Standard & Poor’s President has resigned and parent company McGraw Hill has announced a corporate restructuring. Standard & Poor’s had already been under pressure for presumed rating oversights of mortgage backed bonds and other complex debt associated with the 2008 financial crisis. However, the restructuring at least probably has more to do with what has been an unusual marriage with publishing parent McGraw Hill from perspective of financial analysts following the company and the parent’s many diverse businesses. When I began as S&P counsel (and soon became SVP in structured ratings), McGraw Hill's acquisition of S&P a few years earlier had brought together two very different cultures together, publishing and financial services. Publishing was low growth and steady revenues. S&P generally became the growth driver for the whole company. Presumably the pressure for ever more revenue growth (historically well in the double digits) is alleged to have encouraged S&P overlooking potential rating criteria problems leading up to the crisis. I’m of the view that an inordinate share of the blame has fallen on the rating agencies and particularly Standard & Poor’s for the 2008 crisis. Simply put, S&P was less nimble in deflecting responsibility than Wall Street firms more directly responsible for actually originating, packaging and then selling into the capital markets such structured debt instruments. S&P’s downgrade of the US Government debt brought about a second wave of critics - particularly some political critics now also charging lack of “patriotism. (Read – “S&P Downgrades US Debt” - diplomaticallyincorrect.org/films/blog_post/sp-downgrades-us-debt-by-ambassador-mo/33202 ). The downgrade though was more a product of the bickering, gridlock and ineptness of Washington and a reflection on the regression of politics rather than any alleged lack of patriotism or actual financial weakness of the US as debtor. S&P’s restructuring probably is more about the moment being right to present a new face to Wall Street analysts who prognose/forecast and value S&P’s business, (remember S&P also has extensive value in other areas, as equity analysis and branding opportunities such as the “S&P 500”). By being spun-off from McGraw Hill, S&P’s full value and potential is more likely to be realized as well as accommodating the very different corporate culture of financial services from publishing. Perhaps that could be of influence in future crisis, in a positive way. Although probably unconnected, it is ironic though that since downgrading the US it is S&P that has undergone the greater institutional and cultural transformation. It also speaks of why most Americans see change and progress as more likely through the private rather than public sector. By Ambassador Muhamed Sacirbey Facebook-Become a Fan at “Diplomatically Incorrect” Twitter-Follow us at DiplomaticallyX More at “America-AAA Country” Channel - diplomaticallyincorrect.org/c/america-aaa-country & “International Financial Crisis” Channel - diplomaticallyincorrect.org/c/international-financial-crisis