Étiquette : Performance

Boardroom Burnout !


Voici un résumé des recommandations présentées par Kaye O’Leary dans innovationexcellence.com pour éviter de surcharger les membres de conseils d’administration.

Boardroom Burnout !

Practical tips from board members on how to avoid wearing-out your directors!

« The challenge:  It’s no secret that there are an increasing number of demands on boards.  Directors are expected to keep abreast of the organization’s business model, performance, strategic challenges and risk environment, understand the industry, understand the legislative environment, be knowledgeable of and ensure compliance with regulatory and reporting requirements and changes, evaluate the CEO and board’s performance, has a compliant and effective compensation program, be current on applicable accounting rules and ensure that the organization has a solid succession plan and effective culture.

Tip 1:  Don’t waste precious meeting time presenting information that was distributed in the board materials

Effective Board Suggestion: Skip the presentations of the information that was distributed and move directly to questions on the material distributed.  (PS – make sure you get your materials out well in advance of the meeting!  Do not distribute materials on a Friday afternoon for a Tuesday board meeting; board members do not enjoy spending their weekend reading board materials.)

Tip 2:  Utilize Committees Effectively

Effective Board Suggestion: Rely on your committees and avoid repeating the committee work with the full board.

Tip 3:  Annually Assess the Work of the Board

Effective Board Suggestion: As part of your annual board assessment process, take the time to review how the board spends its time vs. the organization’s strategic priorities.  Is your board focused on your strategic priorities? Do you have special purpose committees that are no longer relevant?  Are there things your board can stop doing?   Review the materials you are sending out in your board book.  If you send it, you are obliging your board members to read the material; don’t send 60 pages of financial information if 15 pages will suffice ».

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 et éthique – Gilles Paquet


Voici le résumé de l’allocution d’ouverture prononcée par Gilles Paquet, professeur émérite à l’École de Gestion et Senior Research Fellow au Centre d’études en gouvernance de l’Université d’Ottawa, à l’occasion du Congrès annuel de l’Ordre des Administrateurs Agréés du Québec le 24 janvier 2012.

Gouvernance et éthique – Conférence de Gilles Paquet aux Adm.A. 

« Ma présentation s’est construite autour de quatre mots (contexte, gouvernance, stewardship et éthique) et d’une argumentation en deux temps, à l’effet que l’on ne peut pas comprendre l’éthique sans comprendre la gouvernance, et que l’on ne peut pas demander moins à un professionnel que le professionnalisme – c’est-à-dire un comportement éthique à la hauteur des attentes beaucoup plus grandes qu’on a d’un professionnel que d’un citoyen ordinaire.

De là l’importance de bien comprendre que l’Ordre doit développer le professionnalisme de ses membres, et ne pas s’enliser dans un corporatisme défenseur d’intérêts mesquins qui ne pourraient que détruire la légitimité et la valeur ajoutée de l’Ordre au plan social. »

Comment la mondialisation affecte-t-elle la rémunération des hauts dirigeants ?


Très bon article paru dans Slate qui discute de l’influence de la globalisation des marchés sur la rémunération des CEO.  Peu ou pas du tout d’effet … Voici un extrait de l’article :

Comment la mondialisation affecte-t-elle la rémunération des hauts dirigeants ?

The global war for talent is a popular justification for exorbitant chief executive pay. But with few exceptions, expatriate chiefs are a tiny minority at most major publicly traded corporations. It’s bad news for shareholders, especially in high-pay hubs, who could find better-value stewards overseas.

« Multinationals are constantly in search of cheaper workers. The one exception appears to be the most expensive staff of all, in the boardroom. Particularly in the United States and Britain, boards have shown little desire to get the maximum bang for their buck by insisting companies cast wider recruitment nets. Anglo-American companies continue to tolerate steep rises in pay at the top that far exceed returns.

In 2010, compensation for the head honchos at American and British companies climbed 36 percent and 43 percent, respectively, dwarfing shareholder returns of around 15 percent, according to research firms GMI and Incomes Data Services. As recently as 1993, U.S. corporate bosses were paid some 130 times more than the average worker. Now they command about 350 times more, according to Duke University economist Dan Ariely.

A big plank of the defense has been globalization. Since the brightest CEOs can take their pick of posts across the globe, or so the argument goes, shareholders should not be surprised by astronomic remuneration – a point recently made by the Corporation of London’s policy chief. This oft-repeated excuse for overcharging shareholders is seldom backed up with evidence ».

Comment s’assurer que le processus de relève du CEO est efficace ?


Voici un article très pertinent, publié dans talentmgt.com, qui met l’accent sur trois actions clés à entreprendre pour assurer la relève de la haute direction. Le conseil d’administration a un rôle crucial à jouer dans ce processus.

A successful CEO transition requires a collaborative partnership between boards and CEOs and acknowledgement of the complex dynamics involved. The last 18 months have seen a series of high-profile CEO succession stories. Since every organization deals with it at some point, it’s interesting that many companies continue to bungle the process, especially when getting it wrong can be costly.

Succession missteps pose a serious threat to business performance, and ultimately to shareholder value. They can lead to a leadership vacuum, interruptions in decision making and business processes, and the loss of stakeholder confidence. Potential successors can become so focused on the race — who is winning or losing the succession battle — that they lose sight of managing performance. Candidates who are passed over for the top post may leave abruptly, depleting the talent pool and making it harder to manage the leadership change. And competitors that sense weakness may launch an offensive to win over customers, poach talent or even attempt a takeover.

Amélioration de l’information annuelle des OBNL


Vous trouverez, ci-joint, un extrait de la préface d’un important document publié par le Conseil canadien de l’information sur la performance de l’ICCA. C’est un guide d’une grande pertinence pour les dirigeants et membres de conseils d’administration d’OBNL.

Amélioration de l’information annuelle des organismes sans but lucratif

L’information publiée par les organismes sans but lucratif suscite de plus en plus d’intérêt. Le présent document, intitulé Amélioration de l’information annuelle des organismes sans but lucratif et publié par l’Institut Canadien des Comptables Agréés (ICCA), a été élaboré par un groupe de travail réunissant des représentants d’organismes sans but lucratif qui ont été invités à faire part de leurs points de vue au Conseil canadien de l’information sur la performance de l’ICCA.

Le présent guide vise à aider les hauts dirigeants et les administrateurs d’organismes sans but lucratif à préparer des rapports annuels de qualité qui renforcent la reddition de comptes et fournissent une information utile aux parties prenantes. Les petites organisations dont les ressources sont limitées pourront envisager d’échelonner la mise en oeuvre des présentes indications sur un certain nombre d’années. Par ailleurs, bien que ces indications visent les petits et moyens organismes sans but lucratif, elles peuvent également présenter un intérêt pour les entités de plus grande taille. Les organismes publics qui appliquent les PCGR pour les organismes sans but lucratif, y compris ceux du secteur «HUCE» (hôpitaux, universités, collèges et écoles), devraient se reporter aux dispositions des énoncés de pratiques recommandées du Conseil sur la comptabilité dans le secteur public.

Oeuvrer sur des C.A. d’OBNL : Excellent apprentissage à des postes de direction de sociétés !


Voici un excellent article publié par Alice Korngold dans Huffington Post Canada qui montre éloquemment que s’investir dans des C.A. d’organisations à but non lucratif est une excellente préparation à des postes de direction de sociétés.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nonprofit Boards: Boot Camp for Corporate Executives

In my view, nonprofit board service is the ultimate leadership opportunity, giving business executives with the personal and professional skills they need in this new world. Furthermore, there’s a win-win in this leadership development arrangement. By serving on nonprofit and global nongovernmental (« NGO ») boards, business people provide invaluable skills, expertise, and resources in strengthening organizations that address vital issues, while gaining unique experience in working with people from diverse backgrounds on missions of common interest.

Cinq raisons qui expliquent pourquoi certains C.A. d’OBNL ont des problèmes d’efficacité


Voici cinq raisons qui expliquent pourquoi certains C.A. d’OBNL ont des problèmes d’efficacité … et quelques suggestions pour y remédier.

Have you ever sat down at a board meeting and realized that no one was excited to be there? There could be several reasons for that. Maybe it was the end of a long day for everyone. Maybe they ate too much for dinner and are tired. Or maybe, just maybe, it’s something you can do something about. Maybe there’s something that simply got sidetracked somewhere along the way that you can do something to remedy.

Group Think. Have you seen the studies that sent people out on the street to ask for help? An interesting situation unfolded. If there were just one or two people on the street, typically one of them would see what they could do to help. However if there were more than 2 or 3 people on the street, everyone appeared to wait to see if someone else would do something. In fact, in many cases, no one ended up doing anything. This situation often occurs in the nonprofit board room. Everyone is waiting to see what everyone else will do. One thing to try? Bring in an outside expert to provide a critical analysis of the situation. another option is to assign someone the role of the ‘devil’s advocate.’

Wrong People. When you were recruiting your board, did you ask them to be a part as a favor to you? Or did you ask them because you thought they couldn’t say no to you? If you have the wrong people and the wrong skill sets represented, take a step back, identify what your goals for the board are, and identify the skills you need to accomplish that. Then look out in the community and seek out people who are well known and who are passionate about your cause.

Unclear Expectations. When recruiting board members it is tempting to minimize the commitment that will be required of members. The right people will still want to be a part, and the people who are only trying to fill their resume will shy away. Having clear expectation will help ensure you are recruiting the right people.

No Accountability. Our board members are busy people and its easy for things to slip their mind. Generally speaking, they appreciate check-in and reminder calls. Don’t rely on emails for this. Just pick up the phone and call – or ask another board member to make that call. This idea has taken root and resulted in forward movement more than any other with the organizations I have worked with. Waiting a month until the next board meeting to bring something up again only results in things being delayed – or sidetracked permanently.

Magical’ Thinking. Growing up near a major tourist destination in Orlando Florida and having a mom who worked as a chaplain in the local emergency room opened my eyes to this phenomenon early. We would hear stories of people doing things that they wouldn’t do under normal situations. Something about pixie dust perhaps. But sometimes, in the nonprofit world, we have our own kind of pixie dust. It makes us think that nothing bad can come to the organization we work with and that things will fix themselves. We must be proactive and not fall into this trap.

5 Reasons Nonprofit Boards Stall – and What You Can Do About It

Quelles autres raisons peuvent amener les C.A. d’OBNL à tourner en rond et, selon votre expérience, que pouvez faire pour éviter les dysfonctionnements ?

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 ».

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.

Bulletin du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS) – Vol. 6, no. 1, Février 2012


Voici un aperçu de la dernière édition du Bulletin électronique du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS). Vous y trouverez un résumé de la 6e Grande conférence en gouvernance du CAS, au Parquet du Centre CDP Capital à Montréal ainsi qu’un compte rendu de la remise des prix Reconnaissance CAS 2012.

La conférence, « L’évolution des exigences imposées aux administrateurs de sociétés », présentée par M. Pierre Lortie, conseiller principal, affaires, chez Fraser Milner et Casgrain S.E.N.C.R.L., a réuni plus de 150 administrateurs, hauts dirigeants et partenaires du CAS.

 Grande conférence du CAS 2012 par M. Pierre Lortie

M. Lortie a jeté un regard critique sur les mécanismes de régulation et de gouvernance des sociétés canadiennes et québécoises, dans une perspective nord-américaine. Son allocution fut basée sur une recherche approfondie et rigoureuse de quatre thèmes fondamentaux en gouvernance, soit : l’évolution des exigences réglementaires, les recommandations pour une réforme de la gouvernance, le défi de la réglementation des offres publiques d’achat et de rachat, puis la sous-capitalisation des entreprises québécoises et leur faible présence à la cote des bourses.

Consultez l’allocution complète [+]

Dans le cadre de sa Grande conférence, tenue le 25 janvier dernier, le Collège a salué la contribution exceptionnelle de quatre formateurs en leur remettant le prix Reconnaissance CAS 2012. Ce prix est remis annuellement aux intervenants ayant gracieusement offert plus de 25 heures de formation en classe et ayant obtenu un taux de satisfaction très élevé de la part des participants. 

Prix Reconnaissance CAS 2012

De gauche à droite
Bridgit Courey, sociétaire et consultante principale en rémunération des cadres et du personnel, chez PCI-Perrault Conseil, Stéphan Drolet, associé, services-conseils, et responsable de la pratique de juricomptabilité de KPMG au Québec, Dominic Deneault, associé principal, stratégie et gouvernance durable, chez TREBORA Conseil, Guy Langlois, associé directeur canadien, services-conseils gestion des risques, chez KPMG

Bulletin du CAS Volume 6, numéro 1, Février 2012

Problème de l’asymétrie du pouvoir et de l’information entre Board et CEO !


Voici un excellent article paru dans The Conference Board Review (winter 2012), publié par Simon C.Y. Wong, associé à la firme d’investissement Governance for Owners. 

Il s’agit ici d’un sujet capital pour quiconque possède une grande expérience en gouvernance de sociétés. Pourtant, il y a peu d’auteurs qui l’aborde de front et il y très peu de recherches empiriques dans le domaine. Cet article présente clairement les enjeux du déséquilibre d’autorité entre le PDG et les membres du conseil d’administration. L’auteur donne plusieurs exemples d’asymétrie entre le pouvoir du CEO et celui de son Board et il suggère des pistes d’action intéressantes en vue de rétablir l’équilibre :

– Solide expérience de leadership et grande crédibilité du président du conseil

– Indépendance d’esprit des administrateurs

– Connaissances approfondies du secteur d’affaires par les membres du C.A.

– Limite de temps imposé au PDG (10 ans par exemple)

– Séparation des rôles de président du conseil et de PDG

Mismatch in the Boardroom

« But as any board member would acknowledge, it’s no small thing to challenge the CEO, especially when he’s serving as chairman as well. All too often, there’s a stature gap between the CEO and other directors, and that gap can seriously hinder boards’ effectiveness. Indeed, the consequences of boards’ failure to robustly challenge their “star” CEOs can be devastating…. To serve as an effective counterweight to the chief executive, boards should ensure that the statures of their non-executive members are equal to or greater than the CEO’s.

What’s the best way for boards to protect their standing and influence against an all-powerful CEO? By separating the roles of chairman and CEO. Even after years of corporate-governance experts’ urging, most U.S. companies still concentrate power at the very top—indeed, many firms reward a well-performing CEO with the chairman’s title. Nothing could more clearly signal a board’s acquiescence to a diminished role ».

Présider un C.A. : Un art à maîtriser


Richard Leblanc révèle les principaux facteurs qui rendent un président de C.A. efficace. Excellente lecture.
 
 
The former Prime Minister whispered in my ear before the board meeting of the bank, “Watch the way I chair this meeting, Richard.” Seeing a meeting chaired almost perfectly is a rarity so I paid attention and was not…

Présider un C.A. : Un art à maîtriser

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 !

Une formation universitaire en gouvernance de sociétés : Indispensable !


L’article met en évidence l’importance pour les «Business Schools» d’offrir une formation en gouvernance de sociétés, une formation qui s’adresse à des membres de C.A. ou à des membres potentiels de C.A.

À ce jour, peu d’écoles de gestion offrent une formation qui prépare les participants à vivre les expériences de la gouvernance des entreprises, plus particulièrement en favorisant l’apprentissage expérientiel, les jeux de rôle et la simulation. Voir cet excellent article du FT.

Most corporate boards are failing. I’m not only referring to the spectacular failures at Olympus, Yahoo or BP; most boards are not adding the value they could to corporations because they are not being educated properly. It…

Comment un administrateur principal (Lead Director) peut-il être efficace ?


 

Ma

Voici un excellent article publié sur le blogue du NACD qui présente les avantages de nommer un administrateur principal (Lead Director) losque le président du conseil (Chairman of the Board) n’a pas l’indépendance requise pour exercer ses fonctions. Peu d’attention a été accordée à cette fonction pourtant très utilisée dans les C.A. de grandes sociétés publiques (cotées en bourse).
 
Cet article est certainement l’un des plus explicites sur le sujet. Idéalement cependant, je crois que les C.A. devraient élire un président du conseil totalement indépendant de la direction. Mais, l’on comprendra que cette façon de faire puisse encore convenir dans plusieurs circonstances, notamment aux É.U. où 65 % des « Boards » ont un « Lead Director ».
 
NACDonline.org 
 
Comment un administrateur principal (Lead Director) peut-il être efficace ?
 
As lead directors’ influence grows, the requirements for success in the position must be considered.

Beaucoup d’OBNL adoptent le iPad : Efficace ?


Voici un article très intéressant sur l’augmentation fulgurante de l’utilisation des iPad par les membres de conseils d’administration, notamment par les C.A. d’OBNL. En août 2011, la firme australienne de consultation pour OBNL de Steven Bowman, Conscious Governance,  a effectué un sondage auprès de CEO et de membres de C.A. d’OBNL afin, entre autre, de savoir ce qu’ils pensaient  de l’utilisation des iPad dans les réunions de conseils.

Steven Bowman explique ce qui l’a surpris lors du survey : “I have seen an exponential growth in the use of iPads in the Board room since February 2011. What surprised me most were the comments from large numbers of Directors that their use of the iPad was actually assisting them to focus even more, and that the Board meetings were even more productive. And often these comments were coming from Directors who had refused to use laptops, sometimes even email, prior to the introduction of the iPad.” Voici les points saillants des résultats du sondage.

  1. There is keen interest in the possibilities of iPad use;
  2. Top concerns about iPad use in the boardroom are security and usability;
  3. The iPad is both useful and limited;
  4. The iPad receives high marks for increasing efficiency;
  5. Success relies on making sure each board member has a device and on providing good training.

Pour plus de détails, veuillez lire l’article : Nonprofit Boards and the iPad: a Good Fit ?

Beaucoup d’OBNL adoptent le iPad: Efficace ?

Nonprofit board meetings can be a nightmare of paper and mailing. But some boards are adopting e-governance, using online systems and portals to get board members prepped for meetings. That’s where iPads come into play. iPads…

Une formation universitaire en gouvernance de sociétés : Essentielle !


L’article met en évidence l’importance pour les «Business Schools» d’offrir une formation en gouvernance de sociétés, une formation qui s’adresse à des membres de C.A. ou à des membres potentiels de C.A.

À ce jour, peu d’écoles de gestion offrent une formation qui prépare les participants à vivre les expériences de la gouvernance des entreprises, plus particulièrement en favorisant l’apprentissage expérientiel, les jeux de rôle et la simulation. Voir cet excellent article du FT.

Most corporate boards are failing. I’m not only referring to the spectacular failures at Olympus, Yahoo or BP; most boards are not adding the value they could to corporations because they are not being educated properly. It…

Cinq prinicipes de base pour évaluer l’efficacité d’un C.A.


Très bonne analyse de A. Au, S S. Boren et E. De Angelis, publié par SpencerStuart, sur les principes de base relatifs à l’évaluation de l’efficacité des conseils d’administration.
 

Cinq prinicipes de base pour évaluer l’efficacité d’un C.A.

« Corporate boards today are expected to be more engaged, more knowledgeable and more effective than in the past. One tool that a growing number of boards are using to examine and improve their effectiveness is the board evaluation. Annual assessments have become the norm for boards in many countries, with nearly all listed companies in Canada, France, the U.K. and the U.S. conducting some sort of assessment each year ».