At the 2019 international meeting of business leaders, Michael Owusu said that multi-jurisdictional attempts to regulate corporate governance were futile because of differences in national culture. He drew particular attention to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and International Corporate Governance Network (ICGN) codes, saying that they were, 'silly attempts to harmonise practice'. He said that in some countries, for example, there were 'family reasons' for making the chairman and chief executive the same person. In other countries, he said, the separation of these roles seemed to work. Another delegate, Victor Bema, said that the roles of chief executive and chairman should always be separated because of what she called 'accountability to shareholders'.One delegate, Vincent Tommy, said that the right approach was to allow each country to set up its own corporate governance provisions. He said that it was suitable for some countries to produce and abide by their own 'very structured' corporate governance provisions, but in some other parts of the world, the local culture was to allow what he called, 'local interpretation of the rules'. He said that some cultures valued highly structured governance systems while others do not care as much. Required:(a) Explain the roles of the chairman in corporate governance.(b) Assess the benefits of the separation of the roles of chief executive and chairman that Victor Bema argued for and explain her belief that 'accountability to shareholders' is increased by the separation of these roles. (c) Critically evaluate Vincent Tommy's view that corporate governance provisions should vary by country.
At the 2019 international meeting of business leaders, Michael Owusu said that multi-jurisdictional attempts to regulate corporate governance were futile because of differences in national culture. He drew particular attention to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and International Corporate Governance Network (ICGN) codes, saying that they were, 'silly attempts to harmonise practice'. He said that in some countries, for example, there were 'family reasons' for making the chairman and chief executive the same person. In other countries, he said, the separation of these roles seemed to work. Another delegate, Victor Bema, said that the roles of chief executive and chairman should always be separated because of what she called 'accountability to shareholders'.
One delegate, Vincent Tommy, said that the right approach was to allow each country to set up its own corporate governance provisions. He said that it was suitable for some countries to produce and abide by their own 'very structured' corporate governance provisions, but in some other parts of the world, the local culture was to allow what he called, 'local interpretation of the rules'. He said that some cultures valued highly structured governance systems while others do not care as much.
Required:
(a) Explain the roles of the chairman in corporate governance.
(b) Assess the benefits of the separation of the roles of chief executive and chairman that Victor Bema argued for and explain her belief that 'accountability to shareholders' is increased by the separation of these roles.
(c) Critically evaluate Vincent Tommy's view that corporate governance
provisions should vary by country.
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
