autres publications | Page 2

Selon une étude parue le 8 juin 2016 sur le blog de Harvard (« Women Directors and Participation on Key Committees »), la féminisation des CA progressent mais davantage dans les comités du CA.

Women corporate directors globally are showing greater proportional gains on occupying key board committees than on boards overall, according to a new analysis by leading governance and ESG data and analytics provider Institutional Shareholder Services.

Point intéressant sue le Canada :

Among markets outside Europe, boards of Australian companies showed the greatest proportional gains for overall female boardroom representation between 2014 and 2016 with a 4.9 percent increase, and with female directors now making up just under 21 percent of all directorships at those companies. Canadian companies analyzed saw the greatest growth outside of Europe in female representation on audit committees, jumping 5.6 percentage points during that same period.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

En mai 2016, l’Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators (ICSA) a publié avec Ernst & Young un rapport sur le rôle du comité de nomination : « The Nomination Committee – Coming out of the Shadows ».

While its role may be less clearly defined than that of the audit committee, and its profile lower than that of the remuneration committee, it is arguably the most important of the three. It plays a pivotal role in appointing directors to the board and, if the board lacks the right balance, knowledge, skills and attributes, the likelihood of it and its committees operating effectively is greatly reduced.

Concernant sa mission et ses membres, il est précisé les points suivants :

1. What the appropriate role of the committee should be, e.g., whether the committee should look at executive talent if it does not already do so, and whether the board would benefit from combining the committee into a nomination and governance committee.

2. Whether the following processes are clearly linked: the discussion of current board composition and future composition in light of the company’s strategy, the executive and senior talent succession planning and company strategy, the outcome of the board evaluation exercise and board succession plans, and the link between board evaluations and development and training plans.

3. The existence of a two-pronged approach to identify succession plans in both emergency and steady-state situations.

À propos de la planification de la relève et la détection de talent, le rapport mentionne relativement au comité :

1. The extent to which nomination committee looks across the market and internally to identify four or five potential successors to the CEO.

2. How deeply into the organisation the committee should be looking to identify future talent.

3. The best way to develop the skills of future executive leaders in the business.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

L’EHRC vient de publier un guide « Business and human rights – A five-step guide for company boards » bien intéressant pour les CA. Comme le précise ce document : « We recommend that boards should follow five steps to ensure that their company is fulfilling its responsibility to respect human rights in a robust and coherent manner that meets the expectations of the UN Guiding Principles and UK statutory reporting obligations. Boards should be aware of the company’s salient, or most severe, human rights risks, and ensure ».

The following are the five steps that it is recommended boards should follow to ensure that their company is fulfilling its responsibility to meet human rights in a robust and coherent manner that meets the expectations of the UN Guiding Principles and UK statutory reporting obligations:

1. the company should embed the responsibility to respect human rights into its culture, knowledge and practices;
2. the company should identify and understands its salient, or most severe, risks to human rights;
3. the company should systematically address its salient, or most severe, risks to human rights and provide for remedies when needed;
4. the company should engage with stakeholders to inform its approach to addressing human rights risks; and
5. the company should report on its salient, or most severe, human rights risks and meet regulatory reporting requirements.

Attention : encore une fois, tout cela n’est que du droit international et donc du droit « mou ». Ce guide l’exprime très bien en ces termes : « The Guiding Principles do not create any new international legal obligations on companies, but they can help boards to operate with respect for human rights and meet their legal responsibilities set out in domestic laws ».

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourain

L’Autorité prudentielle de la Banque d’Angleterre vient de publier un Supervisory Statement intitulé « Corporate governance: Board responsibilities » (SS5/16, mars 2016).

The Prudential Regulation Authority has published a policy statement and accompanying supervisory statement concerning the responsibilities of boards.

The purpose of this supervisory statement is to identify, for the boards1 of firms regulated by the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), those aspects of governance to which the PRA attaches particular importance and to which the PRA may devote particular attention in the course of its supervision. It is not intended to provide a comprehensive guide for boards of what constitutes good or effective governance. There are more general guidelines for that purpose, for example the UK Corporate Governance Code, published by the Financial Reporting Council.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Jeffrey N. Gordon connu pour ses écrits dans le domaine de la gouvernance d’entreprise offre une belle tribune dans le Morning Consul du 22 mars 2016. Intitulé « Shareholder Activism, the Short-Termist Red-Herring, and the Need for Corporate Governance Reform », cet écrit revient sur l’activisme des hedge funds et la concentration dont ils font l’objet.

Jeffrey Gordon demande qu’une réforme de la gouvernance d’entreprise soit mise en place, non pour contrer l’activisme mais pour réformer le conseil d’administration et lui donner un rôle nouveau `s’assurer de la crédibilité de la haute direction.

It’s the attack of hedge funds, shareholder activists looking for short term gain even at the expense of investments that would produce higher returns over the long run, and, along the way, would lead to employment gains and then wage gains. What follows, then, is a prescription for changes in tax policy and legal rules that would hamper the activists, all to promote the “long run.” But this is a misdiagnosis, which fails to realize that the shareholders activists’ success reveals a major shortfall in corporate governance for large public corporations.

(…) Reform should move not in the direction of closing down the activists who are bringing the news about this design flaw. Rather we should develop a new role for the board: credibly evaluating and then verifying that management’s strategy is best for the company (or making changes if it is not). Boards need directors who will have that credibility, which is won through deep knowledge about the company and its industry and an appropriate time commitment.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian