Étiquette : Stratégies

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 ».

Le processus de destitution des administrateurs | The Process of Removing Directors


Voici un article très explicite publié sur le blogue de Richard Leblanc, concernant le statut des membres de conseils d’administration. Le point de vue avancé par Richard est que les actionnaires devraient avoir une voix plus prédominante sur le choix des administrateurs qui doivent rester sur le conseil.

Le processus de destitution des administrateurs | The Process of Removing Directors

 

« It’s very rare for a director to be removed from a board. Only 2% of directors who step down are dismissed or not reelected, according to Stanford researchers. Most directors get re-elected and continue serving. Some directors serve on boards for up to 25 years. About a year ago, I counted 30 directors who served on Canada’s five bank boards for more than nine years. Nine years is the upper limit for independence now in the U.K.

P1030704

A board does not have the power to remove another director, even if that director is performing poorly. If the director digs in and refuses to step down, that director must be replaced at the annual meeting. It is rare for shareholders to remove a director at the meeting if he or she is re-nominated. Only 93 directors failed to win majority support, out of a total universe of some 50,000, as of recent figures ».

Votre entreprise est-elle préparée à prendre en compte les risques environnementaux et sociaux ? Et votre C.A. ?


Les actionnaires exercent de plus en plus de pressions sur les C.A. afin que ceux-ci prennent en compte les risques environnementaux et sociaux. Voici un article publié par E&Y qui fait un excellent résumé de la situation. À lire.

 

Aujourd’hui, c’est le premier anniversaire du blogue Gouvernance   |  Jacques Grisé et ce billet est le 365e de l’année, ce qui représente une moyenne d’une publication par jour. Je me propose de tenir le rythme pour les prochaines années.

 

Faites de mon blogue votre source d’information indispensable sur les activités et les actualités en gouvernance de sociétés. Merci.

 

English: Risk Management road sign
English: Risk Management road sign (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

« Shareholders are asking boards to mitigate risks tied to evolving regulations, shifting global weather patterns and heightened public awareness of climate change issues. Summary: Proposals from shareholders reveal that investors find their company’s social and environmental policies correlated with its risk management strategy — and ultimately its financial performance. We estimate that half of all shareholder resolutions in 2011 will center on social and environmental issues. »

 

 

In 2011, shareholder proposals are expected to focus on the following issues:

 

  1. Social/environmental. Expected to make up the largest portion of proposals this year, these proposals will focus on political contributions and lobbying, human rights and labor practices, sustainability and greenhouse gases, environmental risk and toxic chemicals.
  2. Board-focused matters. Expected to represent the second-largest category of proposals, these initiatives will center on board composition, independent leadership, majority voting to elect directors and board declassification.
  3. Strategic and antitakeover-related-issues. Typically these proposals seek to eliminate supermajority vote requirements, and to allow shareholders to call special meetings or act by written consent.
  4. Executive compensation. As this is the first year for mandatory say-on-pay provisions giving shareholders the right to vote on executive pay, fewer proposals will relate to compensation arrangements.

Échec de la gouvernance à RIM | Un coup d’oeil au C.A. !


Richard Leblanc, dans un article publié dans Canadian Business, présente une solide analyse de la composition du conseil d’administration de RIM .  À partir des discussions publiées dans le groupe Boards and Advisors  de LinkedIn, il a identifié les changements requis afin de  renouveler le « Board » de RIM. Bonne lecture !

 

Échec de la gouvernance à RIM | Un coup d’oeil au C.A. !

 « It took RIM until 2012 to accede to having an independent board chair, a practice recommended almost 20  years ago. At this week’s annual general meeting, the minimalist shuffle toward corporate governance continued. Chair Barbara Stymiest, a former banker and regulator, acknowledged there were gaps in board skills.

Image representing Research In Motion as depic...
Image via CrunchBase

 “Gaps” is an understatement. This board does not have the industry track record, or clout to push back against management ».

   

Huit pièges à éviter en matière de diversité des C.A. !


Un autre excellent article de Richard Leblanc dans Canadian Business. C’est certainement l’article le plus percutant et le plus éclairant sur le sujet de la « diversité » des conseils d’administration !  À lire par toutes les personnes intéressées par la bonne gouvernance.  Voici les huit pièges à considérer. L’article est fascinant !
 

The eight traps of boardroom diversity

 

English: Whisky Society boardroom table lookin...
English: Whisky Society boardroom table looking towards president (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

« There are myths and vested interests in the movement toward boardroom diversity now underway in several countries. In this post, I’ll consider the “traps” and embedded myths, and in a later post propose solutions.

1. The “Defining diversity downward” trap

2. The “Business case” trap

3. The “Be careful” trap

4. The “Entrenchment” trap

5. The “We want a CEO” trap

6. The “It’s whom you know” trap

7. The “Prior experience” trap

8. The “Pipeline” or “Shallow pool” trap »

Quoi de neuf en gouvernance de sociétés ?


Deloitte vous présente une collection de documents récents portant sur la gouvernance des sociétés privées, cotées, d’états ou sans but lucratif. Vous devez souscrire pour avoir accès à la page ainsi qu’à l’outil de recherche mais le service est gratuit et le Centre de la gouvernance Deloitte est exceptionnel.
 
English: Office Deloitte Vienna Deutsch: Bürog...
English: Office Deloitte Vienna Deutsch: Bürogebäude Deloitte Wien (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
 

What’s New | Center for Corporate Governance

L’IFA publie un document phare sur la gouvernance des sociétés cotées en France


L’IFA publie un document phare sur la gouvernance des sociétés cotées dont l’objectif est d’attirer en France les investisseurs étrangers en les informant des atouts de l’hexagone.

 La gouvernance des sociétés cotées à l’usage des investisseurs 

Voici comment on présente l’ouvrage.

La qualité de la gouvernance des sociétés françaises constitue indiscutablement une valeur ajoutée et un renforcement de la sécurité économique et juridique. Afin de faire connaître ces pratiques en dehors de nos frontières, l’Institut Français des Administrateurs et Paris Ile-de-France Capitale Economique, en partenariat avec le Conseil Supérieur de l’Ordre des Experts-Comptables et la Compagnie Nationale des Commissaires aux Comptes, publient « La gouvernance des sociétés cotées à l’usage des investisseurs ».

Cette synthèse sur les pratiques sociétales de gouvernance en France a été réalisée à partir de l’expertise d’un groupe de travail piloté par la Commission Internationale de l’IFA présidée par Marie-Ange Andrieux et regroupant des institutions du monde économique et financier. Elle se veut, à la fois, un outil d’information des investisseurs étrangers et un document de valorisation de la gouvernance de nos sociétés.

« L’étude réalisée montre, en effet, que les pratiques de gouvernance françaises des sociétés cotées se situent déjà au niveau des meilleurs standards européens et internationaux, indique ainsi Daniel Lebègue, Président de l’IFA. Ces pratiques devraient poursuivre leur dynamique de progression, dans les grands groupes comme dans les entreprises moyennes, et même s’étendre aux entreprises non cotées. Équilibre des pouvoirs, performance des instances de gouvernance, à travers, entre autres, les différents comités, et transparence sont des qualités dont peuvent se prévaloir aujourd’hui nombre de Conseils d’administration ; Qualités indiscutablement séduisantes pour des investisseurs internationaux… Et qu’il s’agit donc de leur faire connaître ! »

Paris
Paris (Photo credit: citronate)

« La qualité de la gouvernance des entreprises est devenue un facteur significatif d’attractivité et de confiance; il contribue à améliorer la réputation d’un pays ou d’une région économique vis-à-vis de ses partenaires industriels et financiers, souligne Pierre Simon, Président de Paris IDF Capitale Economique. Dans un contexte de concurrence mondiale, c’est un vrai atout. Nous l’avons en France. »

Les atouts de la gouvernance des sociétés cotées françaises sont multiples et détaillées dans la synthèse :

– Le poids prépondérant de la « soft law » par rapport à la réglementation, au regard des sources de la gouvernance,
– La composition des Conseils (indépendance, diversité, mixité, compétences…) et l’efficacité de leur fonctionnement (comités, secrétariat général…),
– La qualité de la transparence de l’information tant financière qu’extra financière,
– La clarté de la communication sur la rémunération des mandataires sociaux,
– Le bon équilibre des pouvoirs entre les actionnaires et le Conseil d’Administration, 
– Le respect du droit des actionnaires et les outils mis à disposition des non-résidents au service de l’engagement actionnarial,
– Une bonne gestion des risques, facilitée par le rôle efficient des organismes de vérification et de contrôle.

Connaître ecoDa (European Confederation of Directors’ Associations)


EcoDa (European Confederation of Directors’ Associations), est une organisation dont l’objectif est de repésenter les positions des administrateurs de sociétés européennes en matière de gouvernance à l’échelle européenne. Il est donc important de connaître la mission, les objectifs et les activités de cette organisation afin d’être au fait de l’évolution des règles de gouvernance au parlement européen.
 
Le Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS) est membre de ecoDa dans la catégorie RESEARCH ASSOCIATES. Je vous encourage donc à visiter ce site.
 
 
European Confederation of Directors’ Associations
 

ecoDa, the European Confederation of Directors’ Associations, is a not-for-profit association acting as the “European voice of directors ”, active since March 2005 and based in Brussels .

Through its national institutes of directors (the main national institutes existing in Europe ), ecoDa represents around fifty-five thousand board directors from across the EU. ecoDa’s member organisations represent board directors from the largest public companies to the smallest private firms, both listed and unlisted.

ecoDa’s mission is to promote Corporate Governance at large, to promote the role of directors towards shareholders and corporate stakeholders, and to promote the success of its national institutes.

Révision du code de gouvernance de Singapour


Le nouveau code de gouvernance de Singapour contient des changements significatifs en ce sens qu’il insiste sur les standards éthiques à respecter et la notion de parties prenantes.  De plus, il précise que les entreprises doivent considérer les facteurs liés au développement durable dans la formulation de la stratégie. Cet article, paru dans csr-asia.com, est intéressant à lire parce qu’il illustre clairement la tendance à concevoir des codes de gouvernance semblables à l’échelle mondiale.

 

CSR Asia – Corporate Social Responsibility in Asia

English: Integrated boardroom designed and ins...
English: Integrated boardroom designed and installed by EDG in 2003. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
« These changes are and address areas of corporate governance best practice – director independence, board composition, director training, multiple directorships, alternate directors, remuneration practices and disclosures, risk management, as well as shareholder rights and roles plus fundamental changes to the very first principle, which sets out that ‘every company should be headed by an effective board’….

 
However, the Revised Code also included a fundamental change to the very first principle, which sets out that ‘every company should be headed by an effective board’.   Previously the 2005 Code of Corporate Governance had set out that the role of the board was to do all those things stated below in black text. The Revised Code added the text in red, broadening its requirements to cover sustainability and ethical standards and embedding them in company strategy. Arguably, a huge shift.
  1. provide entrepreneurial leadership, set strategic objectives, and ensure that the necessary financial and human resources are in place for the company to meet its objectives;
  2. establish a framework of prudent and effective controls which enables risks to be assessed and managed, including safeguarding of shareholders’ interests and the company’s assets;
  3. review management performance;
  4. identify the key stakeholder groups and recognise that their perceptions affect the company’s reputation;
  5. set the company’s values and standard (including ethical standards), and ensure that obligations to shareholders and other(s) stakeholders are understood and met; and
  6. consider sustainability issues, e.g. environmental and social factors, as part of its strategic formulation ».

The Director’s Dilemma – Juillet 2012


Voici un cas présenté par Julie Garland McLelland www.mclellan.com.au. À chaque mois Julie présente un cas qui est analysé par trois experts. Vous pouvez vous abonner à la série Director’s Dilemma.

Welcome to the July 2012 edition of The Director’s Dilemma.

This newsletter provides case studies that have been written to help you to develop your judgement as a company director. The case studies are based upon real life; they focus on complex and challenging boardroom issues which can be resolved in a variety of ways. There is often no one ‘correct’ answer; just an answer that is more likely to work given the circumstances and personalities of the case.

These are real life cases; the names and some circumstances have been altered to ensure anonymity. Each potential solution to the case study has different pros and cons for the individuals and companies concerned. Every month this newsletter presents an issue and several responses.

Consider: Which response would you choose and why?

Miriam is the Regional Managing Director for a large multi-national company. She oversees a group of companies that manufacture and sell products across the region and also export from it. One of the subsidiaries in her group is in a country that has a small market for the products and is fundamentally unprofitable. She has recommended on several occasions that the board allow her to close this subsidiary and supply that market by importing product from other group companies. She has backed her recommendations with detailed market analyses and projections as well as implementation plans.

Each time the board has denied her request and she is forced to continue to see the subsidiary drain her region’s profits and the shareholders’ returns. Last time the board met in her region she made the usual request and was denied again. She lost her temper and said some fairly harsh words in an unprofessional tone.

Miriam is a professional manager and has produced good results so her transgression was forgiven. However the board is, once again, meeting in her region and she has another invitation to present her recommended strategy to them.

What should Miriam do?

Eli’s Answer

Before addressing the board again, Miriam needs to find out why its members have so far refused to close the subsidiary. There may be a surface agenda as well as a hidden agenda, and she needs to uncover both. Once she finds out what the real concerns are, she needs to factor them into any proposed solution, which may be something other than her first choice.

When proposing the eventual solution, Miriam should first acknowledge respectfully the concerns about the proposed closing, and then explain the challenge she has in balancing these concerns with the need to be fiscally viable. The fact that she acknowledges the board’s concerns with utmost respect will likely make it easier for the board to listen to her proposed solution. Again, the proposed solution would probably not be an outright shutdown, but one that would somehow optimize the positive outcomes and minimize the risks.

Of course, there is a possibility that Miriam will discover that the board’s resistance to a shutdown is not legitimate but is emotionally or personally-based (e.g., the board Chair is the one who orchestrated the start-up of this subsidiary and takes personal offence to any suggestion of a shut down). If this is the case, Miriam may consider whether she can tolerate working in this setting. If her professionalism is substantially compromised, she should consider resigning.

One other issue to consider is whether the board should even be involved in decisions to start-up or wind-down a subsidiary, or whether such decisions should be delegated to the CEO who would make them on strictly professional considerations. However, such a change would require a revision of board policy to delegate more authority to management and remain focused primarily on strategic priorities, fiduciary duties, and organizational policies.

Eli Mina is a consultant on board effectiveness, shared decision making, and meeting procedures. He is the author of « 101 Boardroom Problems and How to Solve Them » and is based in Vancouver, Canada.

Julie’s Answer

Miriam must set the correct strategic context for a board discussion. She should investigate and understand the reasons the subsidiary was established and the assumptions presented to the board when they approved establishment. She should ask:

  1. Were the assumptions wrong?
  2. Were the assumptions right but the world has now changed?
  3. Have the reasons for setting up in such a small market ceased to exist?
  4. Can the aims of the subsidiary be addressed by another strategy?

Loss of temper (or any emotional control) is not acceptable behaviour for a senior executive. Miriam is lucky to have a second chance. She must make the most of this by establishing a strong shared understanding of strategy for the subsidiary. She needs to present the facts and align herself with the board by building agreement about what the subsidiary was set up to accomplish before she asks the board to endorse a change of strategy.

She then needs to demonstrate that the board can rely on her leadership to implement the strategy she is recommending. This is not just a question of financial logic and brief implementation plans; she must address risks including legal issues around staff redundancies and closure of facilities. The board needs to satisfy itself that the strategy recommended will be satisfactorily implemented under her leadership.

Board time is precious and Miriam should write a good board paper so that all directors are able to engage in a productive discussion and confidently make a decision.

If the board is still unwilling to close the subsidiary she will just have to carry on running it. By engaging in a proper high level discussion Miriam should gain an insight into the reasons for retaining a loss-making subsidiary. She may even find that she agrees with the directors.

Miriam needs to relax. It is the board’s decision, not hers. She has done her duty by providing the information required to facilitating a proper debate and decision.

Julie Garland McLellan is a practising non-executive director and board consultant based in Sydney, Australia.

Michelle’s Answer

Miriam is forgetting that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting different results! If the board is saying ‘no’ – then it’s ‘no’! The good news for Miriam is that ‘no’ is just feedback that she didn’t properly understand her audience’s attitude. Miriam simply hasn’t reflected to the board that she understands their perspective before seeking approval. ‘No’ means try again, just do something different!

To date Miriam has presented her logic, data and analysis and only covered what she wanted to say, and it’s not working. Miriam should remember, ‘it’s not about me, it’s all about the audience’. I suggest Miriam think about the issues from the board member’s (not her own) perspective. She should ask herself, ‘what is this audience thinking, feeling and doing in relation to this issue?’ She could phone each board member prior to the board meeting and elicit their concerns. She could seek feedback from her direct reports as they are possibly more connected to the issues at the coal face. I expect Miriam would find that her previous approach was misdirected. Instead of focusing on profitability (her main concern) there’s probably a different matter getting in the way of their approval, such as a prior commitment to the staff in the unprofitable subsidiary or to the wider financial market regarding the closure of the subsidiary.

We are more likely to be influenced by our emotions first and then substantiate our views with logic and data. It’s important that Miriam dedicates some time in the opening of her upcoming board presentation to re-establish rapport with her board. Only then is she in a position to deliver the relevant facts and data based on her assessment of their perspective.

This matter is important, so I encourage her to allocate the time important matters deserve. Miriam must plan her approach and rehearse until she is confident. A professional presentation skills coach can help dramatically with the necessary preparation for this type of business presentation.

Michelle Bowden, CSP is a Master of Influence and presentations coach. She is the author of « Don’t Picture me Naked » – how to present your ideas and influence people using techniques that actually work. She is based in Sydney, Australia.

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed above are general in nature and are designed to help you to develop your judgement as a director. They are not a definitive legal ruling. Names and some circumstances in the case study have been changed to ensure anonymity. Contributors to this newsletter comment in the context of their own jurisdiction; readers should check their local laws and regulations as they may be very different.

This newsletter – If you have any ideas for improving the newsletter please let me know. If you are reading a forwarded copy please visit my website and sign up for your own subscription.

www.mclellan.com.au | PO Box 97 Killara NSW 2071 email julie@mclellan.com.au | phone +61 2 9499 8700 | mobile +61 411 262 470 | fax +61 2 9499 8711

Le C.A. et l’utilisation des médias sociaux


Excellent document de Santiago Chaher et James David Spellman paru dans Global Corporate Governance Forum Publication. La publication présente plusieurs facteurs qui devraient inciter les conseils d’administration à se préoccuper sérieusement des médias sociaux. À lire. 

Corporate Governance and Social Media

« What should board members know about social media as it relates to a company’s ability to do business and safeguard its image? And what is the board’s role in helping a company make the best use of social media—and defending against its misuse? Two corporate governance practitioners provide insights on the power of new social technologies to shape boards’ decisions and bolster stakeholders’ influence ».
 
Image representing Twitter as depicted in Crun...
Image via CrunchBase

« In short, today’s corporate directors have the ‘necessary’ skills in terms of compliance and financial performance, but not the ‘sufficient’ skills in terms of strategic or technological know how, » says Barry Libert, chief executive officer of OpenMatters, a consultancy for boards. « Why? Because for years, astute corporate directors believed the tools that companies like Facebook and Twitter offered weren’t essential. In their view, these new means of communications were for kids, had little, if any, business value, and created minimal strategic, operational or financial risks. Wow, were they wrong. »

This circumstance will change as business and personal needs require more extensive use of social media.For a 2011 Deloitte questionnaire, 79 percent of all public company respondents reported that their board’s use of technology is increasing.

En rappel : Un nouveau modèle de gouvernance de sociétés


Voici, en rappel, un excellent billet de Richard Leblanc qui a fait un travail colossal de synthèse afin de dégager les bases d’un modèle de gouvernance, bâti à partir des nombreuses et riches discussions dans le groupe Boards & Advisers de LinkedIn. Richard a développé un modèle vraiment très pertinent que vous pouvez télécharger à partir de son blogue. Je vous encourage à lire ce document synthèse qui est le fruit de centaines d’échanges sur LinkedIn. Par la même occasion, je vous invite à vous inscrire à son blogue et à suivre son groupe Boards & Advisers sur LinkedIn.

Shareholder Spring and A New Model of Corporate Governance

« Shareholder activism at CP Rail, Yahoo, Research in Motion, Chesapeake Energy and BMC Software continues, trying to prevent the destruction of billions of dollars of shareholder value. Shareholders rejected Citigroup’s, Aviva’s, Knight Capital’s, FirstMerit’s and Cairn Energy’s executive pay packages. Activists and hedge funds such as Bill Ackman at Pershing Square, Dan Loeb of Third Point Capital, Vic Alboini at Jaguar Financial Corp., Paul Singer at Elliot Management and Carl Icahn reveal defects in the current corporate governance system. What do they all have in common? And are boards listening ? »

Comment un PDG peut-il mieux communiquer avec son C.A. ?


Voici un article paru dans blog.openviewpartners.com qui montre la nécessité d’établir une bonne communication entre le PDG et le C.A. Si les réunions avec le C.A. sont un cauchemar pour vous, dépêchez-vous de lire cet article !

How to Take Advantage of Your Board of Directors

« It’s no secret a lot of CEOs aren’t big fans of their boards of directors. They derive very little value from them and in some cases find the board to be an utter distraction. Even seasoned CEOs who have managed to assemble a valuable team of advisors and mentors sometimes struggle with board management. They’re not sure how often to communicate with them, how involved they should allow board members to be, or in which areas the board could provide the most value…

The most common Board of Directors (BOD) challenges are often functions of these three issues:

  1. You don’t communicate with your BOD: If the only time you talk with your board is during quarterly meetings, an information gap will inevitably exist. That can cause a huge operational disconnect that results in ineffective and inefficient meetings. Too much of the BOD meetings are spent getting caught up, versus having a meaningful dialogue about the key issues.
  2. You don’t want to show your weaknesses: CEOs are very often hesitant to open up and reveal their weaknesses. This may be born out of a bad experience in the past or just pure ego. They worry that if they’re candid about the challenges the business is facing, they’ll be viewed as incompetent.
  3. You don’t want to bother them: Entrepreneurs too often assume that their board members are too busy to be bothered with seemingly menial issues, and they feel like a nuisance if they ask for help ». 

Administrateurs de sociétés | Tendances, défis et opportunités


Excellent article de Susan Shultz du The Board Institute Inc. Vous trouverez, dans le document ci-dessous, 11 éléments-clés qui confrontent les administrateurs de sociétés aujourd’hui. À lire.

English: Frame of reference for research of in...
English: Frame of reference for research of integrateg Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Administrateurs de sociétés | Tendances, défis et opportunités

« Boards of directors matter — and now they matter more than ever. The market continues to demand increased transparency and accountability. New compliance mandates, regulation and shareholder activism are the drivers. Boards and their constituencies are clamoring for more strategic engagement and value-add by the directors. Yet this trend seems to be in stark contrast to the drumbeat for compliance and regulation. How can boards balance the pressures from their attorneys, auditors and regulators to be risk averse (Read: safe) with Wall Street calling for creativity, innovation and job creation? Challenges and opportunities for boards have never been greater, and good governance is more than just compliance ».

Comment l’attention accordée aux stakeholders contribue-t-elle au développement durable et la création de valeur à long terme ?


Voici un rapport de Deloitte sur l’importance à accorder aux parties prenantes (stakeholders), dont les actionnaires (shareholders), dans la réalisation du développement durable et la création de valeur à long terme.

Vous pouvez télécharger le document en version PDF

How stakeholders view a company, what they expect of the company, and how they understand the company’s impact on society and the environment, in addition to its financial results, can affect business value. Determining the impact on value of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues to multiple stakeholders is becoming central to how many companies craft their sustainability strategy and report on their sustainability performance. This opens the door to a new vision of the business objective: enlightened value maximization, which seeks greater alignment between various stakeholders to generate long-term business value.

This paper describes:

  1. The impact shareholders and other stakeholders can have on corporate valuations by identifying and reacting to ESG risks
  2. How stakeholder perception of the company and its actions are likely to drive the corporate agenda, including ESG performance goal setting
  3. Strategic steps that can help a company mitigate the impact of stakeholder action on its bottom line, cost of capital and risk, and leverage new opportunities to generate business value.

CRÉATION D’UNE CHAIRE DE RECHERCHE EN GOUVERNANCE DE SOCIÉTÉS


Le 13 juin 2012 – Le Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS) est fier d’annoncer aujourd’hui sa participation à  la création de la nouvelle Chaire de recherche en gouvernance de sociétés de la Faculté des sciences de l’administration de l’Université Laval. La chaire de recherche est créée par le Programme pour l’avancement de l’innovation, de la recherche et de l’enseignement (PAIRE) de l’Université Laval et est financée à hauteur de 1 M$ par l’Autorité des marchés financiers et le CAS qui y verseront respectivement 100 000 $ par année pour les cinq prochaines années.

Nouvelle chaire de recherche vouée au développement et à la promotion de la bonne gouvernance  

M. Jean Bédard, professeur à la Faculté des sciences de l’administration de l’Université Laval a été nommé titulaire de la Chaire. Expert de réputation internationale dans les domaines de l’audit et de la gouvernance d’entreprise, il enseigne le contrôle interne ainsi que l’audit aux trois cycles universitaires et au Collège des administrateurs de sociétés.

« Le Collège se devait de bâtir un partenariat solide avec une équipe de chercheurs pour assurer une veille, innover, publier, renforcer la connaissance en gouvernance et, ultimement, contribuer au maintien du haut calibre de la formation offerte par le Collège et de sa position de leader en gouvernance », a souligné Bruno Déry, président et chef de la direction du CAS.

Pour connaître tous les détails concernant la Chaire de recherche en gouvernance de sociétés, consultez le communiqué.

Comment composer avec les médias traditionnels ?


The 24-hour news cycle
The 24-hour news cycle (Photo credit: West Point Public Affairs)

Voici un court article présentant les meilleures pratiques dans la manière de faire face aux médias traditionnels. Les conseils s’appliquent essentiellement aux membres de la haute direction des entreprises mais plusieurs enseignements peuvent être utiles à tous les gestionnaires.

Comment composer avec les médias ?

Voici un extrait de l’article publié dans inhouseaccess.com

The panelists addressed the tension between the pressure of the 24-hour news cycle and lawyers’ natural inclination to get all the facts and avoid damaging admissions. They emphasized the importance of preparation, from thinking about how to handle a crisis and having a crisis communications plan, to individual media training and preparing for interviews in advance rather than just winging it. There were differing views regarding “on the record” (put the statement in quotes and identify the speaker), “background” (put the statement in quotes but only provide general description of speaker) and “off the record” (cannot attribute or use). Regardless of the “rules of engagement,” everyone agreed that it was crucial to have a clear understanding of the facts, focus of story and reporter intent. Each panelist emphasized a common theme: Be clear and concise. Villa did just that when he said, “Know your message, stick to it, be brief, be clear, be confident and shut up!”

Particularly noteworthy take-aways:

  • Remember that discussions with your PR representatives may not be privileged. (John Villa)
  • Avoid statements that enrage your adversary, especially when it is the Department of Justice or the State Attorney General. (John Villa)
  • It is dangerous to have the GC inform the press; she knows too much. (John Villa)
  • If you are going to be interviewed, practice your answer. (Pete Williams)
  • When you make affirmative statements, be sure of your facts. (Bob Bostrom)
  • Speak clearly (e.g., in English – not complicated legal jargon). (Pete Williams)
  • First, do the right thing; then, it is easier to talk about it. (David Goodfriend)
  • Know your client and its culture, as it will be major factor in how you deal with the media. (Lisa Joyner)
  • Bring your public affairs professionals in early so they are aware of what is going on. (Pete Williams)

Whether the story is about the company facing civil liability or accusations of criminal conduct, a bad turn in business, an employee complaint or an unhappy customer –– you must be ready to field calls from the media, have a strategy for responding to questions and be prepared to address the difficult questions. And, as Joyner reminded us with a quote from Will Rogers, “Never miss a good chance to shut up!”

Capsules vidéos en gouvernance – Le comité d’audit et la gouvernance stratégique


Série « capsules d'experts »

Le Collège des administrateurs de sociétés est fier de présenter les huit vidéos de sa première série « Capsules d’experts ». Huit experts du Collège partagent une réflexion le temps de 2 à 3 minutes en se prononçant sur des sujets d’actualité en gouvernance. Deux nouvelles « capsules d’experts » sont maintenant en ligne; elles ont pour thèmes « Le comité d’audit » par M. André Courville et « La gouvernance stratégique » par M. Yan Cimon.

par André Courville

Associé principal, Ernst & Young

par Yan Cimon

Professeur de management, Université Laval

Le rôle accru du C.A. dans la gouvernance des projets en TI


Voici un court article paru dans Agile IT Governance  (IT Governance for Board Members) qui réfère à une étude de McKinsey sur les stratégies d’affaires à adopter en matière de technologie de l’information (TI). Il est clair que les membres de conseils d’administration (C.A.) sont de plus en plus sollicités sur ces questions et qu’ils doivent être en mesure d’évaluer les risques liés à l’acquisition et la mise en oeuvre des projets en TI. Comme vous le verrez ci-dessous, dans l’extrait de l’article, il y a des situations qui exigent une très forte implication des Boards. Pour plus d’information, vous pouvez télécharger le rapport de McKinsey.

A McKinsey survey on information technology strategy and spending affirms the importance of IT for business success. Respondents are aware of the risks from information-and technology-based disruptions. They realize that information and technology capabilities are fundamental to improve their business performance and competitive advantage. More companies are gaining competitive advantage by leveraging information technology for their benefit. But with progress also come some risks. Board members increasingly recognize they need to actively oversee such risks.

There are some situations where the board expressly needs to consider getting involved in IT oversight. These situations are where:

  • Information technology is an integral part of the company’s services
  • The company has a strategic program to capitalize on emerging technologies
  • The company is executing a major technology implementation project with a long installation period and significant costs
  • The company stores highly confidential information about customers or stakeholders
  • The company has international operations with separate technology systems

Le président du CAS, Richard Drouin, récipiendaire du titre de Fellow de l’Institute of Corporate Directors (ICD)


Lors de son 15e Gala annuel qui s’est tenu le 30 mai 2012 à Edmonton, l’Institute of Corporate Directors (ICD) a décerné le titre de Fellow (F.ICD) à M. Richard Drouin, C.C., O.Q., c.r., président du conseil de la Corporation Financière Stonebridge et du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés. Le titre de Fellow est attribué à des chefs de file du milieu des affaires canadiens et à des administrateurs qui ont fait preuve d’une conduite exemplaire en matière de gouvernance dans les salles de conseils de tout le pays.

Richard Drouin
Président du conseil du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS)
Avocat-conseil, McCarthy Tétrault

Quatre administrateurs canadiens sont reconnus pour leur conduite exemplaire dans les salles de conseils

« Cette année, la qualité des mises en nomination pour le titre de Fellow a impressionné le comité de sélection, ce qui a rendu encore plus difficile sa tâche de choisir uniquement quatre récipiendaires. La liste d’administrateurs chevronnés qu’on lui a proposée reflète l’importance d’une gouvernance efficace, la volonté de la renforcer et l’appréciation collective envers ceux et celles qui axent leurs efforts sur l’obligation de rendre compte de leurs actions et sur la surveillance dans les salles de conseils », a souligné la présidente du Comité de sélection des candidats au titre de fellow de l’ICD, Mme Mary Mogford, IAS.A., F.ICD (2002).

« Les Fellows 2012 ont été mis en nomination par leurs pairs, puis choisis par les membres du comité de sélection indépendant, composé de Sir Graham Day, F.ICD, M. Robert Després, O.C., G.O.Q., F.ICD, Dr Gail Cook-Bennett, O.C., F.ICD, M. James Gray, O.C., A.O.E., LL.D, F.ICD,  et Mme Elizabeth Watson, LL.B., IAS.A. Le comité a jugé les candidats en fonction de certains critères tels le leadership, la reddition de compte aux parties prenantes, les contributions en matière de gouvernance, les relations avec la haute direction, le souci d’améliorer l’efficacité du conseil et la collégialité. Le comité a également tenu compte des réalisations hors de la salle de conseil, notamment les publications, les conférences et les activités d’intérêt communautaire ».

Trois autres administrateurs de sociétés ont également été nommés fellow de l’ICD. Il s’agit de Mme Janice G. Rennie, FCA, administratrice, Teck Resources Limited (Edmonton, Alb.); M. Robert Bertram, MBA, CFA, IAS.A., administrateur, Nexen Inc. (Aurora, Ont.); et Mme Beverley A. Briscoe, FCA, administratrice, Goldcorp Inc. (Vancouver, C.-B.).

Félicitations aux récipiendaires !