Le bulletin d’information d’avril du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés vient d’être publié. Bonne lecture.

Bulletin du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS) – Avril 2012
Le bulletin d’information d’avril du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés vient d’être publié. Bonne lecture.

Bulletin du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS) – Avril 2012
Le malheur s’acharne sur SNC-Lavalin. Lire les deux articles dans LesAffaires.com et dans le Globe and Mail.
À la suite d’une enquête lancée en septembre dernier, l’une des filiales de SNC-Lavalin (TSX: SNC) a reçu de la Banque mondiale un avis formel suspendant temporairement le droit de cette filiale de déposer des appels d’offres visant de nouveaux projets de la Banque mondiale.
One of Canada’s global champions has just given itself a beating. Canadian officials often pointed to SNC-Lavalin’s business abroad as an example of this country’s trade inroads. It’s taking over the sale of CANDU nuclear equipment. Foreign Minister John Baird brought an SNC exec, Bruno Picard, to meet Libya’s new leaders last fall.

Une mauvaise réputation, c’est comme l’eau contaminée d’une maison. Plus personne ne la désire. Arthur Andersen est le plus bel exemple. Cette société internationale dans le domaine de la vérification comptable jouissait d’une réputation enviable avant que certains associés soient liés au scandale d’Enron. Dans l’espace de quelques mois, cette firme est disparue car leurs clients ne voulaient pas être associés à eux, pour cause de mauvaise réputation.
Les administrateurs de sociétés et le risque lié à une mauvaise réputation
Excellente intervention de Diane Bérard sur le blogue Les Affaires.com. Dans ce billet, Mme Bérard pose plusieurs questions fort pertinentes à Richard Leblanc, expert en gouvernance à l’Université York. Et comme c’est son habitude, Richard Leblanc formule des réponses claires et précises. D’abord, Mme Bérard brosse un résumé de la situation :
« Pierre Duhaime, pdg de SNC-Lavalin, a démissionné. Ce geste marque la conclusion du premier chapitre d’une saga qui dure depuis plusieurs semaines. Celle-ci a débuté avec des allégations de pots-de-vin en Libye pour un montant d’une trentaine de millions de dollars. Après enquête, on apprend que cette somme s’élèverait plutôt à 56 M$ et elle ne serait pas nécessairement reliée à la Libye. Il s’agirait de fonds utilisés pour payer des “agents” à l’étranger. Cette somme aurait été soumise au chef de la direction financière ainsi qu’au président du conseil qui ne l’aurait pas autorisée. En dépit de cela, Pierre Duhaime aurait permis cette dépense. Je résume: une somme de 56M$, sans aucun lien apparent avec les projets de SNC, aurait été dépensée sans autorisation. Et l’usage pour lequel celle-ci aurait été dépensée contreviendrait au code d’éthique de SNC ».
Lisez cet article pour connaître le point de vue de Richard Leblanc sur les questions suivantes :
SNC-Lavalin: cinq leçons pour les conseils
Q: Il doit y avoir beaucoup de gens nerveux aujourd’hui?
Q: Pourquoi s’en faire, SNC est canadienne et le Canada n’a pas de loi sur la corruption?
Q: “L’ incident SNC” aura-t-il des répercussions chez d’autres conseils de sociétés canadiennes?
Q: Quelles leçons les conseils devraient-ils tirer de ce dérapage?
Vous trouverez, ci-dessous, un extrait de l’excellent billet publié par Hélène Solignac, associée de Rivoli Consulting en charge de l’activité Gouvernance d’entreprise (France). L’auteure présente les résultats d’une étude conduite par HEC, Poytechnique et le BCG auprès d’une cinquantaine de grandes entreprises françaises.
Il me semble que les constats dégagés sont tout à fait transposables aux entreprises québécoises; la gouvernance des entreprises familiales et des PME est plus complexe que l’on est porté à croire ! Le Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS) de l’Université Laval a d’ailleurs mis sur pied une formation intensive de deux jours sur la Gouvernance des PME.
Les chercheurs ont cherché à « mettre en évidence les facteurs-clés transposables à des entreprises non familiales, en particulier, la priorité donnée au long terme et à la pérennité de l’entreprise, le rôle central des valeurs, conjuguées avec la capacité à innover et à explorer de nouvelles opportunités sont des caractéristiques largement partagées par les entreprises familiales. Les valeurs très fortes qui trouvent leur origine dans la famille et son histoire, sont incarnées par les dirigeants familiaux et intériorisées par tous les membres de l’entreprise. Elles fondent une vision long terme partagée, mais aussi un système d’obligations et d’attentes réciproques.
Bien sûr, l’entreprise familiale n’est pas un modèle en soi : les exemples sont nombreux de successions et de transmissions mal gérées, d’isolement de dirigeants autoritaires ou de dissensions familiales préjudiciables à l’entreprise. Les risques liés à une gouvernance mal organisée et au non respect des actionnaires minoritaires, à des héritiers peu préparés, à une trop forte résistance au changement ne sont pas toujours bien analysés.
Néanmoins, à l’heure de la “corporate governance”, où la gestion des managers professionnels est critiquée pour sa vision court-termiste, la recherche de profits immédiats, les risques excessifs et non maîtrisés – comme les échecs d’opérations de croissance externe du fait de l’attention insuffisante portée à l’intégration – ; où l’on déplore le manque d’éthique, la perte de sens au travail, la promotion de individualisme au détriment de la recherche de coopération, ces pistes de réflexion sont les bienvenues ».
Cet article scientifique, publié dans Social Science Research Network, pose une question cruciale sur les fondements de la gouvernance. On explique pourquoi les Boards n’ont pas « l’autorité » requise pour exercer une influence significative sur les orientations stratégiques des organisations. L’article expose aussi les processus dont les Boards doivent se doter afin de mieux jouer leur rôle de supervision et de contrôle de la direction.
Les auteurs n’y vont pas « avec le dos de la cuillère », comme vous le constaterez. Je vous réfère au groupe de discussion LinkedIn – Boards & Advisors pour analyser la teneur des contributions des membres sur ce sujet ! Vous trouverez, ci-dessous, un « abstract » de l’article.
Questioning Authority: Why Boards Do Not Control Managers and How a Better Board Process Can Help
Fewer than half of Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) believe their boards of directors understand the strategic factors that determine their corporation’s success; in fact, some long term directors “confess that they don’t really understand how their companies make money.” Yet corporate law expects that boards of directors will stop managers from behaving badly. It assumes that the ultimate governing authority within corporations rests with their boards, and not with the managers who run them. Broadly accepted theories of corporate governance are based on the faulty assumption that boards have actual authority over managers. This Article directly challenges that assumption and argues that managers, not boards, control corporate decision-making processes. The problem is that scholars and policymakers have ignored the connection between decision-making processes and authority. This Article is the first to examine this largely unexplored relationship, which is essential to helping boards live up to their normative mandates.
Without an effective decision-making process, regulators will continue to expect boards to perform tasks that exceed their capabilities. Even more concerning, conventional structural reforms, such as increased director independence, actually have dangerous consequences. These reforms lessen boards’ actual authority by reducing their ability to utilize effective decision-making processes. Boards must take active steps to improve the quality of their decision making. Unless they do so, they will continue to fail because they lack to the power to perform as law and theory expect. This Article argues that effective decision-making processes, which can be found in organizational behavior theory, are the key means by which the board can exercise actual authority. Analyzing the components of such a process, and identifying which components are truly controlled by boards as opposed to managers, provides a roadmap for what boards need in order to have both de facto and de jure authority in their corporations. This Article provides that original analysis and applies insights into group decision making from organizational behavior theory to identify the attributes of an effective decision-making process that are essential to securing a board’s de facto authority.
Le National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) a récemment rendu publique son étude annuelle sur la gouvernance des entreprises privées aux É-U. Les résultats de cette étude (survey) indique les principales tendances relatives aux pratiques des C.A. et montre l’évolution des processus de gouvernance dans les plus grandes entreprises américaines. Bien que l’étude s’adresse essentiellement aux spécialistes en gouvernance aux États-Unis, celle-ci peut néanmoins se révéler être d’une grande importance pour les sociétés canadiennes; les résultats sont, selon moi, tout aussi applicables à ces dernières. Vous serez étonnés de constater le peu d’attention apportée à la planification de la relève des hauts dirigeants ainsi qu’à la diversité. Le NACD insiste donc sur la nécessité d’un redressement de la situation dans ces deux domaines. À lire.

Importantes lacunes en matière de planification de la relève et de diversité : une étude du NACD
NACD’s Public Company Governance Survey highlights the need for more effective succession planning, as only 23 percent of private company boards report that they have formal succession plans in place, 25 percent of private companies have no succession plans at all, and 52 percent have only an informal succession plan. Notable statistics included in this year’s report underscore the need for ongoing director education; 90 percent of respondents believe such programs enhance the board’s effectiveness.
Perhaps most startling findings were new statistics on boardroom diversity, which highlight a significant deficiency of minority and female directors. Only one-third of private boards currently have at least one female director, with only 17 percent having three or more. With regard to minority directors, only 20 percent have at least one minority director serving in the boardroom, and 63 percent report having none at all.
The Top 4 Risks in Pay for Performance
« Pay for Performance, (« P4P » for us cool compensation pros) is all the rage. Those of you who read my postings regularly know that I’m a big proponent of performance-based compensation, in its many forms. Despite being a big supporter, or perhaps because of it, I think its important to discuss the major risks involved with these programs.
1. Incorrect Metrics
Metrics are the “things” that are being measured. These are the foundation of your plan and must represent the measurements of success. I will save you the time of repeating what I, and others, have already said. A couple of interesting articles are here and here.
2. Poorly Set Goals
Goals are the levels that define the success of each metric. These are the drivers of your plan and must represent your destination. Again, I will save time, by pointing out some other articles, here and here.
3. Underwhelming Communication
Performance compensation is often confusing. Clean, clear communications are essential to engaging and motivating your staff. This is a topic we cover here often at the Compensation Cafe. Some good examples are here, here and here.
4. Human Nature
Human nature is the one thing that you cannot build into your compensation programs, yet it is the single biggest risk to pay for performance. A colleague of mine often says that the problem isn’t that P4P programs don’t work well, it’s that they work TOO well. Results and actions must be in alignment. Many companies create great metrics, goals and communications and still have compensation plans blow up. Why is this? For programs that demand high-performance, you must also provide strong management and oversight. Many companies use their compensation plans as a form of management. This may lead to participants slowly defining the good and bad ».
Voici un site Internet, recommandé par Richard Leblanc, qui présente un ensemble d’outils, de formulaires, de guides et d’aides à la gestion des conseils d’administration. On y retrouve un nombre important de « templates » dont les C.A. pourraient s’inspirer. À voir de plus près !
Governance Centre of Excellence de la Ontario Hospital Association
![]() |
Un des meilleurs articles sur l’obligation des Conseils d’administration en matière de planification de la relève des PDG, paru dans Blogs.reuters.com.
La planification de la relève : Une activité primordiale pour tous…
« In an environment of increased corporate governance scrutiny, succession planning through both departures and crises is a focal point for shareholder interests and transparency-related issues. Companies historically kept succession plans close to their vests, but recent succession episodes at Apple Inc., Bank of America Corpand Hewlett-Packard have highlighted the multitude of issues that shareholders have with respect to the concern shown by boards on such a significant matter.
In October 2009, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reversed its long-held position whereby the exclusion of shareholder requests for disclosure of succession plans from proxy statements was allowed. The SEC clearly recognized that succession planning-related matters are within the remit of shareholder proposals, and that boards must significantly address the issues as leadership voids or uncertainty could adversely affect companies ».
Article très intéressant publié dans Harvard Business Review Blog Network. Les résultats de cette étude me semblent très concluants eu égard à l’exercice du leadership des hommes et des femmes. Les résultats vous surprendront certainement !
« We’ve all heard the claims, the theories, and the speculation about the ways leadership styles vary between women and men. Our latest survey data puts some hard numbers into the mix.
….Similarly, most stereotypes would have us believe that female leaders excel at « nurturing » competencies such as developing others and building relationships, and many might put exhibiting integrity and engaging in self-development in that category as well. And in all four cases our data concurred — women did score higher than men.
But the women’s advantages were not at all confined to traditionally women’s strengths. In fact at every level, more women were rated by their peers, their bosses, their direct reports, and their other associates as better overall leaders than their male counterparts — and the higher the level, the wider that gap grows (see chart) »:

The European Business Schools/Women on Board initiative has published a first list of more than 3500 board-ready women to bring Europe into the 21st Century and support European Commission Vice President Reding’s initiative to shatter the glass ceiling for women in Europe’s publicly listed corporation’s board rooms.
The European Business Schools Women on Board Initiative
The list includes individual profiles of 150 senior executive women who are publicly supporting Commissioner Reding’s initiative as well as European Business Schools who have culled their alumnae, faculty, and Board members to identify more than 3500 “board ready” women.
The group has also published five sets of criteria for board membership. These criteria were used as guidelines for the selection of the individual women and by the business schools for their selection of board ready women (see below).
The group includes Business Schools such as IESE (ES), EDHEC (F), INSEAD (F), Cambridge Judge Business School (UK), IMD (CH) , RSM (NL), Boston University Leadership Institute(BE), ESMT (D) and the business school association EFMD (European Foundation of Management Development) as well as professional organizations such as the GTWN (Global Telecom Women’s Network), WiTT (Women in Telecoms and Technology), WoB (Women on Boards), the FT Non-Executive Director’s Club, EPWN (European Professsional Women’s Network), IFA (Institut Francais des Administrateurs), TIAW (The International Alliance for Women).
By publishing this first list, the group believes it will do away with oft-cited remarks such as “there are not any qualified women” and “where can board ready women be found”. It also believes that such a list will help increase not only the gender diversity but also the international diversity of companies since many corporations may wish to avail themselves of the talent of senior executive women from other countries than where they are based.
Excellent article sur l’avenir des quotas en Europe. Voici un long extrait de ce document:
Norway’s businesswomen and the boardroom bias debate
As the EU begins a three-month consultation on whether there should be quotas for women in the boardroom, Harriet Alexander asks whether Norway’s quotas could work in Britain.
Mrs Berdal said she was broadly supportive of the quota system, as a necessary step – even though she disliked the principle of interference in boards. She also denied that it had adversely affected the profitability of Norwegian companies.
« If women are just there as ‘tokens’, then the nomination committee is doing a really bad job. I don’t know any woman who is there just to make up the numbers; they are all highly qualified and professional, » she said.
« There was obviously resistance at the beginning, but now that it has been there for a few years it has weakened.
« My general experience is that it is working fine, and that boards are not weakened by the system: on the contrary, in fact.
But other business experts have expressed scepticism that the EU could impose uniform restrictions on such diverse national working cultures.
Kenneth Ahern, a professor of finance from the University of Michigan, doubted whether Britain was ready to make the necessary financial sacrifice to push women onto boards. His own research on Norway, published last year, showed that « the quota led to younger and less experienced boards, and deterioration in operating performance, consistent with less capable boards. »
He told The Sunday Telegraph: « In Norway, they knew that the value of their companies would drop, but society there cared more about equality than finance. It was a conscious decision.
« For the EU to make such an important moral choice, across such a variety of countries, is a very big ask indeed. I could see there being real resistance to obligatory quotas from countries such as Germany and the UK, which prize the financial output extremely highly. »
Mrs Berdal, who was a widely-travelled international lawyer before dedicating herself full time to board work, agreed that it could be hard to impose quotas in Britain.
« I think the British culture – both in society in general, and in business – is a bit more conservative, and still a bit more male dominated than in Scandinavia.
« In the boardroom, if you have only men, they tend to know each other from school, university or the golf club, and decisions are often made outside of the boardroom so you don’t have full control and transparency. Maybe in the UK you’ll have to twist some more arms. »
Voici les résultats d’une étude réalisée par la Chaire Claire-Bonenfant – Femmes, Savoirs et Sociétés de l’Université Laval, sous la direction de la professeure Hélène Lee-Gosselin : Où sont les femmes dans la direction des organisations?
Pour les femmes qui souhaitent accéder à des postes de haute direction, la compétence et la performance, voire la volonté et l’ambition, ne suffisent pas toujours pour être reconnues et promues. Certains éléments du contexte organisationnel, tels que la sensibilité de l’organisation à la réalité des femmes, l’existence d’un lien entre l’employée et un membre du réseau des personnes influentes dans l’organisation, l’encouragement et le soutien offerts tout au long du cheminement professionnel ou l’émergence d’opportunités liées à une restructuration, à des projets spéciaux ou à de nouvelles activités, s’avèrent souvent déterminants. L’ascension professionnelle est donc bien souvent le résultat d’une combinaison de facteurs individuels et organisationnels auxquels s’ajoute la présence de circonstances favorables.
Read the last issue of Corporate Board Member magazine on boardmember.comVers un Board sans papier ! boardmember.com
“Directors no longer like having to carry thick manuals of paper documents, and

there are better graphics on the iPad versus paper copies, along with the ease of making notes and annotations,” Thompson says. “Plus, it was so much easier for management to make updates via the portal versus having to hand out updated hard copies to the board at our meeting.
“I also like how easy it is to synch documents and document updates into the ‘briefcase’ and take them with you on board the plane for reading—there’s no need for an ongoing Internet connection,” he continues. “And the pushpins are a big plus in getting back to reading where I left off or to key pages of interest.”
Advocates of board portals point to the seamless ability to prepare documents online, eliminating the back-and-forth process of making changes, securing approvals, and managing addendums. Agendas and calendars are easily updated and information can be shared interactively between meetings, including the ability to handle written consents and conduct director questionnaires. In addition, absent directors can access meetings online, and emergency meetings can be held virtually with videoconferencing capabilities.
Voici un article intéressant paru dans Channelnewsasia.com qui montre les besoins de formation en gouvernance des hauts dirigeants de Singapour et les efforts entrepris afin d’explorer les formations à l’internationnal, notamment en Europe.
« Going back to school after climbing the corporate ladder – that’s what some top corporate executives are doing to keep up with rapid changes in the business world especially on corporate governance issues. Besides partnering SMU to conduct a certificate and diploma programme in company directorship, the Singapore Institute of Directors is also exploring the possibility of working with a leading a leading international institution to run an annual senior director and chairman programme for experienced senior directors.
With recent changes in Singapore’s corporate governance landscape, experts said there is a need for directors to upgrade their knowledge.
Irving Low, Partner and Risk Consulting Head at KPMG Singapore, said: « If you talk to the old boys from 10, 15 years ago, (you would realise that) how they manage risk and govern companies these days is very different. The old guards would say the world has changed completely. »
Solide prise de position de Marcel Côté, associé de la firme de consultation Secor, et un message clair aux organismes de réglementation et de classement des entreprises en fonction de leur « bonne gouvernance ».
D’accord avec ses propos ?
« La bonne gouvernance des entreprises est au cœur des préoccupations du milieu de l’investissement. La saison des assemblées annuelles approche, et elle donnera…
Lire la suite dans l’article de CA Magazine :
Très bonne analyse de Richard Leblanc dans Canadian Business sur les moyens à prendre en vue de prévenir la fraude dans les entreprises. C’est de plus en plus une responsabilité du Board de s’assurer que les organisations mettent en place les bons mécanismes de surveillance.
Prévenir la fraude dans les organisations – Does Canada have a…
« The issue raises many questions, but among them are a couple I’m particularly interested in: do directors on boards play a role in detecting and deterring fraud, and can they be held responsible, or even liable, if they do not fulfill this role properly? Increasingly, the answer to both is yes, especially given new U.K. and U.S. legislation following the financial crisis.
A bank director once told me that the number one role of a director was to watch for fraud. That may be true. So here is a list of 10 red flags and suggestions based on my work with companies accused of fraud or other malfeasance—some were pretty high profile ».
Lire l’article pour connaître ces dix mises en garde.
Voici un article publié dans le Globe and Mail par Leah Eichler qui décrit les résultats d’une recherche effectuée par Catalyst Inc., une organisation qui défend la position des femmes sur les conseils d’administration au Canada. L’étude fait le point sur la situation des femmes sur les C.A. de grandes corporations canadiennes et l’auteur suggère des cibles à atteindre à cet égard.

It found that in 2011, the portion of women on the boards of Canada’s 500 largest companies (public, private and Crown corporations) was a mere 14.5 per cent – an increase of only half a percentage point since 2009. In both years, about 40 per cent of companies had all-male boards. Catalyst, which issued its report on International Women’s Day, wants corporate Canada to fill 25 per cent of the board seats with women by 2017.