Catégorie : Management (Haute direction)

De qui un haut dirigeant doit-il être entouré ?


Voici un article très intéressant (et léger) de Jessica Hagy, dans Forbes, qui propose les profils de personnes dont vous devriez vous entourer dans votre organisation. C’est un article qui n’a rien de scientifique, mais je suis certain que vous reconnaîtrez plusieurs caractéristiques se rapportant aux personnes-clés qui vous entourent … ou qui devraient vous entrourer. L’article insiste sur l’importance d’avoir une équipe composée de joueurs possédant un ensemble de qualités différentes … mais qui, selon moi , doivent aussi avoir ont une bonne compréhension et une bonne acceptation de leurs différences. Bonne lecture.

« Nothing incredible is accomplished alone. You need others to help you, and you need to help others. With the right team, you can form a web of connections to make the seemingly impossible practically inevitable ».

Le « risque réputationnel » : Une priorité des Boards


Voici un court article de sensibilisation publié dans CFO par Caroline McDonald. Il semble que cette préoccupation soit vitale; de plus en plus de conseils d’administration l’inscrivent à leur liste de priorités.

economics
economics (Photo credit: Sean MacEntee)

« Boards are taking the peril of the loss of their companies’ good names more seriously and are ready to beef up staff to help CFOs.

For a second straight year, boards of directors see reputational risk as their top concern. They’re also displaying a new optimism about a financial recovery, and are making plans to hire staff to support CFOs, according to a survey by EisnerAmper LLP. Looking at internal growth and expansion, “the fact that so many board members — 71% compared to 51% in 2011 — feel that the current economic environment will give new opportunities for internal growth and expansion is a tremendous increase over the prior year,” says Steve Kreit, an audit partner with the accounting firm in New York. The study, “Concerns About Risks Confronting Boards,” found that 66% of 193 directors see reputational risk as their top concern, compared with 59% who view regulatory risk as the top concern. Aided by the National Association of Corporate Directors, the firm polled directors by web-based survey ».

Ce que les dirigeants devraient savoir sur les perspectives du « commerce mobile »


Voici un article très pertinent sur l’utilisation du commerce électronique « mobile » en 2012. L’article d’Eric Koester, fondateur de la firme Zaarly, publié dans Forbes présente une liste de sept points à connaître à propos du « mCommerce« . Tous les dirigeants d’entreprises devraient être interpellés par l’avenir de cette technologie dans le domaine des affaires car celle-ci risque de chambarder les façons de faire. C’est un article facile à lire et un sujet incontournable pour tous les gestionnaires, spécialement pour ceux dont les entreprises oeuvrent dans le domaine des services.
 
7 Things CEOs Need To Know About Mobile Commerce – Forbes   

iPhone Mobile Payment 100 Euro
iPhone Mobile Payment 100 Euro (Photo credit: monty.metzger)
« Mobile is hot – the innovation fortune tellers (aka venture capitalists) have dipped into their wallets and doled out big bucks to mobile-focused companies. Even more than just mobile, we’ve seen a veritable gold rush into the mobile commerce market from mobile payments to mobile couponing to location-based discounts to the ‘buzzy-sounding’ MoLoSo (it’s short for mobile-local-social integrated technologies). For CEOs and other business leaders, the big question is what they really need to know about mobile commerce right ».

Que devrait-être l’agenda du Comité des Ressources Humaines (CRH) en 2012 ?


English: Attention
English: Attention (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Voici un rapport américain très intéressant, publié par Pearl Meyer & Partners et partagé par Richard Leblanc, qui présente les dix items les plus importants des ordres du jour des comités de ressources humaines (CRH) en 2012. Le document expose en détail chacune des priorités des CRH pour cette année. Voici un bref extrait du rapport.

 

Top 10 Compensation Committee Agenda Items for 2012

« Compensation Committees in 2012 will need to focus continued attention to the design details of executive pay programs, along with how they are administered and communicated to all stakeholders, including investors. With that in mind, Pearl Meyer & Partners’ annual look at the Top 10 issues facing Compensation Committees focuses on how Boards can effectively address the key elements – and the sometimes overlooked nuances – of a robust and effective pay-for-performance orientation.With that in mind, Pearl Meyer & Partners’ annual look at the Top 10 issues facing Compensation Committees focuses on how Boards can effectively address the key elements – and the sometimes overlooked nuances – of a robust and effective pay-for-performance orientation ».

Les 10 items les plus importants sont les suivants :

1. Understand Your Company’s Pay-for-Performance Linkage

2. Understand Total Executive Compensation

3. Reassess Executive Compensation Benchmarking

4. Balance Short-Term and Long-Term Incentive Programs

5. Don’t Follow the Leader – Shareholders, Not ISS, Are Your Target Audience

6. Use a Persuasive Executive Summary in the CD&A

7. Continuously Assess Your Succession Planning Strategy

8. Test Your Pay Philosophy Against its Stated Objectives

9. Assess Executive Rewards Within Your Executive Talent Management Strategy

10. Revisit Consultant Independence and Selection Under Dodd-Frank

La gouvernance tient-elle le coup dans la tourmente? | Un rapport de KPMG


Dans le dernier rapport de l’Audit Committee Institute, la firme KPMG, présente un sommaire de ses observations sur la capacité des conseils d’administration à faire face au rythme accéléré des changements organisationnels et aux risques en résultant. Norman Marks, CRMA, CPA, vice-président de SAP, nous livre les pricipales conclusions.

Is Governance Keeping Pace ? 

The basic conclusion seems to be that most organizations are struggling.

The logo of KPMG.
The logo of KPMG. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

– Only 39% are satisfied that governance activities are focused on the areas of greatest risk to reputation and brand.

– Just 24% are satisfied that management has an effective process that links risk ‘hot spots’ to strategy and execution activities.

 

La gouvernance et le « Old Boys’ Network »


On se questionne souvent sur l’efficacité des membres de conseils d’administration qui appartiennent aux mêmes réseaux sociaux et qui ont des liens étroits. La recherche de B. D. Nguyen de l’Université Cambridge (Judge Business School) est assez concluante à cet effet. Voici un extrait de l’article qui montre trois impacts négatifs du « Old Boys’ Network ».

There were three main findings. Firstly, close ties within a board can adversely affect company performance. While his study was not designed to explain why this is the case, Dr Nguyen believes opposing forces are at play: the positive effects of connectedness on information asymmetry as well as the board’s advisory role versus its willingness to be tough on a CEO when circumstances demand.

Secondly, social networks seem to impact board effectiveness in its role of hiring and firing CEOs, a key duty for the board to enable them to protect shareholder value. It appears well connected CEOs are less likely to be ousted for poor performance than non-connected CEOs. For the same poor performance, the connected CEO is almost three-times less likely to be fired.

Old Boys Network
Old Boys Network (Photo credit: marksdk)

The third key finding is that a connected CEO ousted for poor performance is much more likely to find a better job, more quickly, than an unconnected CEO.

Les avantages de recruter le PCD (CEO) à l’interne


Voici un article, publié dans Forbes, qui insiste, encore, sur les avantages de recruter le PCD (CEO) à l’interne. L’article présente des statistiques intéressantes et donne des munitions à ceux qui croient que l’on devrait toujours donner préséance aux candidats provenant de l’interne. À lire.

New CEO Study Underlines Merits Of Promoting From Within – Forbes

This news may not come as a shocker but it bears repeating: It pays to hire from within, whether lower- or mid-level employees, or candidates for a company’s top job.

Last month I wrote about a study by a Wharton professor, Matthew Bidwell, who found that external hires get paid more than internal promotes. For their first two years on the job, external hires also get much lower marks in performance reviews, and they are more likely to be laid off than those promoted from within.

Wharton Park - Durham
Wharton Park – Durham (Photo credit: drew | DROWNEDeffect™)

Yesterday, the consulting firm Booz & Co. released its twelfth annual study on CEO succession, and showed some similar findings about chief executives. The Booz study, of the world’s 2,500 largest companies, reports that from 2009 to 2011, companies let go 35% of CEOs hired from outside, compared to 19% of bosses who were promoted from within. Also, CEOs who come up from within, stay on their jobs for a year longer than outsiders, an average of five years, as opposed to four. Companies apparently recognize the advantages of hiring insiders. Four out of five new CEOs rise through the company ranks, says the study.

La taille optimale du C.A. d’une OBNL !


Il y a toujours eu beaucoup de discussions sur le sujet de la taille optimale des Boards d’OBNL. Mais que montrent les études et qu’en disent les experts à ce sujet ? Selon Richard Leblanc, on trouvera la réponse en analysant la mission et les fonctions de l’organisation et en étudiant le leadership du C.A. Voici un article intéressant à consulter si vous songez à modifier la taille de votre conseil.

The optimal size for boards of directors of nonprofits savannahnow.com

« A 2011 study by Bain Capital reported in The Nonprofit Times asserts that the optimal board size for effective decision making is seven people. According to Bain, “every person added after that decreases decision-making ability by 10 percent.” So for boards with the median of 17 people, Bain would put their decision-making ability at zero.

English: Icon for recentism

While a smaller board size does reflect new thinking about board functioning, I’ve seen too many boards that work extremely well with 17-22 people to buy into Bain’s assertion. Some boards grow quite large to enable greater engagement of key community leaders or to expand its fundraising capability. United Way is an excellent example of this done very effectively.  »

Comment un dirigeant-administrateur (interne/non-indépendant) peut-il « confronter » son PCD ?


Voici le point de vue de Jim Kristie, éditeur de Directors & Boards, à propos de l’indépendance requise pour exercer une évaluation efficace de la haute direction.  Selon plusieurs experts, une personne comme Sheryl Sandberg de Facebook n’a pas les coudées franches dans son nouveau rôle d’administratrice de la compagnie. En plus de saluer le fait que c’est la première femme à siéger au conseil d’administration de Facebook, l’auteur montre une autre facette à considérer… et qui semble avoir été complètement occultée. Plusieurs dirigeants-administrateurs se retrouvent dans cette position.

DAVOS/SWITZERLAND, 28JAN11 - Sheryl Sandberg, ...
DAVOS/SWITZERLAND, 28JAN11 – Sheryl Sandberg, Chief Operating Officer, Facebook, USA; Young Global Leader are captured during the session ‘Handling Hyper-connectivity’ at the Annual Meeting 2011 of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, January 28, 2011. Copyright by World Economic Forum swiss-image.ch/Photo by Jolanda Flubacher (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Quel est votre point de vue à cet égard ? »

How does an inside director challenge the CEO or chairman when it…

Frankly, I was surprised by the huge gush of approval over Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg’s election to the board of the social media company.

Yes, she is the first woman to join the Facebook board, which many in the governance world wanted to see happen. Yes, without a doubt, she is an accomplished executive. And yes, it is always worthy news when an accomplished woman executive is elected to a board.

But . . . and this is a big “but.” She is an insider.

What everyone who praised Sandberg’s appointment missed is a fundamental tenet of corporate governance: board members are the boss of the CEO.

Renowned governance guru J. Keith Louden has stated it best:  “It is too difficult for an inside director to function as the subordinate of the chief executive officer every day and then, at a board meeting, in effect become his superior.”

Les scandales dans les OBNL : Revoir les pratiques de gouvernance !


Plusieurs scandales ont éclaboussés les OBNL au cours des dernières années. On retrace souvent l’origine de ceux-ci à des problèmes de gouvernance. L’article de Alice Korngold, publié sur son blogue dans le HuffingtonPost, décrit avec justesse ce qui est requis pour améliorer la gouvernance de ce type d’organisations, souvent très notables. Voici un extrait de l’article en question. Bonne lecture.

« The nonprofit board scandals of the past year are highly distressing: revealing everything from complete board dysfunction in the firing of the CEO at the University of Virginia, to the cover-up of criminal behavior at Penn State, to policy decisions that arguably destroyed Komen’s leading nonprofit brand. In all three cases, the financial and reputational losses are quite severe. People to be served by the mission and outsiders have been harmed, the victims at Penn State devastatingly so.

The most important value must be the integrity of the institution, and the driving purpose must be the mission of the organization and the community it serves. Let the transparency of these scandals and the severity of the consequences serve to move nonprofit board governance forward.

Nonprofit Board Scandals: Let Them Move Governance Forward EC Mission Statement and Commitments (Wordle)

What’s required for a board to ensure that an organization achieves its mission to the fullest is  (1) a board composed of people who:

– are fully committed to the mission, and understand the role of the board in achieving the mission

– have the diversity of experience, expertise, networks, relationships and perspectives that are needed for the particular board to advance the organization in achieving its greater vision

– will work in partnership with the CEO to create and achieve the revenue model for success

– have leadership potential

– commit to the legal duties of care, loyalty and obedience

and (2) a board that is organized efficiently and effectively in terms of:

– board structure: size (not too large), number and duration of meetings

– committee structure

– board meeting agendas

– expectations and accountability of board members

– leadership succession planning

– board member identification and recruitment

– practices, such as terms and term limits

– board member orientation and education

Plus de femmes sur les BOARDS : Une perspective australienne


Australian Securities Exchange
Australian Securities Exchange (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Je crois qu’il est important d’avoir une perspective globale de la gouvernance et, pour ce faire, il est nécessaire d’explorer le phénomène sous un angle international. Comment se pratique la gouvernance ailleurs dans le monde, en Europe, en Asie et en Australie par exemple ? Et comment la situation se compare-t-elle aux États-Unis, notamment en ce qui a trait aux femmes siégeant sur des conseils d’administration ? Voilà ce que l’étude de D. M. Branson de l’Université de Pittsburgh aborde. Vous pouvez téléchager le document au complet. En voici quelques extraits : 

« In the United States, the representation of women on corporate boards of directors has been flat for 6 years now. By contrast, elsewhere around the world the topic is a hot button issue. This includes Australia where the proportion of board seats held by women has suddenly jumped from 8% in 2010 to nearly 14% today. The Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) has adopted a “comply or explain” diversity disclosure requirement (for emphasis termed an “if not, why not” disclosure requirement), which emphasizes gender diversity. The requirement is even more stringent than the London Stock Exchange (LSX) comply or explain regulation adopted after the Lord Mervyn Davies Report on women in corporate governance appeared in February 2011. The Australian Institute of Company Directors also has instituted a mentoring/sponsorship program, the first of its kind in the world, designed to obtain board seats for women. This article reviews these Australian as well as global developments, including enactment of quota laws (especially Norway and France), certificate and pledge programs (“Rooney Rules”), and hard law disclosure requirements (United States) ».

La transparence en matière de rémunération des hauts dirigeants : Une initiative mondiale


Je porte à votre attention un compte rendu du Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), paru dans triplepundit.com, qui propose des changements majeurs dans la divulgation des données sur la rémunération des hauts dirigeants, à l’échelle mondiale. Le GRI propose notamment la publication du ratio – rémunération de la direction par rapport à la moyenne des employés. Je vous encourage donc à appréhender l’ampleur du phénomène et à être mieux informés sur la mise en oeuvre d’un standard international en matière de rédaction de rapports de développement durable. 

« The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting transparency around economic, social and environmental issues at all organizations – companies to NGOs to governments at any level. Basically, it’s an international standard for writing sustainability reports – and interest in the reporting standard is growing rapidly. In 2011, 2834 reports were registered with GRI.

The Global Reporting Initiative is tremendously popular in Europe with 47% of reports originating there. GRI reporting in the US is growing like gangbusters, however, with 350 reports registered in 2011 compared to only 100 in 2010. That’s partly thanks to the attention and commitment of Mike Wallace, Director of GRI’s Focal Point USA. The GRI guidelines are continuously updated based on feedback from users, which is filtered through working groups. I must say that when I dove into the guidelines, I wasn’t expecting any surprises. But I was wrong.  Check out this note from the summaryon the changes to the “Governance” section of reporting :

EXECUTIVE PAY BY COUNTRY VS AVERAGE WORKER CRO...
EXECUTIVE PAY BY COUNTRY VS AVERAGE WORKER CRONY CAPITALISM (Photo credit: snowlepard)

G4 is proposing a number of changes to governance and remuneration disclosures to strengthen the link between governance and sustainability performance, taking into account the consistency within existing governance frameworks and developments in that field. The proposed changes include new disclosures in the Profile section of the report on the ratio of executive compensation to median compensation, the ratio of executive compensation to lowest compensation and the ratio of executive compensation increase to median compensation ».

Gouverner pour assurer une valeur ajoutée à long terme | CFA Institute


La présidente du Cercle des administrateurs de sociétés, Mme Louise Champoux-Paillé, partage avec nous cet excellent document émanant du CFA Institute  « prodiguant des conseils afin d’éviter le piège des orientations à court terme ». Le rapport présente également les résultats d’un « sondage sur les pratiques de gouvernance en matière de communication avec les actionnaires, de rémunération, de gestion des risques, de sélection des administrateurs et de l’importance accordée aux discussions stratégiques au sein des C.A. »

Visionary Board Leadership | Stewardship for the Long Term

Voici un aperçu de la table des matières :

« Visionary Boards—Areas of Focus That Can Influence

Long-Term Value

Quarterly Earnings Practices

Shareowner Communications

Strategic Direction

Risk Oversight

Executive Compensation

Culture (Board Culture/Company Culture)

Conclusion »

Comment la direction des sociétés évalue-t-elle l’efficacité (et l’utilité) de son conseil d’administration ?


Une étude de Heidrick & Struggles du Center for Effective Organizations de University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business  montre que les perceptions qu’ont les présidents | chefs de la direction (PCD ou CEO) de l’efficacité du conseil d’administration (C.A., Board) sont significativement différentes de celles qu’ont les membres du conseil (C.A.) de leur propre utilité et efficacité !  Les auteurs proposent plusieurs moyens pour améliorer la dynamique entre le C.A et le management des sociétés. Vous pouvez lire l’article au complet sur le site de la NACD (nacdonline.org).

 Closing the Gap

Achieving the Perfect CEO-Board Dynamic – Resources – NACD

« Nine out of 10 directors think their boards are doing a good job. Their CEOs think only one director in five is effective. Who is right?

A study conducted by Heidrick & Struggles with the Center for Effective Organizations at the University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business surveyed 768 directors, nearly 75 percent of whom are outside directors, at 660 of the 2,000 largest publicly traded companies in the United States. CEOs confide that they have at most one or two effective directors who provide wise counsel, offer advice on key issues. But 95 percent of directors rate their boards as either effective or very effective overall ».

Closing the Gap

When CEOs see only about 10 to 20 percent of directors as effective and their top management teams often regard working with the board as a demotivating experience, what are the issues? The good news is that the causes of the demotivating disconnect are clear and there are readily available remedies to address them ».

Le PCD doit perfectionner ses habiletés à utiliser et à confronter les médias !


Reuters Newsmaker event - Ted Turner
Reuters Newsmaker event – Ted Turner (Photo credit: caribbeanfreephoto)

Les aptitudes à la communication sont de plus en plus perçues comme essentielles à la réussite comme Président et chef de la direction (PCD) des sociétés, plus particulièrement celles reliées à maîtrise  des communications publiques comme les vidéos corporatifs, les entrevues en direct, les vidéos publiées sur YouTube, les téléconférences par SKYPE, les discours de positionnement stratégique et l’utilisation des médias sociaux tels que Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, etc.

Cet article, publié dans International Business Times | ExpertNetwork, montre toute l’importance que les hauts dirigeants doivent consacrer à leurs activités de communications publiques en ces temps de besoins d’une plus grande transparence.

Celebrity Executives: The New C-Suite Reality

 

« The sooner an executive develops their ability to jump on camera to comfortably and confidently share their views, the more likely they are to be selected for high-profile positions and to be the spokesperson in moments of incredible visibility. Don’t make your first « live » video moment be one where you are unprepared to make a good impression. The likelihood of it being something critical (i.e. damage control, communications spin), is high, while your ability to knock it out of the park will be low. »

Guide pour l’adoption de LinkedIn par les administrateurs et les hauts dirigeants


My LinkedIn network, visualized
My LinkedIn network, visualized (Photo credit: For Inspiration Only)

Voici quelques conseils très utiles pour des administrateurs ou des membres de direction qui souhaitent intégrer LinkedIn comme outil de réseautage professionnel. L’auteur, Jon Burgess – RedFusion Media, fait un bon résumé des choses à faire et des choses à ne pas faire sur les réseaux sociaux.

C–dessous un extrait :

 

An Executive’s Guide to Using Linkedin – CEO, Directors, Board Members

 

 

« What is LinkedIn used for?

In the simplest terms, LinkedIn is a Web 3.0 Rolodex, meaning it is a living document with social interaction. It is a great place to keep your business contacts, so that when they move to a new job, you’re still connected. Of the social media platforms, LinkedIn is the most important for Business to Business (B2B), sales, industrial or niche market organizations. In addition, LinkedIn is a great place to follow authoritative people in your industry. Knowing what leaders and even your competitors are doing can sometimes be more valuable than the connectivity that LinkedIn gives you. As you become more comfortable with social media, you too should focus on being a authoritative person, or “thought leader” in your industry ».

En rappel | Dix événements qui ont radicalement changé la gouvernance au cours des 10 dernières années


Il y a dix ans, on parlait très peu de gouvernance dans la profession d’administrateur et dans la formation en administration. Voici dix événements qui ont radicalement changé la manière de concevoir et de vivre la gouvernance au cours des 10 dernières années. C’est un article très intéressant et je vous incite fortement à le lire pour être à la fine pointe des connaissances en gouvernance. Ci-dessous les dix facteurs de changement incontournables présentés dans l’article publié dans Corporate Secretary.

Corporate Secretary

1. Sarbanes-Oxley 

2. The fall of Lehman Brothers

3. Dodd-Frank

4. Social media governance

5. Say on pay

6. Protecting whistleblowers

7. Corporate social responsibility

8. The rise of the Enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practice  Act (FCPA)  

9. Women on boards

10. Shareholder spring’ activism and protests

Ten events that have changed corporate governance

ENRON, The Play
ENRON, The Play (Photo credit: Scott Beale)

Ten years ago, corporate governance was still in the concept stage. There wasn’t much information available to the public about the way corporations were governed, and there were few regulations, websites or groups dealing with the topic on a daily basis. Over the years, however, the notion of good corporate governance has taken an interesting turn. After a string of corporate failures that crippled the economy, it has become clear that governance matters. So as Corporate Secretary celebrates its tenth anniversary as a publication, we take a look at ten significant events that have changed the face of corporate governance.

Les raisons et la logique d’accroître le nombre de femmes sur les C.A.


Vous trouvez, ci-dessous, un excellent rapport publié par le CED (Committee for Economic Development) et partagé par Louise Champoux-Paillé avec les commentaires suivants :

« Plaidoyer auprès des dirigeants d’entreprises américaines pour qu’ils accélèrent le pas »

«Corporate leaders must actively commit to make advancement decisions that take advantage of the power of diverse views from leaders who don’t think, act or look like themselves. That will require diligently breaking old habits of selection that still favor those similar to existing leadership at the top. Nominating committees need to re-examine the narrow selection criteria that often exclude those who have not served in a CEO role. For example, it has been reported that of the 78 women currently serving as CFOs of Fortune 1000 companies, 53 are not currently serving on any outside board»

English: CED Logo
English: CED Logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Je vous encourage à lire au moins le sommaire exécutif (pages 7 à 9)

Fulfilling the Promise: How More Women on Corporate Boards Would Make America and American Companies More Competitive

Quel est le cadre juridique du fonctionnement d’un conseil consultatif de PME ?


Voici quelques éléments d’information en réponse à une question souvent posée dans le cadre de la formation en gouvernance de sociétés. Cette question a été soumise à la considération de Me Raymonde Crête, professeure de droit à l’Université Laval et de Me Thierry Dorval, associé de Norton Rose. Je reproduis ici la réponse de ces deux experts juridiques en gouvernance.

« Dans une PME, il est possible de créer un comité consultatif. Il n’existe pas de règles spécifiques concernant la création de ce type de comité. Concernant la création de ce type de comité consultatif, on peut consulter le site suivant :

Palasis-Prince pavillion of the Laval Universi...

Un comité consultatif pour vous critiquer et accélérer votre croissance

Les membres du comité consultatif ne sont pas, en principe, assujettis aux responsabilités qui incombent normalement aux administrateurs de sociétés, à moins qu’ils agissent, dans les faits, comme des administrateurs. Si les membres du comité consultatif agissent, dans les faits ou de facto, comme des administrateurs de sociétés, ils pourraient engager leur responsabilité, notamment en matière fiscale ou d’environnement. L’article 227.1 de la Loi de l’impôt sur le revenu impose aux administrateurs une responsabilité solidaire en cas de non-paiement de certains impôts. Pour éviter d’engager leur responsabilité, les membres du comité consultatif ne doivent donc pas exercer des fonctions analogues ou des pouvoirs similaires à ceux exercés par les membres d’un conseil d’administration, tels les pouvoirs décisionnels en matière d’émission d’actions, de déclaration de dividendes, etc ».

Concernant les responsabilités du conseil d’administration, vous pouvez consulter le document ci-dessous publié par Norton Rose.

Identification et gestion des risques que comporte le rôle d’administrateur de société

Les actionnaires disent de plus en plus NON aux rémunérations excessives !


Encore un solide article, partagé par Richard Leblanc et publié dans Bloomberg.com, sur la propensité de plus en plus grande des actionnaires à dire NON à des « packages » de rémunération jugés excessifs. À lire.

More Shareholders Are Just Saying No on Executive Pay

« It is often said that social change can’t occur until what was seen as misfortune is seen as injustice. There is a corollary in the financial world. It says change can’t occur until what was seen as immaterial is seen as risky. That’s happening with executive compensation. Investors are recognizing that excessive pay for chief executive officers does more than shave a few cents off earnings; it also provides important clues about the alignment of executives’ and shareholders’ interests. Misalignment can be very expensive. More important, compensation provides crucial information about the effectiveness of a board’s independent oversight. If directors can’t say no to the CEO on pay, they probably can’t say no to poorly designed strategy or head off operational fiascos ».