Sheila Fraser, ex-auditeure générale du Canada se joint au Board de Bombardier


Excellent article de Sean Silcoff dans le Globe and Mail du 30 mars 2012. L’ex-auditeure générale du Canada, Sheila Fraser, est pressentie pour joindre le Board de Bombardier. Mme Fraser, qui possède une réputation irréprochable, viendra certainement ajouter une note d’intégrité à une entreprise qui en avait bien besoin.

Bombardier Inc. used to have one of the worst governance reputations in Corporate Canada. Now, it’s about to hold a very different distinction, as the only Canadian company with not one, but two former federal auditors-general on its board of directors.

 

In six weeks, Sheila Fraser, who retired as Auditor-General of Canada after 10 years last May, is expected to join the board of the transportation giant at its annual meeting, taking a seat near her friend and predecessor as Canada’s top federal watchdog, Denis Desautels. It will be her second corporate board, after she became a director last November of Manulife Financial Corp.

Dans une entrevue, Mme Fraser dit qu’elle entend jouer son rôle d’administratrice indépendante sans complaisance : “I’d like to think I can ask questions and be direct. If I have something I want to know, I’ll ask about it, and will work hard to understand the issues.”

Bulletin d’information du Collège des administrateurs (CAS) – Avril 2012


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

logo-cas.gif

Bulletin du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS) – Avril 2012

SNC-Lavalin: Quelles leçons les conseils d’administration doivent-ils retenir ?


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?

Importantes lacunes en matière de planification de la relève et de diversité : une étude du NACD


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.

Liste de 3 500 femmes prêtes à siéger sur des C.A. européens


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.

L’avenir des quotas en Europe : le débat se poursuit


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. »

Où sont les femmes dans la direction des organisations?


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.

La formation en gouvernance s’internationalise : l’exemple de Singapour


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.

La formation en gouvernance s’internationalise : l’exemple de Singapour

« 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. »

Où sont les femmes dans la direction des organisations?


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.

Gouvernance des sociétés : de nombreux défis pour les conseils d’administration en 2012


Excellent article par Brendan Sheehan dans Boardmember.com qui présente les perspectives nouvelles qui s’offrent aux C.A. et aux hauts dirigeants des sociétés cotées en bourse en 2012. De nombreux défis attendent les administrateurs en réponse aux demandes pressantes de groupes d’actionnaires « activistes » , notamment  l’Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS). Je vous encourage à lire l’article au complet mais voici un court extrait :

telescope

Gouvernance des sociétés : de nombreux défis pour les conseils d’administration en 2012

« The failure of prominent companies, ongoing scandals, and the stubbornly persistent financial crisis have dramatically changed the landscape for managements and directors at U.S. public companies and provided new vigor to activist shareholders and governance commentators. For boards of directors, keeping track of the latest reforms and ensuring the company is fully compliant has become an even more complicated puzzle.

Many of the post-Enron reforms have concentrated on enhancing transparency and boosting disclosure in proxy statements and other corporate filings. The end result is while shareholders have greater insight into the companies they own, they also now demand a louder voice in the way companies are being managed and directed, even down to who gets hired and how much they get paid. This, in turn, has led to what many observers have characterized as the pendulum swinging too far to one side, creating a need for balance.

In the meantime, with activists gaining broader access to corporate boards and with disclosure policies constantly expanding, directors and management are becoming increasingly more concerned about what shareholders think. This time of year, that interest manifests itself in trying to figure out what is going to happen during proxy season. How are people going to vote? What will be the hot-button issues? Where will the surprises come from?

As with most things, in order to predict the future it can be instructive to look at the past. An examination of recent voting results and proposal activity reveals that, despite all the talk about the shifting focus of activists, the same proposals that surface every year continue to dominate the voting agenda. Majority voting dominated the proposals, as it has in the last four or five years, followed by the repeal of classified board structure, rights to call special meetings, and rights to act by written consent. These four areas have been among the most prevalent proposal topics for many years, and companies generally understand how to address the surrounding issues. Compensation-related proposals were strongly featured as well, and are likely to be the main focus in 2012.

That being said, several new disclosure rules were enacted in late 2010 and during 2011 that, as investors have time to examine the disclosures and get comfortable with them, could spark an increase in activity. In short, most experts feel that investors will start to move away from simple issues like board structure and poison pills and engage with boards on more complicated—and possibly more important—risk- and performance-related issues ».

L’internationalisation des conseils d’administration : Une tendance lourde en gouvernance !


Voici un résumé du Global Board Index report de la firme Egon Zehnder International qui montre que les entreprises qui opèrent à un niveau global ont avantage à mettre beaucoup d’énergie dans la constitution d’un Board international, un Board qui reflète le niveau d’activité international de la société.
 
 

There is a compelling argument to be made for greater international representation on boards. But, if that is the case, why aren’t boards doing more to close the gap between their global aspirations and the international directors who represent such an apparent advantage? The answer is that while these directors can provide great value to boards and their companies, identifying and attracting them is a difficult and daunting process. It can be done,

Based on anecdotal evidence from our client work and broader observations about global companies and their boards, we have long believed that global boards can be a valuable resource to companies pursuing a global strategy. We set out to quantify the current state of the “globalness” of boards of large companies, beyond what we experience day-to-day with our clients, and to determine if and how board composition links to business success. 

The results of the study confirmed our belief that there is a gap between companies’ global activity and longer-term plans, on the one hand, and the board resources that help to shape and guide that strategy, on the other. The troubling news is that this gap is large. The good news is that once companies are aware of the extent of the gap between their global strategy and their director resources, they can work toward closing it. In light of the positive correlation we are seeing between companies that perform better on key business metrics and those with international representation on their boards, we suspect many companies will take steps to ameliorate this deficit on their boards.

Gouvernance exemplaire à Facebook ?


Les préoccupations de gouvernance, de protection des droits des actionnaires passent au deuxième plan dans le cas d’entreprises à succès telles que Google, LinkedIn et Facebook. Sommes-nous face à un nouveau modèle de gouvernance qui s’adresse à des propriétaires-dirigeants d’entreprises à succès ou sommes-nous en voie de prendre des risques inconsidérés qui portent préjudices aux actionnaires et aux parties prenantes ? Voici un article publié par John Plender dans le Financial Times (FT.com Blogs) du 26 février 2012.

Gouvernance exemplaire à Facebook ?

Voici deux courts extraits de l’article :

« Not so long ago, a debate raged about whether there was any real evidence that good governance contributed to strong corporate performance. It seemed to me pretty academic, given the palpable damage bad governance had inflicted on shareholders at such disaster zones as Enron and the Robert Maxwell empire.

The protection for investors against that age-old governance problem, the over-dominant CEO, is non-existent. If there is a novelty here, it is that the potentially over-dominant executive is just 27 years old and has created a company that will be valued in tens of billions on flotation. And, indeed, none of this is to denigrate the achievement of Mr Zuckerberg. It would, after all, be unusual for someone of his age to have grasped the advantages for himself, as well as for shareholders, of a strong governance framework. And in today’s heady market the IPO will, I suspect, be a big success ».

Pratique de gouvernance canadiennes – réponses aux questions de l’EU


Voici le résumé d’un chapitre de volume publié dans International Journal of Disclosure and Governance (2012) par plusieurs auteurs canadiens dont Richard Leblanc. J’ai pensé que l’introduction au chapitre saurait vous inciter à lire le document au complet. Bonne lecture.

« The European Commission has put forward an interesting set of questions about how to improve corporate governance, within its ‘Green Paper: The EU Corporate Governance Framework’ (Green Paper, 2011). The following provides analysis and the responses by a working group of authors in Canada to these questions based on the experience and research of the group (academics and practitioners) and the relevant literature ».

Pratiques de gouvernance canadiennes – réponses aux questions de l’EU

INTRODUCTION

« The European Commission, in response to the governance failures that came to light in the credit crisis, is considering fundamental changes to European governance systems. As a step towards that goal, the EU has put forward a series of questions that examine essential aspects of governance, that is, what it involves, who it applies to and how it can be enforced. Whether these are the only or best questions that can be asked in this context is not the issue in this article, but rather, we see addressing them as an opportunity to bring to the reader the latest in governance research, as well as lessons from experience with the governance regimes in other regions, notably Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States.

This article is authored by a working group of academics and practitioners, with expertise in governance and various sub-governance domains. Members of the group have advised and worked with boards, regulators and companies that have become recognized for their leading governance practices. It is these experiences and the literature upon which we also draw.

Twenty-three of the 25 questions have been addressed below. Each question appears, followed by our group’s response. Two of the questions (questions 13 and 16) were not addressed owing to the time constraints of the submission (which was due on 22 July 2011) and the group felt that it did not possess all of the requisite expertise.

At the outset, the European Commission should be congratulated for establishing a high-level governance forum for discussions and debates and for the exchange of experiences. The need for a clear road map through the shifting and confusing terrain of corporate governance is very compelling. In a global marketplace, the solutions and recommendations championed in Europe will have a profound effect on governance standards in Canada and elsewhere.

In this article, the authors address in detail the need for improved governance in the areas articulated by the EU. First we consider the need for similar or different standards for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) and unlisted companies. Then we focus on board recruitment, diversity and ways to improve the effectiveness of individual directors and boards. The critical area of governance over remuneration is then subject to our analysis, and we then assess ways to improve the board’s role in the governance of risk, of asset managers and of proxy advisors. Ensuring adequate shareholder engagement is next addressed, as well as minority shareholder interests. Lastly, we make recommendations for improvements in the implementation and monitoring of governance codes ».

Background: Canadian corporate governance practices

« We believe that Canada is a leader in corporate governance practices and, given that our group members are primarily Canadian, we draw on many of the initiatives here to frame our response to the EU deliberations. We also draw on global developments, including those in the United Kingdom and United States.

Canada has adopted the Anglo-American, unitary model of corporate governance. Our companies, however, operate within different ownership structures, legal and linguistic dualities, geographic diversity, and a decentralized regulatory regime of 13 provinces and territories. We have companies that are state-owned, family, significant shareholder, small and medium-sized listed, as well as widely held, not dissimilar to the diverse plurality and tapestry within the European Union.

Canada has had formal corporate governance guidelines in place since 1994 (Dey et al, ‘Where were the Directors?’) within a flexible ‘comply or explain’ approach. There has been time to digest and assess a continuously evolving corporate governance landscape, as companies and boards adopt guidelines and practices to suit the foregoing diverse circumstances, in a flexible manner.

The Canadian corporate governance guidelines, most recently revised in 2005 (Canadian Securities Administrators, 2005), have been adopted and adapted by companies within the listed sector, and through osmosis and other best practices, within private, governmental and not-for-profit sectors as well. It is upon this experience that we also draw for our responses ».

Boardroom News | Directorship | Boardroom Intelligence


Excellent guide de l’actualité en gouvernance dans le monde

Le mode de gouvernance de Facebook est-il à risque ?


Je suis d’accord avec les propos de mon collègue Richard Leblanc. Son article, dans Canadian Business, soulève plusieurs questionnements fondamentaux pour les experts en gouvernance. Comme il y plusieurs points de vue différents sur le sujet et que tout le monde s’entend pour affirmer que l’opération est légale, il y a matière à concevoir un beau cas en gouvernance, créatrice de valeur, et en stratégie de conservation du contrôle de l’entreprise. Qu’en pensez-vous ?

Facebook’s board is a recipe for disaster

« Facebook’s governance has been described by Businessweek as resembling a “dictatorship” and by a Wall Street Journal blog as “Governance = Zuckerberg.” Under the public offering, 27-year-old Mark Zuckerberg owns almost 60% of supervoting shares, is chair and CEO, can name a successor CEO and has complete control over the nomination process for directors ».

Board Focus 2012 : Issues and Developments


Excellent article du The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation qui présente une revue de l’année 2011 en gouvernance et discute des perspectives pour 2012. À lire.

chapeau

Board Focus 2012 : Issues and Developments

Governance developments in 2011 brought some good news. Shareholder governance proposals were at their lowest level since 2002. Support declined for controversial proposals, such as shareholders’ right to call special meetings or act by written consent, and ISS conceded that its recommendations about written consent proposals should reflect the company’s governance as a whole. Even say-on-pay voting had some worthwhile effects. It gave shareholders the means to express more targeted dissatisfaction, driving a decline in opposition to director incumbents, and it prompted more and better dialogue between many companies and their major shareholders and better disclosure about the business rationale for pay decisions.

Assemblée annuelle des actionnaires de Metro : Yves Michaud vole la vedette


Notre Robin des banques, Yves Michaud,  fait encore des vagues à l’assemblée des actionnaires de Metro (voir l’article paru aujourd’hui dans les Affaires.com sous la plume de François Pouliot).

Assemblée de Metro : Yves Michaud vole la vedette

Les assemblées annuelles d’actionnaires ne sont pas toutes prévisibles et ennuyeuses. Celle de Metro, tenue ce matin à Montréal, a donné lieu à quelques épisodes cocasses, gracieuseté de celui qu’on surnomme le Robin des banques, Yves Michaud. Certaines de ses interventions avaient aussi le mérite de provoquer la réflexion, notamment celles portant sur l’absence d’accent aigu sur le « e » de Metro.

La diversité – un avantage concurrentiel crucial !


Forbes – 16 janvier 2012 – Cet article fait la démonstration que la diversité des ressources humaines fait la différence en terme de productivité et d’innovation.

In his wonderful book, The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies, (Princeton, 2007) Scott Page shows in detail and with considerable intellectual rigor when diversity does lead to better outcomes and how and why, as well as when it doesn’t.

La diversité – un avantage concurrentiel crucial !

Québec veut plus de femmes sur les conseils d’administration


Article très intéressant de Marie-Claude Morin dans les affaires.com le 9 janvier 2012. Le Québec est à l’avant-garde en ce qui a trait à la parité hommes/femmes sur les C.A. de sociétés d’État. L’annonce de cette Table des partenaires influents, pilotée par Mme Jérôme Forget, est de bon augure.

chapeau 

Québec veut plus de femmes sur les conseils d’administration

« Les femmes occupent encore trop peu de place sur les conseils d’administration des sociétés privées québécoises, déplore la ministre de la Condition féminine, Christine St-Pierre. Dans l’espoir d’améliorer la situation, elle a annoncé lundi après-midi la création d’une Table des partenaires influents ».

Forbes anticipe un renouvellement significatif des membres de conseils


B.C. Forbes, le fondateur de Forbes magazine, anticipe un renouvellement significatif des membres de conseils des grandes entreprises au cours des prochaines années.

Corporate Boards : Shifting From Aging Men To New Generation Of Women? – Forbes

« More than 1,100 directors currently serving on F1000 boards are over 70 years old. With their retirement imminent, demand is surging for a new generation of directors, one which better reflects the 21st-century marketplace. How can qualified women ensure that they’re considered as candidates to fill those slots? »