Corporate Governance Essay

Conduct a review of the politics of your organisation (or one with which you ar familiar) in the image of a melodic theme to the moderate (or President) of the Governing senesce of music directors. In the brief cover up consumption the concepts, tools and techniques learned in this subject to review the expression, process and effectiveness of the political science of the organisation and make recommendations for appropriate take backs.Executive summaryThis report sets come to the fore to review unified governance at a semiprivate order, namely, preponderant Insurance fellowship. The specific objectives were to identify the relevant codes the organisation follows, why they argon important and review the grammatical construction, process and effectiveness of the governance of the organisation. passim the report, it was unornamented from the findings that paramount although once a successful organisation, had or so governance issues that burn and should be impr oved for the best interest of the club and its policyholders. Finally, several recommendations for improvement of the organisations governance were outlined.Introduction corporate Governance has evolved from the archaeozoic days of merchants and monopolists and the concept of somatic governance is as old as trade but the phrase is new. (Tricker 2011).At its simplest, inembodiedd governance give the sack be regarded as being about promoting bodied fairness, transp argonncy and eyeshadeability (Wolfensohn 1999). whole embodied entities need governing however, good merged governance that takes into considerateness a variety of frameworks, including various perspectives such as the dealinghip, stakeholder, financial, and societal. This report entrust review the corporate governance policies of Paramount Insurance Company modified (Paramount). Firstly I will supply an overview on the fellowships profile and define corporate. Then the report will sapidity at the compositi on and criteria for the Board of Directors of Paramount and demonstrate any corporate governance issues that the play along may be facing. Finally recommendations are tending(p) for modifications or improvements in the companys pr typifyices relevant to this crinkle.Company profileParamount was an insurance under importr predominantly writing motor business for individuals in the United Kingdom. Based in Watford, Paramount Insurance Company Limited (Paramount) wrote motor insurance over a halt of close to forty nine age until May nineteen 90 six when it ceased underwriting. Initially, the company primarily forgetd motor package insurance, that later expand into also writing some legal expenses cover. Paramount was incorporated in Guyana and therefore the company complied with the Insurance Act 1998 and the Companies Act 1998 of Guyana.These acts provided a bleed to Paramount along with the Guyana integrated Governance Code (GCGC) to some of its corporate governance practic es. The Corporate Governance Code of Guyana is non mandatory or enforceable but simply provides a list of principles for best practice. Throughout this report, it is evident that Paramount has a arrive of issues in relation to corporate governance. This eventuated with issues for policyholders as was estimated that there may be 40,000 authentic policies at the clock of the provisional liquidation. Definition of corporate governanceThe termination governance is derived from the Latin gubernare which means tolead, suggesting rather that the governance (Corporate, in this case) implies more the steering function than the control one. BALC et al. (2013, pp. 14-17). Corporate governance has many definitions as it is often used in a variety of perspectives, operational, relationship, stakeholder, societal, and a financial economic science perspective. For the purpose of this report, corporate governance is outlined as the relationship that exists in the midst of company bring of fment, stakeholders and the jury.Objectives of the company are usually set, attained and monitored through the structure corporate governance provides. (Balgobin 2008).The Guyana Corporate Code of Governance is mistakable to the UK codes of corporate governance and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD 2004).These principles serve as a mention point that can be used by companies to expose their own frameworks for corporate governance that reflect their own circumstances or situations.Composition and criteria at ParamountThe Chairman and the Chief Executive military officerThere is extensive search on board composition and the brilliance it places on different scenerys of organisation consummation. (Kang H, et al 2007). At Paramount the unitary board exists, where according to the textbook, a unitary board is when a company has a single governing body (Tricker 2009). A non- decision maker conductor is defined as a person who is non involved in t he day to day management of an organisation but rather in business tasks such as strategic planning, and monitoring of executive managing directors. An executive director tends to be more involved in the managerial aspects of the company. The Chairman and four another(prenominal) directors are independent non-executives, and the CEO and one director are non- executives.Diversity of board membersA diverse board is defined as a varied composition of a number of parameters for example, sex activity and age. ( Jhunjhunwala, S et al. 2012). It is often believed that women bring a somewhat different approach to leadership in an organisation. They are seen as better at build relationships, are perceptive in decision-making, etc. (Hughes et al 2012). Paramounts board consists of one female executive director, Ann Estorffe, out of its eight members. She previously worked for one of the companys subsidiaries in theCaribbean and thus was deemed fit because of her experience, noesis and competency on insurance and policymaking. In addition, there are no young directors on the board. According to the Company Secretary, all of the board members are in excess of sixty five years of age. This is well in a higher place the retirement age outlined by the company, which is 60 years. Some in the company may argue that it is risky to have appointed junior individuals on the board as they lack the experience that comes with age and they are higher risk takers.However, studies have shown that diverse boards may help in formulating strategies, improving productivity and creative problem solving. (Jhunhunwala & Mishra 2012).Appointment to the board and sub committals Tricker et al. 2009 makes reference to two reasons why unitary boards acquire subcommittees To enable independent directors to oppose separately from the board as a whole, in order to fulfil their anxietys roles To delegate board activities to reduce the burden on the boards as a whole. All the directors are subject to re-election by policyholders every three years but this system is fraught with ineffectiveness to implicit pressure to re-elect the current directors. Paramount had several subcommittees consisting of the audit, lucre, nominating speech, marketing, government and compliance committee, finance, and strategic planning subcommittees. This report specifically will be outlining the three committees, which are creditworthy for providing oversight to management. These are Audit, remuneration and nominating speech committees. (Tricker 2009)It is the impression of the Board that this power resides with them as they can choose the best person for the committee. In other words, some still feel that the right to appoint board members is the heart of corporate power. (Tricker 2009).Paramounts audit committee considered and made recommendations to the board on rules, corporate governance codes, and the law. This committee also assists the company to comply with relevant account sta tement standards and legislation. Hence, this requires a company to have effective internal audit functions to manage the monies entrusted on them. The effectiveness of the audit is reflected in annual reports, with the intent to create transparency aimed at improving accounting and auditing standards and promoting good corporate governance. The earnings Committee of Paramount consisted of two independent nonexecutive directors and one chair.This committee is responsible for setting remuneration forall executives and the chairman however it is the board or the policyholders that determine the remuneration of non-executive directors. (Guyana corporate governance code 2011) It is said that the remuneration committee is where in interest of the shareholders conflict with that of management. (Carson 2002). The amount of remuneration true by directors and chairman are disclosed in the companys annual reports In addition, this monitoring ensures that when profits are low, directors remu neration can be adjusted and the issuing of incentive payments. Directors of Paramount were not viewed as self-serving and were viewed as effective in this aspect of corporate governance.Board performance military rankOne of the principles of Guyana code on corporate governance states that a board should have an annual rating of its own performance, its committees and individual directors. In addition, every three years this evaluation should be externally quickend. This principle aligns with the UK corporate governance code. Studies have suggested that corporate governance markers such as the uses of sub-committees, independent directors, and an appropriate board structure may not be the best forecasters of board effectiveness. (Tricker 2009) In other words, a form of performance appraisal for directors may ensure they act in the best interest of the company and of the shareholders. Performance appraisals give feedback to individuals and facilitate changes or improvements. (Noe et al 2009).Corporate cordial responsibility (CSR) in mall can be defined as corporate entities acting as good citizens not evident within Paramount. UK Companies Act 2006 highlighted that quoted companies have to provide information on environmental matters, employees and social and community issues. Early attitudes towards corporate governance were a voluntary bureaucratic, expensive box-ticking exercise. Board members focused delivering on creating wealth not complying with principles. The changing expectations in the governance of organisations saw CSR strategies and policies real, along with CSR competency frameworks created to increase shareholder value.ConclusionThis report has given an account on corporate governance of a business in the private sector, namely the Paramount Company. The investigation first setout to cover the laws and corporate governance codes the company complies with and then reviews the governance in the organisation. The research suggested that orga nisations should have adapted to principles of corporate governance, however. These included the lack of a nomination committee, and an inactive performance evaluation board and the development of a ccorporate social responsibility framework. It was also apparent that the re-election of directors was ineffective and that retirement age seems not to apply to board members. This may be due to lack of fitting succession planning or to the belief that people like similar minded people and in this case age was a commonality.If the above mentioned areas of opportunities were addressed earlier could this have prevented the outcome? That outcome being on the twenty first of May in the year nineteen ninety six the Department of Trade and Industry withdrew authorisation for Paramount to write new insurance business, and avoid having the directors of Paramount petitioning the court to wind the company up. The paper concludes that for too long emphasis of corporate governance has been around the relationship between managers, boards and shareholders and not so much on how corporations are financed and managed. There needs to be a multiple theoretical perspectives industrious to allow for a better understanding of issues like allocation of resources and return and overall economic development.RecommendationsBased on the report, there were a number of approaches that could have been actioned to improve governance at Paramount. Firstly, the organisation needed to plow variation, the acknowledgement that people are different and harnessing this diversity would have provided salient benefit to Paramount. Promoting the health, well-being and opinions of staff, promotes individuals being valued. Fitness programs supported by the company with exclusive membership offers is an example of building a stay and boom out culture. This can be achieved through fair and transparent employment practices, on a regular basis communicated to employees. Secondly, to eliminate the subject ivity of nominating board members and also the complacency.Developing a nomination committee consisting of independent nonexecutive directors, will help to establish criteria for selection of board members, which will help to ensure directors chosen, are truly independent to bear effectively to the board, to reduce the chances of a dominant director. Thirdly, Paramount should have developed a system to allow for the anonymous re-election of board members by not only outside policyholders but also inside policyholders e.g. employees as well. fourth to assist with CSR responsibilities and commitment a corporate policy statement can be generated, focusing on the six core characteristics ofUnderstanding societyBuilding capacityQuestioning business as usualStakeholder relationsStrategic viewHarnessing diversitySwire Pacific Ltd. developed a deconcentrate approach to generate its Sustainable Development Policy and appointed Director of Sustainable Development, Robert Gibson, in 2007. T he intent was to create a long term approach to the sustainable development of their businesses and excel as corporate citizens. Finally, performance evaluation of board members is important to determine their effectiveness. Paramount took the initiative to form a sub-committee for this process however it remained inactive for a number of years. This is an pressing function for a company to establish such a committee to see real long-term change and benefits in the governance of the organisation. Feedback on performance is critical for a board to improve any nonadaptive behaviour.ReferencesTricker, B 2009, corporate governance principles, policies and practices, 2nd ed, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Balc, L, Ilies, R, Cioban, B, & Cuza, B 2013, Corporate Governance. conceptual Approaches, Managerial Challenges Of The Contemporary Society, 5, Pp. 14-17, Business tooth root Complete, Ebscohost, Viewed 15 July 2014. Balgobin, RS 2008, Board Characteristics that come on Effective Governance A Perspective on Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica, ICFAI Journal Of Corporate Governance, 7, 2, pp. 20-41, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 15 July 2014. Donaldson, L, & Davis, J 1991, Stewardship Theory or dresser Theory CEO Governanceand Shareholder Returns, Australian Journal Of wariness (University Of New South Wales), 16, 1, p. 49, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 15 July 2014. Balgobin, RS 2008, Board Characteristics that nurture Effective Governance A Perspective on Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica, ICFAI Journal Of Corporate Governance, 7, 2, pp. 20-41, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 15 July 2014. Guyana Corporate Governance Code 2011, viewed on 9 July 2014 Kang, H, Cheng, M, & Gray, S 2007, Corporate Governance and Board Composition diversity and independence of Australian boards, Corporate Governance An International Review, 15, 2, pp. 194-207, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 13 July 2014. Jhunjhunwala, S, & Mishra , R 2012, Board Diversity and Corporate Performance The Indian Evidence, IUP Journal Of Corporate Governance, 11, 3, pp. 71-79, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 12 July 2014. Hughes, R., Ginnett, R. & Curphy, G 2012, Leadership enhancing the lessons of experience, 7th ed, McGraw Hill Irwin, New York Vafeas, N 1999, The Nature of Board Nominating Committees and Their Role in Corporate Governance, Journal Of Business finance & Accounting, 26, 1/2, pp. 199-225, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 12 July 2014. Wolfensohn, J 1999, Financial Times, 21 June.