Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Asymmetry of power Asymmetry of information Interests of shareholders as residual owners Role of owner management Theory of separation of powers Division of corporate pie among stakeholders
Insistence on forms and structures Overarching regulations Regulatory overkill Lack of adequate number of strong, independent directors Large liabilities for companies and officers
Ownership pattern
Board size
of companies have a board majority of independent directors have less than 1/3rd of their directors independent
12%
Executive directors in board Chairman and CEO Lead independent director Board committees
In 35 companies 50% of the directors or more are executive directors 60% have separate Chairman and CEO 3 companies have lead independent directors companies have audit committees 54% have fully independent Audit Committees
All
Boards of 49 companies out of 50 have less than 25% executive directors Only 20% have separate Chairman and CEO 20 companies have lead independent directors
All
companies have remuneration committees of these 14 fully independent and 16 have majority independent committees
33
companies have nomination committees 6 are fully independent and 3 have majority independent committees
9
Good governance leads to good performance It creates an open and transparent system It improves communication and breaks down systematic barriers to flow of information Good governance allows decision making based on data. It reduces risk Good governance helps in creating a brand and creates comfort for all stakeholders and society
Short term performance does not necessarily depend on governance Market asymmetries are responsible for this. However, this increases risk. This also creates barrier to long term growth We all know what happened to Enron?
Medium to long term performance requires governance Most companies which have grown in the last 25 years have outstanding performance and have good governance structure A good governance structure treats all stakeholders fairly Governance alone cannot ensure performance
Is governance a luxury that can be afforded only by the performing companies? Do strategies and tactics need to change to accommodate governance with performance? Is there a time-lag between governance and performance? Are stakeholders concerned about performance or promised performance ?
Corporate governance has a direct bearing on business performance and thereby ROI Leverage the power of IT
On average, businesses with superior governance practices generate 20 percent greater profits than other companies
Thank You