I'm in London for the weekend, an interlude between inter alia commitments hosted by the Institute of Public Administration (a masterclass for board chairs, in Dublin); Lagercrantz Associates (a workshop, in Stockholm); and the Baltic Institute of Corporate Governance (a masterclass and the BICG conference keynote, in Vilnius). To work with people across cultures, countries and contexts is a great privilege. Discussions reveal differences in perspective and approach. Yet, some things are consistent, transcending borders and cultures. One example is 'good governance'. Directors everywhere want to know how to achieve good governance. This is a tough request. The problem is that 'good' is a moral qualifier, implying someone or something is morally excellent, virtuous or even righteous. But that is not all it means. A quick check in any dictionary reveals at least 39 other definitions! Which one does a person have in mind they ask for help to achieve 'good governance' or 'good corporate governance'? And what about other directors around the table. Do they have the same understanding or not? It's little wonder that directors have become confused about the role and purpose of the board. Pragmatically, corporate governance is the means by which companies are directed and controlled (Cadbury, 1992), that is, it describes the work of the board. The objective is to produce an agreed level of performance (however measured). 'Effectiveness' is a more appropriate qualifier than goodness. If something is effective it is adequate to accomplish a purpose; producing an intended result. Returning to the question of how to achieve good governance. After reminding the enquirer that so-called best practices offer little guarantee of success (which one is best anyway), I usually steer the discussion away from goodness towards effectiveness (performance), and suggest that Bob Garratt's Learning Board matrix, and the Strategic Governance Framework are useful starting points for a lively discussion at the board table. Once directors acknowledge that high company performance is the appropriate goal, and that success is a function of effectiveness more so than goodness, they start to ask more relevant questions, such as, "What actually matters?" and, "How do I as a director and we as a board become more effective?"
4 Comments
Leon
7/4/2019 07:39:25
My comments are probably more questions: do moral principles (eg honesty and integrity) apply? Can we be more effective through immoral means? If people are asking about good governance, are they implying moral and effective (good) governance?
Reply
Peter Crow
7/4/2019 07:51:10
Thanks Leon, for your insightful questions (comments).
Reply
Peter Crow
8/4/2019 23:59:02
Further, moral principles are held by people, not the company per se. In my experience there are no bad or good companies, just bad or good people.
Reply
8/4/2019 22:19:19
When a Board convenes there can be many agendas. Good governance can only come from doing the work to allow them to act as one. That can be uncomfortable initially but literally pays dividends!
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
SearchMusingsThoughts on corporate governance, strategy and boardcraft; our place in the world; and other topics that catch my attention. Categories
All
Archives
November 2024
|