Monthly Archives: March 2016
Cyber risk is at the top of the list of what keeps company directors up at night, according to the Association of Corporate Counsel’s recent survey of chief legal officers worldwide. The trend for holding companies liable for cybersecurity incidents confirms and helps explain this concern. Unfortunately, how to address it is often misunderstood and focusses far too much on the technical issues related to cybersecurity rather than on the legal aspects.
How many times have you been sure someone was ‘pulling the wool over your eyes’? Perhaps hiding information and trying to deceive or mislead you? For some of you, this could be true at this very moment. You know they are not telling you the truth yet they are clearly convinced their efforts to distract you or cover up the truth are actually working, writes Sarah Hopwood, UK International Speaker & Business Consultant
In Canada, the topic of gender diversity at both the executive officer level and director level is one that is now discussed in boardrooms. This wasn’t the case even five years ago when Lord Davies was preparing a report to launch his independent review into women on the UK’s FTSE 100 boards.
In an era of shareholder activism and increasing investor engagement, it is more important than ever for boards to have effective strategies for identifying their shareholders, understanding how they think and behave and designing thoughtful campaigns to effectively communicate with them.
Boards of directors are living in a time when expectations from all quarters are escalating. Gone are the days when directors literally ‘sit’ on the board. In the new era of corporate governance, the demand for disclosure and transparency has reached an unprecedented peak and created a most heavy burden for boards. This demand normally takes the form of stringent reporting requirements.
By Chris Douglas, Owner of Malkara Consulting She sat across from the interview table and it could be seen from her poor physical health that this...
Currently estimated to cost five per cent of the world’s total GDP, or $2.6trillion per annum, corruption is now the third largest industry globally and is growing. In response, anti-corruption legislation around the world is being strengthened, with a growing emphasis now placed on enforcement and compliance. Organisations not only need to have an anti-corruption programme in place, but are increasingly being required to prove that it is effective.
It has become the norm for boards to plough time and resources into remuneration and its spin-offs. I believe the time has now come to engineer strategic, integrated human capital think tanks in the form of cutting-edge nominations committees (NC). This case is also made by the Financial Reporting Council’s (FRC) October 2015 UK Board Succession Planning paper that sets out the key topics for non-executive boards if they are ever to successfully implement their strategies.
The European Audit Reform (EAR) introduces bold changes into the audit market and reinforces communication among companies, auditors and shareholders.1 Rather than view it as yet another burdensome regulation, appreciate that this reform constitutes a real opportunity to challenge — for the better – the quality of statutory audits and the environment in which they are performed.
In designing compensation programmes, two key objectives that are universally shared among public companies are 1) ensuring that the pay levels of executives move with their performance and 2) aligning the interests of executives with those of shareholders. The general appeal of these objectives is that they both ring true in terms of fairness.