Principles and Issues Flashcards
Which approaches see boards taking a longer-term view in decision-making?
Enhanced shareholder value, stakeholder, and inclusive stakeholder approaches tend to take a longer-term view than the shareholder value approach.
How does it differ from the ‘apply and explain’ rule in King IV?
The term ‘apply or explain’ was adopted in the South African King Code for two main reasons.
all companies - less harsh than “comply or explain”- to avoid mindless response
Firstly, the code, for the first time, applied to all types of entities egardless of their form of establishment or incorporation. These entities under a ‘comply or explain’ regime would only have had the option of complying or not. As many of the entities were not listed companies, which the corporate governance practices had originally been designed for, it was felt that that regime would put off many entities from adopting good corporate governance. Asking them how they were ‘applying’ the principles within the code was a less harsh way of reporting on what they were doing as they did not have to give a yes or no answer, they could tell a story of how corporate governance was being adopted in their organisations.
Secondly, to avoid a ‘mindless response’ to the corporate governance recommendations contained within the code. There was a feeling amongst many stakeholders that the ‘comply and explain’ regime was leading to companies adopting a tick-box approach to corporate governance, adopting the provisions without considering whether they were suitable for their companies or not.
What is the ‘comply or explain’ rule for listed companies?
‘Comply or explain’ refers to the system whereby a company is asked to comply with a voluntary principles-based code of best practice. Where the company believes that it is not in its best interests to ‘comply’ with a provision of the code it is required to ‘explain’ to shareholders why they have not complied.
The company’s shareholders and shareholder representative bodies are then expected to assess whether the explanation is acceptable or not. The UK corporate governance code works on the premise of a ‘comply or explain’ code.
Why is the company secretary often referred to as a bridge for information, communications advice and arbitration? (7)
The company secretary is often referred to as a ‘bridge’ for information, communications, advice and arbitration because they play an important role as the board’s communicator. This will differ from company to company.
However, best practice is that the company secretary should be the person responsible for:
- communicating all board decisions to the relevant members of the management team. Although CEOs often intend to do this, evidence shows that due to their other work commitments, CEOs are not very good at doing this in a timely manner;
- managing the disclosure of the board’s decision’s to regulators and other stakeholders. This is because they understand the requirements as far as content to be disclosed and the importance of timely and balanced disclosure;
- liaising between the board members and senior management on logistics for board and board committee meetings, training sessions, board retreats, board evaluation sessions and other board events; and
- facilitating good information flows, between the boa d, individual board members, the committees and senior
management that foster effective working relationships between them;
- being the primary point of contact between the non-executives and the company, as a source of information and advice. Without this, management could be distracted by requests from non-executive directors, some of which may be for the same information. Also, non-executive directors could receive conflicting information or advice depending on whom they speak to. The company secretary can collate the information and/or advice in a format which is more appropriate for the non-executive directors;
- ensuring that the board keeps in contact with shareholder opinion and that shareholders are briefed on the reasons behind the board’s adoption of certain governance practices and decision-making; and
- ensuring that relevant disclosures on corporate governance and directors’ remuneration are made in the companies annual report and accounts and that the annual report and accounts is made available electronically on the company’s website.
Which approaches see boards taking a longer-term view in decision-making?
Enhanced shareholder value, stakeholder, and inclusive stakeholder approaches tend to take a longer-term view than the shareholder value approach.
Which corporate governance code(s) applies to UK listed companies and UK unlisted companies
UK listed companies - the 2018 UK Corporate Governance Code applies to listed companies. Many AIM listed companies adopt as their corporate governance standards the Quoted Companies Alliance (QCA) Corporate Governance Guidelines 2018.
UK unlisted companies -
the Wates Corporate Governance Principles for Large Private Companies 2018 can be applied to any large private company.
Many private companies have selected to follow the Institute of Directors Corporate Governance Guidance and Principles for Unlisted Companies (2010) for their corporate governance arrangements. The guidance is voluntary and seeks to ensure the long-term survival and sustainability of the company as it develops and matures.
What is the difference between principles and provisions in the UK Corporate Governance Code?
The Principles state what a company should be aspiring to. The Provisions provide guidance on how the principles could be achieved.
Listed companies are required to make a statement in their annual report and accounts on how they have:
- applied the spirit of the Principles;
- complied with, or explain why they have not complied with, the provisions and supporting guidelines for the Code.
What is the difference between the enlightened shareholder value and inclusive stakeholder approaches to corporate governance?
The enlightened shareholder value approach proposes that boards, when considering actions to maximise shareholder value, should look to the long term as well as the short- term, and consider the views of and impact on other stakeholders in the company, not just shareholders. The views of other stakeholders are, however, only considered in so far as it would be in the interests of shareholders to do so.
This differs from the stakeholder and stakeholder inclusive approaches where boards balance the conflicting inte ests of stakeholders in the best interests of the company.
What relevance does knowing the historical development of corporate governance have for advising on today’s governance practices?
It is important to know the historical development of corporate governance as only by knowing why the practices have developed can a company decide whether to comply or explain with the practice, and also to know what structures, polices and processes to put in place to ensure the spirit of the practice is achieved.
For example, the practice of separating the roles of the chair and CEO is in response to individuals dominating decision- making and using the company’s resources in their interests, not in the best interests of the company. It is assumed that by having two individuals in senior positions and separating the responsibilities between them this domination can be avoided. If a company decides to combine the roles, other checks and balances need to be put in place to ensure that one individual does not dominate. A senior independent director could be appointed, for instance.
Why might a private company appoint a company secretary?
private company is not required
is absence - director, so
in order to reduce the administrative burden
The important tasks that would normally fall to a company secretary, including shareholder administration and communication, corporate governance and statutory compliance, must still be done. In the absence of a company secretary, s.270 of the CA2006 states that directors must take on this responsibility.
This is why many private companies continue to employ a company secretary: in order to reduce the administrative and corporate governance burdens which would otherwise be placed on their directors.
Which approaches put shareholders first?
The shareholder value and enhanced shareholder value approaches put shareholders first
Why is it important for a company secretary to have interpersonal skills and commercial and business acumen?
Many company secretaries face the following key challenges:
- being considered traitors by the executive team;
- supporting chairs exhibiting poor performance;
- acting as the third person in a CEO-chair relationship;
- becoming a pivotal contact for unsurmountable problems; and
- maintaining independence from other executives and board members.
To overcome these challenges company secretaries, in addition to their technical skills, needed commercial and business acumen and interpersonal skills, which many considered the most important.
In 2012, a study by the All Party Parliamentary Corporate Governance Group criticised many company secretaries for not being ‘commercially minded’ or aware. They saw this as being an important feature of the job, especially as they advise the board on governance issues. To be commercially aware, an individual must understand the business they are in, and make good practical decisions as a result. In the case of the company secretary, this means being able to advise the board on this basis so that they can make the decisions.
‘The Company Secretary: Building trust through governance’ highlighted the importance that the majority of company secretaries acknowledged that ‘commercial awareness and abilities are critical to ensuring their understanding of what is right for the organisation, what information means and to whom relevant questions need to be passed’.
Why does a company secretary’s position need to be one of seniority?
In order for the company secretary to carry out their duties and responsibilities effectively, they need to hold a position of seniority within the organisation. It is debated whether they should be a member of the executive team. Some think this compromises their independence. Whether or not they are a member of the executive team, they should attend meetings of the executive team.
This will enable them to advise the executives on governance issues arising out of any proposals as they are being formulated. They can also advise on how the board might react to a particular proposal and what questions the executive should be prepared to answer when the proposal is considered by the board. Attending executive meetings also helps the company secretary get an understanding of the executive’s positioning and reasonsfor suggesting the proposal which may help the company secretary if the proposal needs to be ‘sold’ to the chair.
Remember that the company secretary can often fill the ole of mediator or arbitrator between the CEO and the chair.
What are the pros and cons of a rules-based approach versus a principles-based approach to corporate governance?
Critics of the rules-based approach argue that it only works:
- where the challenges faced by companies under the purview of the regulation are substantially similar, justifying a common approach to common problems; and
- if the rules and their enforcement efficiently and e fectively direct, modify or preclude the behaviours they are aimed
at affecting.
The benefits of such a system is that it sends a message out to owners, potential investors and other stakeholders that the country takes seriously their protection from nefarious practices by those managing and overseeing the organisation’s they are investing in or dealing with. In reality, it is the enforcement of the rules that achieves this and in many countries, enforcement is weak.
Who enforces the requirements of the UK Corporate Governance Code?
The company’s shareholders enforce the requirements of the code through dialogue with the company and voting at general meetings.