Étiquette : Diversité

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. »

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 ».

ISS publie son « Board Practice Report – 2012 »


L’étude du ISS présente les perspectives qui s’offrent aux conseils d’administration en 2012. Très intéressant de connaître le point de vue d’une organisation « activiste ».

ISS Releases 2012 U.S. Board Practices Study

A decade ago, more than 60 percent of S&P 500 companies had staggered board terms, and plurality voting in director elections was widely accepted. Today, two-thirds of S&P 500 firms have declassified boards and nearly 80 percent of these companies have adopted majority voting provisions, as many boards have heeded shareholder votes for these reforms.

As one might expect, the prevalence of majority voting and declassified boards is higher at large-cap companies, which are subject to more public scrutiny and generally have greater institutional ownership. However, there are some practices, such as independent board chairs, that remain more common at small and mid-cap firms. Directors on a typical S&P 500 board tend to be more independent, more diverse, and slightly older on average than at smaller-cap companies.

These are among the findings in ISS’ annual Board Practices study, which examines director elections, board and director independence, and board diversity, among other factors, at S&P 1500 firms. This year’s report, which analyzes board practices and characteristics based on index, includes data as of June 30, 2011, from 1,461 companies and 13,760 individual board seats in the S&P 500, the MidCap S&P 400, and the SmallCap S&P 600.

Here are some of the key findings from the 2012 edition of Board Practices: The Structure of Boards at S&P 1500 Companies:

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 ».

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 ».

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 !

La grande conférence annuelle du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS)


Le 25 janvier 2012, le Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS) présente sa grande conférence annuelle en gouvernance. Cette année, le CAS invite M. Pierre Lortie, conseiller principal, affaires, de la firme Fraser Milner Casgrain à prononcer une conférence sur l’évolution des exigences imposées aux administrateurs de sociétés.

Pierre Lortie, Fraser Milner Casgrain

L’événement a lieu au Parquet du Centre de la Caisse de dépôt et placement (CDP), Montréal, mercredi le 25 janvier à 17h. Pour en savoir plus, voir l’invitation à :

La grande conférence annuelle du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS)

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? »
 

Quelques considérations sur le recrutement de membres de C.A.


Êtes-vous intéressé(e)s à siéger sur le conseil d’administration d’une grande société. Si oui, lisez cet article publié dans CNN Money par Eleanor Bloxham, PDG de The Value Alliance and Corporate Governance Alliance. L’auteur aurait cependant dû mettre en évidence les responsabilités de nature juridique reliées à l’exercice de la fonction de membre de C.A.

Quelques considérations sur le recrutement de membres de C.A.

FORTUNE — While millions comb sites like Monster.com looking for greener pastures, there is one job opening they won’t find there: a corporate…

 

Plus de femmes sur les C.A. en Australie


Voici un article qui fait état des progrès constatés sur le nombre de femmes siégeant à des Boards australiens. Il semble bien que les mesures d’incitations adoptées portent fruits, mais la côte est encore abrupte…

Plus de femmes sur les C.A. en Australie

« A RECORD was quietly broken last month. It signed off a year in which women accounted for 40 per cent of new board appointments to ASX50 companies – to now make up almost 19 per cent of all ASX50 directors.

While still very much in the minority, women now have a bigger presence on big company boards than ever before. In terms of boosting diversity on Australian boards, it has been a year of  »real progress », says Jillian Segal, an ASX and National Australia Bank director ».

Femmes sur les C.A. : Approche européenne ou américaine ?


Voici deux articles de Bloomberg qui font le point sur la situation des femmes sur les C.A. de compagnies américaines et européennes. Aux É.U., les Boards sont fortement opposés aux quotas et les organisations proposent d’autres façons d’arriver à une meilleure représentation des femmes sur les C.A.; en général, on penche plus vers des cibles.

En revanche, plusieurs pays européens ont décidés de forcer la parité en imposant des quotas. Le débat se poursuit. Qu’en pensez-vous ?

Boys-only boards: Where the women aren’t at the top

Femmes au C.A. : Approches différentes entre U.S. et Europe

Bonne nouvelle pour les administrateurs de sociétés certifiés !


Voici un résumé des conclusions de l’étude du Conference Board sur la rémunération des membres de C.A. ainsi que sur les modes de fonctionnement des C.A. des compagnies publiques canadiennes (cotées en bourse).

Cette étude du Conference Board montre également que 10 % des postes de conseils d’administration du TSX sont occupés par des administrateurs de sociétés certifiés. De plus, l’étude indique que les entreprises canadiennes sont de plus en plus susceptibles de faire appel à des administrateurs de sociétés certifiés.

Ottawa, December 7, 2011 – Compensation for directors of publicly traded Canadian corporations rose significantly between 2008 and 2010, a trend that is expected to continue, according to the Conference Board of Canada’s 2011…

Les administrateurs des entreprises canadiennes fortement opposés à l’imposition de quotas


Voir cet article du Globe and Mail qui fait état de l’opposition de l’Institut des administrateurs de sociétés (ICD) à l’établissement de quotas pour la nomination de femmes sur les conseils d’administration. Seulement 4 % des administrateurs de sociétés sont favorables aux quotas pour rétablir l’équilibre entre hommes et femmes sur les C.A.

On insiste sur d’autres moyens. Lesquels ? Lisez l’article.

Qu’en pensez-vous ?

Rémunérations et pratiques de fonctionnement des C.A. – Rapport du Conference Board


Voici un résumé des conclusions de l’étude du Conference Board sur la rémunération des membres de C.A. ainsi que sur les modes de fonctionnement des C.A. des compagnies publiques canadiennes (cotées en bourse).

Les rémunérations des administrateurs ont augmentées significativement au cours des dernières années et la tendance semble vouloir se maintenir selon le Canadian Directors’ Compensation and Board Practices report. Je vous encourage à lire le communiqué de presse publié par Digital Journal le 7 décembre 2011.

La parité entre les femmes et les hommes est atteinte sur les C.A. de sociétés d’État québécoises


Trè beau succès. Bravo !

Québec, le 30 novembre 2011 – Le premier ministre du Québec, Jean Charest, est fier d’annoncer l’atteinte de la parité entre les hommes et les femmes au sein des conseils d’administration des 22 sociétés d’État visées par la…

La parité entre les femmes et les hommes est atteinte sur les C.A. de…

Plus de femmes sur les C.A. ? Les É.U. doivent-ils suivre l’exemple des pays européens ?


Un autre article de Forbes qui fait le point sur la question des femmes sur les Boards et qui challenge les conclusions de la revue The Economist sur  l’utilité des quotas. Quelle est la situation ici au Canada; irons-nous dans le sens des quotas adoptés par de plus en plus de pays européens ? La question est lancée, le débat se poursuit.

« European countries are passing laws that would force companies to promote women to executive levels. One argument for these compulsory quotas is that talented executives need mentors to help them climb the ladder, and male directors are often reluctant to mentor young women because of how the relationship might be construed. The belief is that quotas will help break this cycle of all-male boards ».

Plus de femmes sur les C.A. ? Les É.U. doivent-ils suivre l’exemple des pays européens ?

The Economist fait le point sur la situation des femmes sur les Boards


Excellente revue de la situation des femmes sur les Boards, par The Economist.

economist.com
 
“PERHAPS WE WOMEN should just keep out of this male circus,” said one of the participants in a forum on “German Female Executives” run by Odgers Berndtson, a firm of headhunters.