academics in the field.

First place: Contact management manages both pre and post contractual matters which includes the review, drafting and negotiation of contracts, and the thorough monitoring of the performance of that particular signed contract until its close-out. Contract management is really about maximizing profits and minimizing risks in any contracts. In a nutshell, Contract Managers are people who possess the technical, operational and commercial skills and acumen in managing a contract so that it always remain healthy and brings in the optimal and desired results. (Rajini Saudranrajan)

The winner, Rajini Saudranrajan, is a Legal Manager at Iris Corporation Berhadand is based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. She has been working in contract management for 11 years and has been a member of IACCM since attending a training class that we ran in Kuala Lumpur in 2006. We caught up with Rajini earlier this week to find out a bit more about her.

Rajini, how do you feel about winning this challenge?

Winning this challenge has further inspired and strengthened the foundation of my faith in the practice of good contract management. This is indeed a special recognition.

What is your view on CM as a profession?

I have come to realize over the years that good contract management will bring about the desired results and will fulfil the intentions of both parties when performed committedly. Today, thanks to IACCM, more and more corporate companies and corporate individuals alike are placing high importance on the need for good contract management. Excellent contract management practice should begin from day one, the very minute parties get together to discuss a potential engagement of each other as opposed to starting to manage the contract after it’s signed and filed.

Contract Management practices is not about just processes, it’s beyond that. It’s about giving effect and respecting the intentions of parties in any contract. As contract professionals, we can bring about the desired positive changes in the ways parties deal with each other in businesses. The good management of any contract will result in better management of stress levels, unhappiness and dissatisfaction amongst parties. Well managed contractual relationships will ultimately yield more businesses and profits while risks and negative effects of a contract will be reduced significantly.

What are your views on IACCM, and how has it been helpful to you?

IACCM have certainly been successful in creating an awareness on the need to have good contract management practices worldwide. As a result of this, a worldwide recognition is being given in one form or another to contract professionals. Many individuals are keen to take up this role as it’s becoming increasingly recognized globally as a profession. I expect that in years to come, each and every player in the global market will have at least one or two contract professionals working for them.

Contract Management in a nutshell strives to achieve the goals and objectives that parties have set for themselves without having one party feel that they have been compromised or short changed when they entered into a contract.

We would also like to give special recognition to the two other top entries:

Second Place: Contract Management consists of all the various tasks and activities that enable an organization to maximize the value of its recorded relationships. And yes, the definition may seem too general at first but contracts inform and define business processes in every part of an organization so the definition must be inclusive too. It's not just buyers and sellers; everyone does contract management every day. (Mike Serulneck, Director, Open Text)

Third Place: Contract Management at its best is about managing risk, and managing relationships. At its simplest a contract is a document describing a relationship between two parties, what each of them agree to do, and who carries the risk if things don’t turn out as planned. Contract Management is about managing that relationship, and those risks, to ensure that both parties get the result they originally wanted. Everything such as cash flow, revenue, obligations management, and all other areas around this, flow from this simple premise.(mind the door) (Stephen Davis, Commercial Manager, Fujitsu Services)

'Contracting Competence Comes To Asia'

'IACCM's highly successful series of 2010 conferences moves to Asia in September, with a regional event in Singapore from September 20th - 22nd. The focus is on the growing importance of contracting as a 'corporate competence' and the session offers insights, guidance and education on the major themes for today's commercial professionals.'

Click on the banner above for more details and to register...

Software Liability Clauses

Many software providers should take note of a recent decision in the UK courts regarding liability for performance. The court did not uphold the supplier's attempted limitations of liability.

Many software providers - whether of stand-alone programs, or as part of an integrated solution - seek to restrict their obligations for performance. It is common to refer to specifications and operations manuals and to disclaim any other representations of suitability for the client's purpose.

This was the scenario when a UK hotel group licensed front-office software from a firm called Red Sky IT. The provider sought to move the risk of suitability onto the customer and established contract terms that are relatively common in the industry. However, the judge found 'that there was a clear disconnect in the way R sold the software to K and the basis on which R's standard terms were drafted'.

In an excellent summary, TRGLaw provides some suggested considerations for those who are drafting or negotiating software agreements. See http://www.trglaw.com/News67.html for details.

TRGlaw provides excellent analysis of commercial law cases in the UK courts. These are presented periodically to IACCM members via 'Ask The Expert' calls or through classroom updates and discussion forums. For information about future sessions, contact pmallory@iacc,.com

Next Generation Pricing

The outsourcing industry has travelled a bumpy road in terms of pricing models since its birth in the late 1980s / early 1990s. Initially pricing was input-based: prices were set in terms of the amount of resource used. The resistance to accepting a move from the ‘old’ regime was down to suppliers being concerned about the risk transfer inherent in a service output-based model. In time though, suppliers have warmed to the new regime: it gives them control over the service inputs and, therefore, whilst suppliers bear the resource volume risk, they equally enjoy the rewards of delivering the service outputs in a more efficient manner. So what next? IAN DEEKS, Ten Squared Limited

The outsourcing industry has travelled a bumpy road in terms of pricing models since its birth in the late 1980s / early 1990s. Initially pricing was input-based: prices were set in terms of the amount of resource used, for example, the number of days effort expended, the number of MIPS of processing power utilised, the MBs of storage used, etc. Despite resistance, this trend was followed by service output-based pricing, for example, a price per application supported, a price per desktop seat managed, etc. The resistance to accepting a move from the ‘old’ regime was down to suppliers being concerned about the risk transfer inherent in a service output-based model: they were being asked to take the risk on the amount of resource required to deliver the service output. From a client perspective, the move was driven by exactly the same reason: why should clients take the resource requirement risk when they were not in control of the resource utilisation? In time though, suppliers have warmed to the new regime: it gives them control over the service inputs and, therefore, whilst suppliers bear the resource volume risk, they equally enjoy the rewards of delivering the service outputs in a more efficient manner. So what next?

The future, which has already seen the light of day in some enlightened deals, is business outcome-based pricing, where what the supplier is paid is directly linked to the actual business benefits realised by the client. This concept begs the question about how benefit realisation is managed and measured, but this question has been answered many times in the past and there are tested methodologies for so doing. So, to avoid going off on a tangent, let’s accept that for present purposes benefit management and measurement is achievable.

As was the case with the move to service output-based pricing, there is supplier resistance to this further move, the reason being the same as previously, namely the risk transfer to the supplier inherent in such a move. On this occasion there is possibly more justification for the resistance: as opposed to case where the resource volume risk passed to the supplier where the supplier was in control of the resource volume, in this case the benefit realisation risk is not wholly in the control of the supplier – the client arguably has a hand in the amount of benefit realised. However, from the client’s perspective, it has been sold one too many stories of the amount of business benefit that the supplier will deliver, for the supplier then to hide behind a technical service specification when the business benefit failed to be realised.

So, is this all bad news for suppliers in the evermore competitive outsourcing battlefield? No is the answer for a variety of reasons, the main ones being those outlined below:

1. If business benefit is to be the yardstick by which supplier reward is determined, then that business benefit must be the language of the contract so that achievement can be measured. Writing specifications in these terms will avoid dispute in the future as to whether the supplier has delivered what it promised – a well worth investment from both the supplier and the client’s perspectives.

2. With the business outcome being the contractual deliverable, the supplier has greater carte blanche as to how that outcome is delivered and therefore greater reward for delivering it more efficiently.

3. With both the client and the supplier having a vested interest in the amount of benefit actually realised, there is compelling reason for them to work together in partnership to achieve the maximum amount of realised benefit. And it is widely acknowledged that partnership-type relationships deliver considerably more value to both parties than the traditional adversarial-type relationships.

In conclusion, suppliers should accept the inevitable and look to reap the rewards offered by outcome-based pricing. And both parties should realise that, by adopting a mature attitude to the way outsourcing deals are managed, it becomes less a case of sharing between themselves a finite amount of benefit and more a case of growing a potentially infinite amount of benefit for sharing between themselves.

Ian Deeks

Ten Squared Limited

Intellectual Property Management System

Controlling and managing IP to ensure commercial exploitation and curb IP pollution should be the strategy of any organization to survive and assure stability. Rajeev T, Manager, Risk Management, Infosys BPO Limited

Controlling and managing IP to ensure commercial exploitation and curb IP pollution should be the strategy of any organization to survive and assure stability.

Technology has transformed ideas to innovation, shrinking the world further and flatter. The free flow of information is leading to innovations every hour strengthening the value chain. With technology, comes the risk of unethical, unwarranted exploitation of IP and a high risk of IP pollution. Accessibility from any corner of the world is making every innovation vulnerable to violation of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR).Only the fittest management systems managing innovation can survive. Controlling and managing IP to ensure commercial exploitation and curb IP pollution should be the strategy of any organization to survive and assure stability. Organizations should adopt a management system to effectively face the perceived risks.

Organizations leveraging their Intellectual Property (IP) like Patents, Copyrights, Trademarks, Trade Secrets, Service Marks, Know-How, Designs, Geographical Indications, etc, face the challenge of effective planning, implementation and monitoring processes and procedures to ensure optimized exploitation of resources while at various focus areas like, IP identification, valuation, infringement analysis, change management, auditing, licensing, etc, in the IP management life-cycle . As the organization grows, challenges grow with it, hence, it has to adopt some mechanism to manage, sustain and improve these processes. IPMS enables an organization to identify, analyze, plan, project, audit, assess risk, commercialize, sustain practices and drive continuous improvement of the IPM life-cycle and framework.

Understanding Intellectual Property Management Life-Cycle and Framework

The IPMS implementation needs the understanding of the IP Management lifecycle and building a framework around it. Fig. 1. depicts a typical IPM lifecycle. Each phase of the cycle depends on certain activities which may be standard practices or may flow from the policies, which in turn require certain controls to be put in place and implemented to ensure effectiveness. Fig. 2. depicts an example of an IPM framework. The systematic execution of the life-cycle and the framework is a complex task. It requires a very good understanding of the internal processes, the cross-functional dependencies and the external factor dependencies. The process re-engineering should ensure that all the stakeholders’ interests are addressed.

Is there a need for IPMS?

There is a need, if the repository is continuously increasing and the organization is going to continue to create IPs. Unless managed well from the point on incubation of an idea to continuous maintenance and improvement, these cannot be effectively exploited commercially. IPs need to be continuously managed and exploited in the long run. Thus, the life-cycle and the framework need to be implemented, managed, monitored and improved continuously. IPMS can enable achieving this objective. It ensures that required controls are analyzed and implemented with appropriate governance to optimize the resources available. IPMS has become inevitable now as the focus of IP management goes beyond managing the Patent Life cycle. Many Standards have IP management requirements, like ISO 27001, BS 25999, eSCM, etc. IPMS can help an organisation exceed the expectations of these standards, and put them on the path of mature and innovative solutions.

What does IPMS manage?

Patents are the most well known form of IP in any industry. A patent symbolizes prestige & high status among employees & companies. After all free flowing revenue brings smiles, growth, stability & scalability. So, there is a natural business case for the IPMS to be strongly focused on patent management.

A major chunk of IPs that an IPMS in the BPO industry is expected to manage (Fig. 3.), falls under

Copyright
Patent
Trade-Secrets &
Trade-marks

The trade-secrets overlap with copyrights & patents.

On the sell side organizations will find that patents in their custody include the client’s as well as 3rd party patents. On the buy side organizations will find very few patents created for them by their vendors/contractors. On the contrary, organizations on both the buy & sell side will find that the number of copyrights is comparatively larger. Organizations from the music, media and publishing industry will see copyrights rule their IPMS.

IPMS can manage other IPs like design, know-how, residual knowledge, geographical indications, etc, too. However, these are set out of the scope of this article.

Is ensuring effective IPMS simple & cost effective?

Most activities to ensure effective IPMS are simple and may already be practiced in an organization. These activities may include:

Maintaining an inventory and continuously updating it
Establishing and strictly following the Information Security Policy, Information classification & labeling policy, etc.
Ensuring an effective configuration management and change management at IT/SDLC as well as at the process level
Maintaining a team with capabilities to evaluate different IP claims
License and Contract Management

IPMS follows the Deming’s PDCA (Plan, Do, Check and Act) Cycle (Fig.4.). Thus, the organization can leverage their Information Security Management System (ISMS) and Quality Management System (QMS), if ISO 27001 and ISO 9001 standards have been implemented. IPMS control complements the controls of these standards which also uses the PDCA cycle.

The Stakeholders Expectations & Assurance Level

The successful implementation of IPMS depends on how well it meets the expectations of the stakeholder and what degree of assurance it delivers to them. IPMS enables you to:

Effectively manage the patent grant process
Identify & manage other protections in the form of trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, etc.
Ensure that the benefits of infringement analysis is reaped
Maintain a single repository of all IPs (Organization, Client & 3rd Party)
Maintain the confidentiality, integrity and availability of IPs
Ensure effective process re-engineering
Ensure configuration management and change management
Identify IP pollution at the earliest stage
Ensure tracking of continuous improvements on IPs
Optimize and commercially exploit IPs
Ensure appropriate communication and information flow with the stakeholders
Ensure a governance mechanism is in place
Ensure continuous improvement in the management system
Ensures better preparation for IP litigations
Arrive at an IP policing strategy

IPMS Maturity grows with every PDCA cycle. The organization will notice more folds of improvement in the IPM Life-cycle and the IPM framework with completion of every cycle (Fig. 5.). With time the IPMS will become a system leading to continuous revenue generation with high ROI.

Summary

Intellectual Property Management System (IPMS) can give an organization absolute control over its IPs. The system is easy to manage and robust enough to scale up to the organization’s expectations and capabilities. The system demonstrates the assurance of IPs being managed, improved, protected and optimized in the interest of the organization, its clients and 3rd parties. It enables curbing the IP pollution and effectively mitigating the risk perceived. The IPMS projected above is workable, systematic and alignable to any corporate culture and the high ROI will attract decision makers to implement it.

Rajeev T, Manager, Risk Management, Infosys BPO Limited

IACCM employee takes part in the Institute of International Education Seminar in Budapest

In July, Sandra Lewy, Business Analyst at IACCM, was invited to take part in the IIE Seminar in Budapest, part of the GE Foundation Scholar-Leaders program in Central Europe. Sandra won the Scholarship and attended the seminar five years ago while at university, and this year returned as a counsellor to share her experiences working with IACCM.

Commenting on the program, IACCM CEO Tim Cummins said: "We were of course delighted that someone with Sandra's background and qualifications chose to join IACCM when she graduated. We are proud of the fact that GE then further selected her to be a counsellor on this prestigious program".

The seminar gives students the chance to meet CEO’s from GE, other highly successful entrepreneurs, and offers networking opportunities with some of the rising stars from leading European universities.

To learn more about Institute of International Education, GE Foundation and the seminar please see the article below.

Regional network of future leaders in CEE continues to grow

In the eight years since it was launched, GE Foundation Scholar-Leaders program has helped 360+ students from CEE to lay the basis of their future careers

Budapest, July 6, 2010 – 57 additional students joined this year the regional pool of scholarship holders in GE Foundation Scholar-Leaders program organized jointly by the GE Foundation and the Institute of International Education (IIE). Over the past eight years the program enabled 360+ university students from the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary and Romania to develop their leadership skills and form a regional network of future leaders in CEE. This year’s winners of the scholarships had the opportunity to build their expertise and a network of connections during a three-day regional summer seminar held as part of the GE Foundation Scholar-Leaders Program in Budapest. This was the first time when the best-performing students of GE Foundation’s Opening Doors Secondary School Talent Development program were also invited to attend the seminar.

The scholarship holders spent the first day of the regional summer seminar in GE Lighting’s regional headquarters in Budapest. During a series of interactive presentations students had an insight in the global and regional economic trends, GE's strategy and the career paths of GE leaders with the help of Leslaw Kuzaj, Regional Executive for GE in Central Europe, and Phil Marshall, President & CEO of GE Lighting Europe, Middle-East and Africa. In addition, students learned about the operations and the corporate citizenship of GE, and got an overall picture of the networking and career-building methods within the company. Adriany Kincso, managing director of the Hungarian Business Leaders Forum talked about the role of NGO organizations and also about her own career as a female manager. During a lunch that followed the conversation, scholarship holders met several local and global GE leaders.

The GE Foundation Scholar-Leaders scholarship program is designed to develop the leadership skills of participating students and to contribute to the training of an internationally competitive new generation of leaders. Addressing students, Adriany Kincso said: ” In addition to becoming leaders in their areas of expertise, students sponsored through the program will have the opportunity to be community leaders, thus helping the creation of a Central and Eastern European generation of young intellectuals and experts who can play key roles in the future economic and social development of the CEE region, a phenomenon vitally important for the continued growth and integration of the region.”

The winners of GE Foundation’s Scholar Leader program receive EUR 1,500 annual scholarships for two years. In addition, they will also have the opportunity to attend global summer leadership seminars in Budapest, and to spend a day with GE leaders at work in their respective countries to have an insight in their job responsibilities (shadow day).

“GE considers education as one of the most important areas of our interest, since its quality ushers in a lifetime of opportunity for the individual while in large scale it helps to build a strong and diverse workforce. Our innovative educational initiatives, like the GE Foundation Scholar leader program we have been running in four countries of Central and eastern Europe (CEE), represent an investment in future leaders of the region. Through this GE, a major investor of the region contribute to the competitiveness of these countries”, said Leslaw Kuzaj.

"We, in GE, are confident that by sharing some of the key elements of our culture, values and management methods during the summer seminars and other interactions with the students, will help to lay the basis of their future careers. The program’s aim is to build self-confidence and new competencies in order to enable these talents to make the most of the opportunities Hungary and Central and Eastern Europe can offer." - Phil Marshall added.

The GE Foundation Scholar Leaders program is the first university scholarship program in both Hungary and Central Europe that has been implemented through funding from GE Foundation, the philanthropic organization of General Electric Company (GE). Following the success of the program launched in Hungary in the fall of 2002, GE Foundation enabled the European Office of IIE in Budapest to extend the university scholarship program to Poland in 2003 and then to the Czech Republic in 2004 based on the Hungarian model. As the newest participant, Romania is providing the program with talented students for the fourth time in a row.

The GE Foundation scholarship program was created through a cooperation between the GE Foundation and the Institute of International Education (IIE). IIE, an independent non-profit organization, is a world leader in training and student exchange programs. The GE Foundation scholarship program was first announced in September 2002 at five Hungarian universities, including Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, University of Miskolc, University of Pécs and Pannon University (formerly University of Veszprém). Students in their second year of studies for their first diploma in the fields of economics, management, engineering and technology were eligible to apply. The program is also open to students from 5 universities in the Czech Republic and Poland respectively. From 2007 students from five universities in Romania are also eligible to apply.

Students from a total of 20 universities in four countries are eligible to apply based on their excellent school achievements, extra-curricular activities and other skills (e.g. active participation in student groups, volunteer activities, community involvement, leadership skills). From 2006 students are also expected to engage in community volunteerism as part of their award to contribute to the improvement and building of their local communities (schools and towns).

"The scholarship program opened new doors for me in my career as I had the opportunity to have an insight in the operations of a successful global company already while I was studying at the university. In addition to acquiring business and leadership skills during the global seminars, I also build up valuable relationships and found friends from the neighbouring countries" - said Anna Elek, graduate of the Budapest University of Technology and Economics.

For more information about the GE Foundation Hungary scholarship program and other European scholarship programs sponsored by GE Foundation visit www.iie.eu

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

GE Foundation (www.gefoundation.com)

The GE Foundation, the philanthropic organization of the General Electric Company, works to solve some of the world’s most difficult problems. In coordination with its partners, it supports U.S. and international education, developing health globally, the environment, public policy, human rights and disaster relief. In addition, the GE Foundation supports GE employee and retiree giving and involvement in GE communities around the world. In 2009, the entire GE family - including businesses, employees, retirees and GE Foundation - contributed more than an estimated $220 million to community and educational programs, including more than $100 million from GE Foundation. For more information, visit www.gefoundation.com.

GE in Hungary (www.ge.hu)

GE has been operating in Hungary since the end of 1989, when it made a strategic investment in Hungarian lamp manufacturer Tungsram, acquiring its 50% + 1 shares. The majority of the packet (49.65%) was bought from foreign banks that owned Tungsram at that time. Building on its positive experiences GE continued to invest in its operations in Hungary, and today all of its five core businesses are active in the country. Currently GE is the largest U.S. investor ($1.1+ billion) and employer (13,000+) and one of the biggest exporters of Hungary, while as a customer has a key supplier base of 2,000+. GE’s 21st century energy, transportation, healthcare, water and security solutions can help Hungary to increase its competitiveness through investments in infrastructure projects. The key to this success is GE's culture of partnership with our associates, with local communities, with the business & scientific community and with the government.

GE conducts its activities in two major legal entities in Hungary.

As part of GE Hungary Kft. and its affiliates employing 10,000 people, two of the five core GE businesses - Technology Infrastructure and Energy - operate four factories (Aviation, Energy, Healthcare and Water) in three cities, and also a regional headquarters and two technology centers in Hungary. In addition, in the framework of GE Hungary Kft., the EMEA headquarters and a global technology center for GE Lighting are located in Budapest. The regional headquarters also operate eight factories in six cities of Hungary.

GE Hungary Zrt. generated HUF 667 billion revenues in 2008, with 98% exports. In 2008, the company ranked first on the list of Hungary’s largest engineering companies, third based on export volumes, fifth based on the number of employees, and seventh based on its revenues (Figyelo TOP200). Budapest Bank Nyrt. is owned by GE Capital and employs over 3,000 people.

Institute of International Education (www.iie.org and www.iie.eu)

The Institute of International Education (IIE) is the most experienced global higher education and professional exchange agency. An independent, nonprofit organization, IIE is the world leader in the international exchange of people and ideas, operating globally since 1919. IIE designs and implements over 200 programs of study and training annually for students, educators, young professionals and trainees from all sectors around the world, with funding from government and private sources. IIE initiated its first educational programs in Europe in 1919, and has been serving Europe directly from its office in Budapest since its establishment in 1990, working in the fields of higher education, scholarship administration, and English language assessment.