A radical thought about governance
This morning, I was reading the local (London) paper and saw an ad for a training class in governance for non-executive directors (affectionally called “NEDs” here). It set me thinking. Maybe dreaming is a better word.
- Directors were required to take training classes in corporate governance?
- The training had to be certified by a recognized authority as including guidance on all topics relevant to effective board and director performance (which would include topics dear to my heart such as the role of internal audit, oversight of strategy and risk management, executive compensation, responsibilities to the shareholders, etc.)?
- Each year, the board was required to disclose that each of the directors had received the necessary and appropriate training to perform their duties, including training in corporate governance?
- Boards had a code of governance that each director was required to sign annually?
- Each year the board was required to disclose not only that assessments of performance had been performed at board, committee, and director levels, but what the results were?
Would this be beneficial, superficial, or a waste of time?