Chapter 23 : Read : Control Complacency .Rogue Trading at Societe Generale by Steve Lindo Pages 461-488
Then complete the following
Page 475 : Exercise
Page 487 : Answer the following questions in 200 words each
Questions :# 3 -200 words
Question #7-200 words
Question # 9-200 words
Question#12-200 words
Question #14-200 words
Required Resources
| Question | Answer Implying Guilty | Answer Implying Not Guilty |
| Did other traders manipulate the trading system? | ||
| Did Kerviel show an attitude of manipulating the transaction systems? | ||
| Did DLP have rules against unauthorized trading? | ||
| Why did Kerviel make huge bets if he was not benefitting from them? | ||
| Was there any inconsistencies reported for DLP transaction systems? | ||
| Did the company have an effective ERM in place? | ||
| Why did the operations employees not escalate the reports of Kerviel’s unauthorized trading activities? | ||
| Why did the risk management not discover the fraud but instead the finance department? | ||
| Were there middle level employees who got promoted to the front desk? | ||
| Did the company make effective use of market risk management? | ||
| Did Societe Generale hide some information from presecutors? | ||
| Did Societe Generale neglect internal controls? | ||
| Was Societe Generale only focused on growth at all cost? | ||
| Did Societe Generale admit its wrongdoings for the losses? | ||
| Was there enough evidence for the prosecutor to sentence Kerviel? |
Question #3: When Kerviel worked in the middle office, did he show any unusual aptitude for manipulating the transaction systems?
Question #7: Was Societe Generale prudent in assigning sole responsibility for market risk oversight to trading management?
Question #9: Why did financial reporting catch the fraud, not trading management, operations, or risk management?
Question #12: Did Societe Generale omit any information at the trial that might have exonerated Kerviel?
Question #14: Did Societe Generale sufficiently admit its responsibility for the losses?