Corporate governance, responsibility, sustainability and accountability : Implication for Nigeria
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE - What is it?
Since corporate governance also provides the framework for achieving a company's objectives, it covers virtually all areas of management, from action plans and internal controls to performance measurement and corporate outreach. "The Institute of Autonomous Secretaries and Administrators offers the following:
Corporate governance refers to the way companies govern and for what purpose. These are practices and procedures to try to ensure that a company is run in such a way that "The definition that most appeals to me is that" corporate governance encompasses the processes through which business objectives are set and pursued in the context of the social, regulatory and market environment. " The unique thread The scrutiny of these definitions and descriptions, the unique thread that unites them is to pursue or achieve corporate goals. This is what I choose to call vision. In fact, the vision of companies is the fundamental and fundamental step to have an effective corporate governance framework. John Graham pointed out the importance of vision as follows: "Vision inspires action A powerful vision attracts ideas, people, and other resources Creates energy and will to make change happen Encourage people and organizations A vision is a practical guide to creating plans, setting goals and objectives, making decisions, and coordinating and evaluating work on any project, large or small. organizations and groups focused and together, especially with complex projects and in stressful times. " In fact, it is the need to achieve a corporate vision that requires the need for a corporate governance framework. This is because corporations must be able to answer the following questions: How do we get from where we are to where we want to be? Having agreed the road map, who will apply the road map? How do we identify who will be responsible for the individual tasks? How do we sustain our plan to achieve vision? How do we measure performance along the way? And how do we make peace when we move away from the desired path? Ultimately, these are the questions that corporate governance frameworks seek to address. And this brings us to our next point which is: why is corporate governance so important? Why is corporate governance important? From the previous discussion, it is clear that we have identified one aspect of the answer to this question, namely, that a corporate governance framework is important to achieve corporate vision. You will find that the other aspect of the answer is quite obvious: corporate governance is also important to ensure that corporations do not derail from the stated view. This is not a point to be taken lightly. When corporations deviate or are able to deviate from an agreed and established vision, the consequences are derived. In this regard, you may have heard that corporate governance has become more important as of 2002. Why? When you hear that, you know that reference is being made to the epic failure of Enron Corporation in the United States. I'm going to share that story briefly. In one of the "autopsies" on the Enron collapse, the New York Times published a report that I quote extensively below: "There is increasing evidence that Enron's board, composed of many prominent and financially sophisticated people, participated while the board dismissed Andersen as an Enron auditor on Thursday and said he only heard of the serious concerns raised about the company's accounting and financial practices in October , directors seem to have played a key role in oversight of alliances at the heart of Enron's collapse. "The council - which includes Wendy L. Gramm, a former government regulator and the wife of Sen. Phil Gramm, a Texas Republican ; John Wakeham, a member of the British House of Lords and former member of the British Cabinet; and Norman P. Blake Jr., executive director of Comdisco, a computer services company, even suspended Enron's code of ethics to approve the creation of alliances between Enron and its chief financial officer, according to a preliminary investigation report made at the request of Enron by the Vinson & Elkins law firm. . . . The associations held significant debt outside of Enron's books and masked much of what was really happening in the company. . . . (Emphasis mine). Although outsiders have had few visions is what really happened between Enron executives and their directors, the revelations in the report leave no doubt that the board was intimately involved in its approval. Questions have already been raised about board independence, and many experts and directors seem to share a substantial responsibility for what happened at Enron. "Questions about the involvement of board members also raise concerns about a special committee set up to investigate what happened, according to corporate governance experts, because that committee has long been a board member - Herbert S. Winokur Jr., a private investment firm. "The strongest indication that the council was aware of the potential risks of establishing partnerships in June and October 1999 was its decision to waive Enron's ethics code. The resignation was necessary to allow Andrew S. Fastow, then the chief financial officer, to serve as general partner of the associations. The board also adopted a series of guidelines for partnerships to protect the company's interests, according to the report. "Andersen's internal memorandum says that accountants were planning to suggest that they would not be able to make a decision, the committee set up a committee to oversee the associations.The audit committee was never informed that Andersen said a committee should be set up to review the impartiality of the transactions. "Two weeks later, the board announced the creation of a special committee to examine controversial transactions. But with the exception of William Powers Jr., Dean of the University of Texas Law School, all members had played some role in building partnerships or reviewing transactions. The special committee is now composed of Mr. Powers, Mr. Winokur and Raymond S. Troubh, a former external director who joined the board in late November. "Some corporate governance experts said they were concerned about Mr. Winokur's presence on the committee. He was on the board when he decided to suspend the code of ethics and, as chairman of the finance committee, directly participated in the approval of one of the "Mr. Winokur is also one of the directors who reviewed the company's dealings with the companies." Enron's directors were among the most highly paid for their services, according to Pearl Meyer & partners, a compensation consulting firm In New York. The average director was paid almost $ 400,000 in cash and stock in 2001 .. But the troubling questions surround the council's independence. Lord Wakeham, for example, received $ 72,000 for his advice on Enron's European operations. Mr. Winokur was involved in a company that did business with Enron, while Dr. Gramm and other directors partnered with organizations that received charitable donations from Enron. Dr. Gramm said she could not accept equity for her services and ordered the company to put that deferred compensation into a mutual fund. "That is the end of the excerpts from the New York Times report.I hope you have noticed the issues But while Enron dust was still unstable all over the world, there was the Parmalat scandal. Cadbury Nigeria has recently dismissed its Managing Director, Mr. Bunmi Oni, a former Nigerian, Babs Ajayi reports from Canada broadly wrote a review. and Mr. Ayo Akadiri, the company's Chief Financial Officer, which is a consequence of the financial book filler and corruption scandal that recently rocked the company ed, and that's the way it should be. The audacity of the Board of Directors led by Dr. Uduimo Itsueli should be praised. The Board recently commissioned the PricewaterhouseCoopers firm to review and investigate the company's finances. The result of the investigation "has confirmed a deliberate overestimation of the company's financial situation for several years, from N13 to N15 billion." This is Nigeria's version of the Enron Corporation scandal in the United States. "Corporate ethics has gone to dogs, or, rather, has been in the bag of dogs all the time in Nigeria. It should be noted here that the management of Bunmi Oni in Cadbury for years has been packaged as the best example of an establishment profesional, his best practice, with strong ethical influence and rectitude. It is sad to discover suddenly that this has been a deception and a huge deception all the time; the unsuspecting Nigerian public has been deceived and deceived. . . "Cadbury Nigeria will now adjust the accounts to reflect an operating loss of between N1 and N2 billion." Kufre Ekanem, Public Affairs Manager for the company, told reporters that "over the years, Cadbury Nigeria had been assigned an ambitious growth objective. To achieve these objectives, several system abuses occurred. The exaggerations are directly traceabel Mr. Ekanem referred to "deliberate violations of our accounting systems and controls," and cooking numbers became an obsession and the central focus of maintaining a mirage. "It is a shame that Messrs. Oni and Akadiri end their long years of service in Cadbury in disgrace with their reputation in rags. Both should be in the custody of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, to explain their functions in the exaggeration of accounts and deliberate manipulation of finance in Cadbury.Enron founder Kenneth Lay was found guilty of six counts of fraud and conspiracy while Enron chief executive Jeffrey Skilling was found guilty of 19 28 cases brought against him Mr. Skilling will serve a 24-year sentence on charges of fraud and conspiracy The case of Mr. Bunmi Oni and Mr. Ayo Akadiri should be no different, and the EFCC should not fail in its duty to protect to investors and serve a warning to corporate looters and thieves even in several companies in Nigeria. "The attitude of collecting and looting in the private sector in Nigeria has not been given the attention it deserves, however, there are many abuses and juggling numbers in most companies in Nigeria. Corruption is so plentiful in the private sector in Nigeria that most foreign companies find it difficult to name Nigerians as helmsmen to run their Nigerian offices. Lever Brothers Nigeria suffered a similar setback a few years ago when suddenly removed Chief Rufus Giwa after a careful review of his finances discovered abuses and irreconcilable figures. The average Nigerian executive believes that his company's funds are just another piggy bank where all kinds of personal expenses are taken care of and every imaginable purchase is made. In the case of Cadbury Nigeria, this included the provision of generators, fuel and maintenance services to the home of one of the company's former executives. "A lot of Cadbury Nigeria accounts are coded so well and there are a lot of games that mean a lot more than they normally do on a casual basis." Many Cadbury employees confirmed the existence of a mafia headed by a former chief executive who clings to company, and only the candidates of this former executive with anointed candidates have risen to executive cadres in more than 15 years.The average Nigerian company and the banks are executed in this way.In such environment honest, hardworking and direct people have no place are persecuted, marginalized and eventually expelled Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/10/corporate-governance-responsibility-sustainability-accountability-implication-nigeria/ In Greg Shaller's Introduction to Corporate Governance in Australia , corporate governance is described as the mechanisms, processes, and relationships by which corporations are controlled and directed. and principles of governance that identify the distribution of rights and responsibilities among the different stakeholders in the corporation, such as the board of directors, managers, shareholders, creditors, auditors, regulators and other stakeholders. Another approach is that corporate governance includes the rules and procedures for making decisions in corporate matters. The popular online resource for investment knowledge, Investopedia, offers the following as a guide: "Corporate governance is the system of rules, practices and processes by which a company is directed and controlled. balance the interests of the many stakeholders of a company, such as shareholders, management, customers, suppliers, financiers, government and community.ion-nigeria /
Since corporate governance also provides the framework for achieving a company's objectives, it covers virtually all areas of management, from action plans and internal controls to performance measurement and corporate outreach. "The Institute of Autonomous Secretaries and Administrators offers the following:
Corporate governance refers to the way companies govern and for what purpose. These are practices and procedures to try to ensure that a company is run in such a way that "The definition that most appeals to me is that" corporate governance encompasses the processes through which business objectives are set and pursued in the context of the social, regulatory and market environment. " The unique thread The scrutiny of these definitions and descriptions, the unique thread that unites them is to pursue or achieve corporate goals. This is what I choose to call vision. In fact, the vision of companies is the fundamental and fundamental step to have an effective corporate governance framework. John Graham pointed out the importance of vision as follows: "Vision inspires action A powerful vision attracts ideas, people, and other resources Creates energy and will to make change happen Encourage people and organizations A vision is a practical guide to creating plans, setting goals and objectives, making decisions, and coordinating and evaluating work on any project, large or small. organizations and groups focused and together, especially with complex projects and in stressful times. " In fact, it is the need to achieve a corporate vision that requires the need for a corporate governance framework. This is because corporations must be able to answer the following questions: How do we get from where we are to where we want to be? Having agreed the road map, who will apply the road map? How do we identify who will be responsible for the individual tasks? How do we sustain our plan to achieve vision? How do we measure performance along the way? And how do we make peace when we move away from the desired path? Ultimately, these are the questions that corporate governance frameworks seek to address. And this brings us to our next point which is: why is corporate governance so important? Why is corporate governance important? From the previous discussion, it is clear that we have identified one aspect of the answer to this question, namely, that a corporate governance framework is important to achieve corporate vision. You will find that the other aspect of the answer is quite obvious: corporate governance is also important to ensure that corporations do not derail from the stated view. This is not a point to be taken lightly. When corporations deviate or are able to deviate from an agreed and established vision, the consequences are derived. In this regard, you may have heard that corporate governance has become more important as of 2002. Why? When you hear that, you know that reference is being made to the epic failure of Enron Corporation in the United States. I'm going to share that story briefly. In one of the "autopsies" on the Enron collapse, the New York Times published a report that I quote extensively below: "There is increasing evidence that Enron's board, composed of many prominent and financially sophisticated people, participated while the board dismissed Andersen as an Enron auditor on Thursday and said he only heard of the serious concerns raised about the company's accounting and financial practices in October , directors seem to have played a key role in oversight of alliances at the heart of Enron's collapse. "The council - which includes Wendy L. Gramm, a former government regulator and the wife of Sen. Phil Gramm, a Texas Republican ; John Wakeham, a member of the British House of Lords and former member of the British Cabinet; and Norman P. Blake Jr., executive director of Comdisco, a computer services company, even suspended Enron's code of ethics to approve the creation of alliances between Enron and its chief financial officer, according to a preliminary investigation report made at the request of Enron by the Vinson & Elkins law firm. . . . The associations held significant debt outside of Enron's books and masked much of what was really happening in the company. . . . (Emphasis mine). Although outsiders have had few visions is what really happened between Enron executives and their directors, the revelations in the report leave no doubt that the board was intimately involved in its approval. Questions have already been raised about board independence, and many experts and directors seem to share a substantial responsibility for what happened at Enron. "Questions about the involvement of board members also raise concerns about a special committee set up to investigate what happened, according to corporate governance experts, because that committee has long been a board member - Herbert S. Winokur Jr., a private investment firm. "The strongest indication that the council was aware of the potential risks of establishing partnerships in June and October 1999 was its decision to waive Enron's ethics code. The resignation was necessary to allow Andrew S. Fastow, then the chief financial officer, to serve as general partner of the associations. The board also adopted a series of guidelines for partnerships to protect the company's interests, according to the report. "Andersen's internal memorandum says that accountants were planning to suggest that they would not be able to make a decision, the committee set up a committee to oversee the associations.The audit committee was never informed that Andersen said a committee should be set up to review the impartiality of the transactions. "Two weeks later, the board announced the creation of a special committee to examine controversial transactions. But with the exception of William Powers Jr., Dean of the University of Texas Law School, all members had played some role in building partnerships or reviewing transactions. The special committee is now composed of Mr. Powers, Mr. Winokur and Raymond S. Troubh, a former external director who joined the board in late November. "Some corporate governance experts said they were concerned about Mr. Winokur's presence on the committee. He was on the board when he decided to suspend the code of ethics and, as chairman of the finance committee, directly participated in the approval of one of the "Mr. Winokur is also one of the directors who reviewed the company's dealings with the companies." Enron's directors were among the most highly paid for their services, according to Pearl Meyer & partners, a compensation consulting firm In New York. The average director was paid almost $ 400,000 in cash and stock in 2001 .. But the troubling questions surround the council's independence. Lord Wakeham, for example, received $ 72,000 for his advice on Enron's European operations. Mr. Winokur was involved in a company that did business with Enron, while Dr. Gramm and other directors partnered with organizations that received charitable donations from Enron. Dr. Gramm said she could not accept equity for her services and ordered the company to put that deferred compensation into a mutual fund. "That is the end of the excerpts from the New York Times report.I hope you have noticed the issues But while Enron dust was still unstable all over the world, there was the Parmalat scandal. Cadbury Nigeria has recently dismissed its Managing Director, Mr. Bunmi Oni, a former Nigerian, Babs Ajayi reports from Canada broadly wrote a review. and Mr. Ayo Akadiri, the company's Chief Financial Officer, which is a consequence of the financial book filler and corruption scandal that recently rocked the company ed, and that's the way it should be. The audacity of the Board of Directors led by Dr. Uduimo Itsueli should be praised. The Board recently commissioned the PricewaterhouseCoopers firm to review and investigate the company's finances. The result of the investigation "has confirmed a deliberate overestimation of the company's financial situation for several years, from N13 to N15 billion." This is Nigeria's version of the Enron Corporation scandal in the United States. "Corporate ethics has gone to dogs, or, rather, has been in the bag of dogs all the time in Nigeria. It should be noted here that the management of Bunmi Oni in Cadbury for years has been packaged as the best example of an establishment profesional, his best practice, with strong ethical influence and rectitude. It is sad to discover suddenly that this has been a deception and a huge deception all the time; the unsuspecting Nigerian public has been deceived and deceived. . . "Cadbury Nigeria will now adjust the accounts to reflect an operating loss of between N1 and N2 billion." Kufre Ekanem, Public Affairs Manager for the company, told reporters that "over the years, Cadbury Nigeria had been assigned an ambitious growth objective. To achieve these objectives, several system abuses occurred. The exaggerations are directly traceabel Mr. Ekanem referred to "deliberate violations of our accounting systems and controls," and cooking numbers became an obsession and the central focus of maintaining a mirage. "It is a shame that Messrs. Oni and Akadiri end their long years of service in Cadbury in disgrace with their reputation in rags. Both should be in the custody of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, to explain their functions in the exaggeration of accounts and deliberate manipulation of finance in Cadbury.Enron founder Kenneth Lay was found guilty of six counts of fraud and conspiracy while Enron chief executive Jeffrey Skilling was found guilty of 19 28 cases brought against him Mr. Skilling will serve a 24-year sentence on charges of fraud and conspiracy The case of Mr. Bunmi Oni and Mr. Ayo Akadiri should be no different, and the EFCC should not fail in its duty to protect to investors and serve a warning to corporate looters and thieves even in several companies in Nigeria. "The attitude of collecting and looting in the private sector in Nigeria has not been given the attention it deserves, however, there are many abuses and juggling numbers in most companies in Nigeria. Corruption is so plentiful in the private sector in Nigeria that most foreign companies find it difficult to name Nigerians as helmsmen to run their Nigerian offices. Lever Brothers Nigeria suffered a similar setback a few years ago when suddenly removed Chief Rufus Giwa after a careful review of his finances discovered abuses and irreconcilable figures. The average Nigerian executive believes that his company's funds are just another piggy bank where all kinds of personal expenses are taken care of and every imaginable purchase is made. In the case of Cadbury Nigeria, this included the provision of generators, fuel and maintenance services to the home of one of the company's former executives. "A lot of Cadbury Nigeria accounts are coded so well and there are a lot of games that mean a lot more than they normally do on a casual basis." Many Cadbury employees confirmed the existence of a mafia headed by a former chief executive who clings to company, and only the candidates of this former executive with anointed candidates have risen to executive cadres in more than 15 years.The average Nigerian company and the banks are executed in this way.In such environment honest, hardworking and direct people have no place are persecuted, marginalized and eventually expelled Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/10/corporate-governance-responsibility-sustainability-accountability-implication-nigeria/ In Greg Shaller's Introduction to Corporate Governance in Australia , corporate governance is described as the mechanisms, processes, and relationships by which corporations are controlled and directed. and principles of governance that identify the distribution of rights and responsibilities among the different stakeholders in the corporation, such as the board of directors, managers, shareholders, creditors, auditors, regulators and other stakeholders. Another approach is that corporate governance includes the rules and procedures for making decisions in corporate matters. The popular online resource for investment knowledge, Investopedia, offers the following as a guide: "Corporate governance is the system of rules, practices and processes by which a company is directed and controlled. balance the interests of the many stakeholders of a company, such as shareholders, management, customers, suppliers, financiers, government and community.ion-nigeria /
Comments
Post a Comment