corporate boards

Sarbox and women on boards: Where's the boost?

Tue, 11 Sep 2007 06:59:59 -0400

A lot of experts once argued that Sarbanes Oxley would lead to more women being added to corporate boards. The logic was that more boards, reacting to insider board limits, might start looking for women who weren't executives. According to Forbes, it hasn't quite worked out that way. Instead, in their search for outside directors, boards have reached out to retired executives, who skew heavily male. Still, there has been some progress. Ninety-seven percent of the 200 largest companies in the S&P 500 have at least one female director (Spencer Stuart). But women account for just one out of six board seats at these companies. Some note that there is an elite women's club of directors, who serve on multiple boards.

For more:
- here's the Forbes article

Related articles:
- More women making a mark on Wall Street?
- Finance opening doors for women?
- Private equity turns taxes into civil rights issue

How times have changed for boards

Mon, 18 Jun 2007 20:01:39 -0400

It is easy to use Sarbanes-Oxley as a scapegoat for just about everything. Whether the law is responsible for many of the changes to corporate boards is an open question. The fact remains, however, that boards are radically different now than they were in 2002. A new study by researchers at the University of Georgia lays out some metrics. Average pay rose from about $52,500 in 2001 to about $80,650 on average just three years later. These costs hit small companies harder. They paid $3.20 in director fees per $1,000 of revenue in 2004, which is 81 cents more than in 2001. Large companies paid 32 cents per $1,000 of revenue for large companies, 7 cents more than in 2001. No surprise here: Audit committees met an average of 2.6 meetings times per year vs. 5.1 meetings three years later. For large firms, meetings average 4.5 times per year in 2001 and 8.2 three years later. D&O costs also soared, more than tripling for large companies.

For more:
- here's a release

Best practices for boards and ERM

Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:01:39 -0500

Enterprise risk management comes off like a buzzword of interest only to the IT guys. But the truth is that more corporate boards are playing a rising role in ERM and its various implementations. There has been huge demand for guidance and best practices advice, to which The Conference Board has responded. It has started a case-study based Research Working Group on ERM and has released a report. It looked at five companies: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Capital One Financial Corporation, International Paper, MetLife, Inc., and Moody's Investors Service. Its recommendation might seem prosaic: "Appreciate the importance of ERM." But others are subtly wise: "Choose compensation policies and performance metrics to promote and track the pursuit of a risk-adjusted corporate strategy." This is far-reaching stuff indeed.

For more:
- here's a release

ALSO NOTED: Boards need to focus on strategy, not compliance; Wal-Mart seeks dismissal of suit... and much more

Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:01:29 -0400

> A common problem among corporate boards is that the best directors are always the most reluctant to join. One publication suggests that the time is now for boards to reassert themselves on strategic matters. Article

> Wal-Mart seeks dismissal of Sarbox whistleblower suit. Can we expect to see more of this? Article

> Comverse exec a fugitive. Where is Kobi? The international saga continues. Article

> Ethics gurus are still in hot demand. Article

> One very political commentator bluntly states that Sarbox ought to be repealed. That, of course, will be a hard sell although many of us may have agreed at one time or another. Article

> A closer look at a small company going private--in part because of Sarbox. Article

> The joys of escaping Sarbox and other public company pressures. Article

And Finally ... Big-time consulting still thrives. Article