Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts from March 9, 2011

Management Board

In countries where there is greater inclusivity in decision-making, or where there is a strong family dominance, it is possible that a A The 2-tier system may also operate with family dominated companies, with family members having their own top-level private Board which has controlling voting rights (and therefore where the true decision-making power rests). To an extent, schools in the UK may be seen to have a 2-tier system, with the Head / Principal and a small number of senior teachers on a management board, with the School Governors in a more supervisory role. Of course, schools naturally have a lot of stakeholders (parents, teachers etc.) so would seem well-suited to this structure. 2-tier board will exist. Management Board will run the day to day operations of the company, but will be monitored by a higher level Supervisory Board . In UK terms, this is similar to having the NEDs on a top board, with the Executive Directors on a separate lower Board. Advantages of 2-tier boa

Corporate Governance

Corporate Governance varies around the World, largely due to different history and cultures. In the UK and US, the model is aimed primarily at the rights of shareholders. In Germany and much of continental Europe, and also in Japan, In Japan, many major company structures were traditionally based around banks. Large groups of companies from many industries would all be financed, and part-owned by a major bank, which would create a strong financial alliance. Cross-shareholdings between companies were common, and in many cases the companies in the "group" would all supply each other. In South America, Italy, Spain, and large parts of East Asia (e.g. Indonesia) the focus is more on banks play a more prominent role, often holding shares and having Board members. Such governance models tend to be more inclusive, ensuring that the rights of workers, customers and suppliers (and maybe the community) are represented at Board level. family ownership , with a large % of the bigges

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT (SARBOX, SOX)

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT (SARBOX, SOX) After the collapse of Enron, WorldCom, and a series of other American corporate frauds and failures, the US Government was keen to act quickly and firmly. On 30 July 2002, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passed (it is named after the 2 US politicians who sponsored it through Congress). It was not long before it became known as Sarbox … or SOX. There are many differences between SOX and the UK Combined Code: ● SOX is law, with strict penalties for non-compliance. The Combined Code is Best Practice, not law ● SOX makes audit partner rotation the law, whereas in the UK such matters are covered by the profession’s Codes of Ethics ● SOX has a ban on auditors providing a range of "other services" to their audit clients. In the UK, very few "other services" are banned, but are instead considered within the objectivity area of Ethics. ● SOX requires the CEO and CFO to personally attest to the accuracy of the Annual Report, Quarterly Report