Skip to content

L’évaluation du conseil d’administration : Une pratique exemplaire

16 juin 2012

Cet article publié sur le Board Blog de Boardmember.com, présente les raisons pour lesquelles le processus d’évaluation des conseils d’administration est devenu, au fil des ans, une quasi-exigence.

En effet, une étude de PwC montre que 94 % des sociétés publiques ont mis en place des processus d’évaluation des membres de C.A. et de l’efficacité des C.A. Je vous encourage à lire cet article; il est cependant requis que vous vous inscriviez, mais vous trouverez plusieurs avantages à consulter ce site.

Ci-dessous, quelques extraits de cet article.

Boardmember.com

Board Evaluations: Honor Spoken Rules of Engagement

« I have always been a big fan of the benefits that can be afforded a company’s board after it undergoes a prudent board evaluation.  Next to executive board sessions, I believe a well-structured board evaluation is one of the best corporate governance practices of the last 10 years and it appears the practice is quite prevalent.  PwC’s 2011 Annual Corporate Directors Study found 94% of public companies conduct some level of board evaluation.  Obviously, that finding partly reflects the requirement by the NYSE for all its listed companies to conduct a board evaluation.  NASDAQ doesn’t require an evaluation as part of its listing requirements but has repeatedly promoted those benefits, as well.

Who should facilitate your board evaluation:  Let me start by saying who I think shouldn’t be the facilitator (the person who directly receives and analyzes the results):  The lead director, chairman, or the chair of the nominating/governance (or similarly named) committee.  And here is the logical reason: How can you evaluate the entire board and all its members if one of those members is conducting the evaluation, especially if the board member facilitator is part of the problem?  Will other board members feel comfortable criticizing the facilitator when that insider will then know what each board member’s comments were?  Now, I recognize that some boards are so collegial and candid with one another that this self evaluation can work, but I still don’t think that having an existing board member, regardless of title, creates the right environment for candid feedback.  Now, again, before I get swamped with readers who think the chairman or the nominating/governance chair should own this process, I don’t disagree.  I just don’t think that it makes sense for them to be the facilitator of the evaluation ».

Laisser un commentaire

Qu'en pensez-vous ?

Entrer les renseignements ci-dessous ou cliquer sur une icône pour ouvrir une session :

Logo WordPress.com

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte WordPress.com. Déconnexion / Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Google+

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Google+. Déconnexion / Changer )

Connexion à %s

%d blogueurs aiment ce contenu :