Can our board get on with doing its work rather than be forever obsessing about governance rules?
Yes, just as you want your car to be a source of getting you somewhere safely, rather than a continual adventure in auto maintenance. But that calls for having a well-designed and well-maintained machine to begin with. Governance as it has been known for so long is a poorly designed mechanism. Therefore, they don’t fulfill their promise, waste time and talent, and fail to demand accountability. Correcting the machinery comes first; that requires studied attention to the unfamiliarity of a new paradigm. But though continual practice is needed (as in any team sport), the intense learning period need not continue indefinitely. Most boards suffering with navel-gazing governance fatigue are ones that continue to debate the system itself, rather than learning it precisely and then consistently using it. Continuing to haggle over, for example, whether some issue is ends or means or whether some questions can be settled outside policies is indicative of never having come to terms with the syst
Related Questions
- Is a company required to notify NASDAQ when it becomes non-compliant with one of the corporate governance rules, as set forth under Listing Rule 5600 Series?
- The assignment mentions that we are not required to preserve data forever. Are there any rules at all for how long we have to to store data?
- Can our board get on with doing its work rather than be forever obsessing about governance rules?
