Introduction
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is among the most complicated business establishments in the world from a perspective of generic strategy. The company’s revenues can increase and decrease and even possible for the revenues of the company to decrease to a point where it is no longer operable. Yet, FDIC can neither undertake marketing to expand its customer base nor diversify its operation. FDIC will either succeed or fail depending on whether its customers succeed or fail. This makes it an entrepreneur of entrepreneurs and a manager of managers in one of the most complex industries; the US banking system. FDIC was established under the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 (FDIC, 2017) . Its principal obligation was to restore the confidence and faith of US depositors after it had been eroded by the Great Depression. At the time, FDIC insured up to US$2,500 of all bank deposits from insured banks. The term ‘insured banks’ was to change into all US banks by virtue of FDIC Improvement Act of 1989 (Austin et al, 2017) . Indeed, the easiest way to check how many banks are active in America is to check how many banks are actively insured by FDIC. This is because a bank becomes the corporation’s customer upon registration and only ceases to be one when it goes into receivership. Finally, by virtue of Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2011, the scope of the bank’s insurance was increased to US$250,000 up from US$2,500 (FDIC, 2017) . The core business of FDIC is to ensure that banks stay afloat and consumers keep depositing monies in banks.
FDIC's Generic Strategies
Every depositor in certain classes of bank accounts in America that only excludes investment-based accounts is an indirect customer of FDIC. The biggest competitor to FDIC is fellow government agency; the National Credit Union Administration. Any depositor who elects to deposit monies credit unions and not banks have elected to be a customer of the latter and not FDIC. The services offered by FDIC are deposit insurance meaning that the corporation makes money as long as people make deposits and the banks the deposits are made into remain liquid (FDIC, 2017) . In the case a bank goes under liquidation, FDIC not only loses customers but also revenues as it has to make good on the lost deposit to the bank's customers up to US$250,000 and in some cases several multiples of that amount, depending on the nature of the account. FDIC must, therefore, ensure that the investor confidence of bank depositors remain up and banks remain afloat, yet without attracting too many costs for FDIC (Koch & Okamura, 2017) .
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The only generic strategies capable of achieving this are cost focus and cost leadership. FDIC cannot actively fight against any other competitor as its market niche is defined by law. Further, the company cannot change the product it offers since the same is defined specifically by law. This means that the differentiation perspective has already been taken care of. What FDIC does is to ensure that the banking industry in America remains healthy and expanding thus by extension the company remains afloat (FDIC, 2017) . Premiums payable by banks to FDIC against deposits made by their customers is one of the key areas of cost focus. These premiums are the only source of income for FDIC and if the company undercharges on them, it may no longer be able to operate. The moment FDIC is unable to operate, then its mandate may not be achieved and the banking industry will be in peril. Yet, if FDIC charges a very high premium on deposits, this will affect the efficiency of the banks which might tilt the scales causing the banks to fail and adversely affect the corporation.
The hardest part comes when some banks begin to struggle. This is the time that the banks need more support to avoid their eventual collapse which would be detrimental to FDIC. It is also at this time that FDIC needs to charge higher premiums because the risk on the deposited amounts has increased. The balancing act of cost focus becomes enhanced at this stage, FDIC has to carefully access the risk facing the bank and compare it with the bank’s situation so as to arrive at a premium that protects FDIC without inordinately creating risks that would cause the bank to eventually collapse (Koch & Okamura, 2017) . The general idea is to aim at the positive alternative of saving the bank without jeopardizing the ability to repay insured deposits in case the worst happens (FDIC, 2017) . All this is achieved using premium regulation.
A time will, however, come when FDIC is sure that the bank is now in the red and suffering a higher risk of collapse than chances of recovery. It is at this point that FDIC makes its most risky move of interfering with the operations of the bank (Barker & Dailey, 2017) . This calls for cost leadership as well as cost focus. The leadership of FDIC must consider that their interference with a bank will have an impact on the customer confidence and may even result in the bank run and eventual collapse. Yet, if the bank is left to its own devices, there is a fair chance that it will still collapse without there being a chance of mitigating loses of customers and also those of FDIC. Customer loses are not based on a possibility of FDIC failing to meet its obligation. In its entire history, no monies insured by FDIC have ever been lost (FDIC, 2017) . However, FDIC does not repay the entire amount deposited, just the insured amount. Thus, if a bank goes under receivership, larger investors will still incur huge losses on deposited amounts above the FDIC set limits. The corporation must decide whether to intervene directly and how to intervene all based on possible outcomes of the intervention (Barker & Dailey, 2017) . All the above takes a careful and circumspect combination of cost focus and cost leadership.
Diversification Strategies
It is not available for FDIC to become creative about the nature of operations that the organization can endeavor into. This is because the corporation’s task and mandates are specifically set by the law and thus remain unchanged making diversification difficult. However, this does not mean that FDIC is rigid to an extent that diversification is out of the question. A critical look at the activities of FDIC over its almost one century of existence will show that the organization does diversify as the interpretations of the laws that govern it continues to change. Further, amendments to the law have also resulted in diversification for the company (Austin et al, 2017) . Evidence to diversification relates to the fact that after every few years, the corporation issues a "Your Insured Deposits" brochure and recently introduced the "Electronic Deposit Insurance Estimator" (EDIE) (Middlebrook et al, 2016) . Both carefully outline how the corporation operates, what it insures and how it insures it. Subsequent "Your Insured Deposits" will always feature new concepts and areas of operation that were not included in the previous ones.
For example, online banking is a relatively new concept in the world of finance. Its appearance in the market and continued variation and expansion has resulted in the diversification of FDIC so as to cover customers that fall under it. Further, the concept of online banking has exponentially altered the general idea of foreign depositors who are covered by FDIC. Under the traditional so-called brick and mortar banks, domicile may have been crucial for FDIC to cover the deposits of a foreign depositor. Online banking now means that FDIC has to cover foreigners who may never even possess a US Visa in their lives but banks in the USA (Middlebrook et al, 2016) . The company does not initiate market diversification but it does have diversification strategies. This includes scanning the industry for products that may fall under its legal mandate then expanding its scope to cover them too.
International Operations of FDIC
The FDIC not only operates internationally, but also has an Office of International Affairs. This office is set specifically to assist the world in areas of investment based on the fact that when the global economy flourishes, the US economy also flourishes. Over and above being the largest economy in the world, the US economy is one of the most reliant on foreign organizations in the world (FDIC, 2016) . Among the tasks undertaken by FDIC’s Office of International Affairs include the hereunder.
Technical Assistance Program
This is basically a training program, ainly undertaken under the auspices of the Bretton Woods organizations and other international partners. FDIC shares its expertise with the international community in the economic development, investment and how to manage the banking industry under different situations (FDIC, 2016) .
Foreign Visitor and Secondment Program
This program is designed to assist investors, whether individual or corporate who wish to conduct some due diligence about local banks with an intent to invest. FDIC advises them on where their interests would be served best if they invest. This is part of the wider obligations of FDIC since when these foreigners invest in local banks they expand the scope of FDIC. Being helpful to them is, therefore, integral to achieving part of its duties. Secondment includes an advanced form of training where a foreigner is allowed to intern at the FDIC so as to learn from practice how the organization operates then apply it in their country of origin (FDIC, 2016) .
Foreign Examiner Training Program
FDIC has an examiner training school at its headquarters in Washington DC. As part of its international program, the organization allows foreigners to study in the institution to gain from its insightful programs (FDIC, 2016) .
International Leadership Development Program
As indicated above, it is in the interest of the US economy that partner foreign economies prosper. FDIC plays a role in this by training foreign leaders of related organizations, advising them, and in some cases seconding some of the FDIC experts to take leadership roles in these organizations (FDIC, 2016) .
Ethics Policies and Practices
FDIC understands that with great power, comes great trust and responsibility. It is towards this end that the company came up with strict and comprehensive corporate codes of conduct titled Guidance on Implementing an Effective Ethics Program. The ethics program specifically provides that strict ethics must be adhered to by all members of staff who works at FDIC in spite of their rank in the organization (FDIC, 2005) . The same also applies to all employees who work at affiliate organizations. Bribery forms among the areas of concern focused upon by the code of conduct with active or passive bribery being strictly prohibited. Any breach of privacy or sharing of information is also strictly prohibited by the code. Strict adherence to all laws, exhibiting candor and due diligence more so when dealing with auditors, examiners, and legal counsel, is also stressed upon by the code. Finally, the code of conducts also provides for continuous training in ethical issues so as to ensure that employees are not in breach of the same based on ignorance. To avoid the code being merely suggestive, it also provides for monitoring of all staff members to ensure that they adhere to its provisions with the disciplinary action being meted upon those found culpable of ethical breaches (FDIC, 2005) .
FDIC Practice Social Responsibility
FDIC may not per se have a corporate social responsibility (CSR) program but the entirety of the organization can be considered as being geared towards CSR. FDIC was not designed to make profits or to flourish in itself. Instead, it was started with the specific intent of ensuring that smaller depositors do not lose their monies in the case banks collapse. It would have been more feasible and profitable in FDIC was designed to protect larger deposits. Focusing on the smaller deposits assists the smaller depositors who may not understand the intricacies of finance. This can be considered as CSR. Further, although the organization is supposed to protect only part of the deposits made, when it saves a bank, its impact goes beyond its core responsibilities thus acting as a CSR contribution.
FDIC's Environmental Sustainability Practices
Part of the core business of FDIC’s customers is financing and land is critical collateral in financing. For this reason, FDIC has compressive Guidelines for an Environmental Risk Program. It can be said that the intent of the organization towards conservation of the environment is self-serving as it involves the use of land as collateral for financial instruments such as loans and mortgages (FDIC, 2015) . However, the environment has so many enemies that any friends who seek to conserve it even with a hidden motive need to be applauded. Toward this end, FDIC offers comprehensive training in the detection and extenuation of environmental hazards. It also offers training of valuation of land depending on the propensity and probability of environmental pollution. Any examiners with FDIC training will, therefore, have an advanced understanding of environmental issues, environmental laws, EPA guidelines, and environmental conservation (FDIC, 2015) .
References
Austin, M., Eckblad, M., Markovich, C., Murray, J., Perry, W., Strok, N., & Woodford, T. (2017). A new era of community banking. Chicago Fed Letter , (383), 1-7
Barker, R., & Dailey, P. (2017). The Growing Problem Of Board Overreach. Corporate Board , 38 (225), 6-11
FDIC. (2005). Federal deposit insurance corporation. Retrieved October 24, 2017, from https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2005/fil10505a.html
FDIC. (2015). Federal deposit insurance corporation . Retrieved October 24, 2017, from https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/5000-4900.html
FDIC. (2016). Federal deposit insurance corporation . Retrieved October 24, 2017, from https://www.fdic.gov/about/intlaffairs/
FDIC. (2017). Federal deposit insurance corporation. Retrieved October 24, 2017, from https://www.fdic.gov/about/learn/symbol/
Koch, C., & Okamura, K. (2017). Why does the FDIC sue? Journal of Corporate Finance, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2017.06.009
Middlebrook, S. T., Kierner, T., & Hughes, S. J. (2016). Developments in the law affecting electronic payments and financial services. Business Lawyer , 72 (1), 255-264
