Evaluating corporate board cultures and decision making

Corporate Governance (Bingley) - 2002
BruceCutting1, AlexanderKouzmin2
1Bruce Cutting is a Management Consultant, in Canberra, Australia.
2Alexander Kouzmin is Chair of Organizational Behaviour, at the Cranfield School of Management, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK.

Tóm tắt

This paper relies on a “trinity of menetypes” of group knowing which captures the essential decision‐making dynamics of board membership. Formal, corporate decision‐making processes require higher commitments of time and cognitive energy of directors – certainly, the requirement is of non‐executive directors to make more formal contributions to the “political” process that determines corporate commitment to appropriate courses of action. There is a fundamental shift from “managerialism” to “politicism” in the corporate dynamics of organization – a shift in “menetype” driving governance dynamics. This wholesale shift in orientation has accentuated personal and group values as key determinants of corporate efficacy. The paper proposes structural reforms to corporate/agency governance conventions, including a greater focus on performance and strategy, greater independence of more effective and extensive audit processes and a greater transparency in the nomination and remuneration of top‐executive appointments.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Berle, A.A. and Means, G.C. (1991), The Modern Corporation and Private Property, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ (originally published 1933).

Blair, M.M. (1995), Ownership and Control: Rethinking Corporate Governance for the Twenty‐first Century, Brookings Institute, Washington, DC.

Burns, T. (1974), “On the rationale of the corporate system”, in Marris, R. (Ed.), The Corporate Society, Macmillan Press, London, pp. 121‐77.

Charkham, J.P. (1994), Keeping Good Company: A Study of Corporate Governance in Five Countries, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Cutting, B.A. and Kouzmin, A. (1997a), “Beyond Weber, we can see clearly now: explaining the dynamics of governance in the maturing Westminster system”, a paper presented at the International Conference of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS), Quebec City, July, pp. 1‐24.

Cutting, B.A. and Kouzmin, A. (1997b), “From chaos to patterns of understanding: an ontological understanding of good governance based on a synthesis of Weber’s concept of ‘Ideal Types’ and the enneagram typology”, a paper presented at the National Conference of the American Society for Public Administration, Philadelphia, July, pp. 1‐13.

Cutting, B.A. and Kouzmin, A. (1998), “The emerging patterns of power in corporate governance: a hermeneutic analysis of institutional archetyping and its capacity to improve corporate performance”, a paper presented at the Tenth Annual International Conference of Socio‐Economics, Vienna, July, pp. 1‐21.

Cutting, B.A. and Kouzmin, A. (1999a), “Formulating a meta‐physics of human endeavour and social action: synthesizing the work of Aquinas, Lonergan and Jung to construct a cognitive formwork of social development”, a paper presented at the Australian Lonergan Workshop, Sydney, April, pp. 1‐23.

Cutting, B. A. and Kouzmin, A. (1999b), “Formulating a meta‐physics of governance: explaining the dynamics of governance using the new JEWAL synthesis formwork”, a paper presented at the Inaugural PAT‐Net Regional Symposium, Sydney, July, pp. 1‐21.

Cutting, B.A. and Kouzmin, A. (2000), “The emerging patterns of power in corporate governance: back to the future in improving corporate decision‐making”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 477‐507.

Daft, R.L. and Weick, K.E. (1984), “Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 284‐95.

de Geus, A. (1997), The Living Company: Growth, Learning and Longevity in Business, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, London.

Galbraith, J.K. (1967), The New Industrial State, Oxford & IBH Publishing, Calcutta.

Galbraith, J.K. (1983), The Anatomy of Power, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA.

Harvard Business School (2000), Harvard Business Review on Corporate Governance, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Hilmer, F.G. (1993), Strictly Boardroom: Improving Governance to Enhance Performance, Information Australia/The Business Library, Melbourne.

Lipton, M. and Lorsch, J.W. (1992), “A modest proposal for improved corporate governance”, Business Lawyer, Vol. 48, November, pp. 59‐77.

Lonergan, B.J.F. (1957), Insight: A Study of Human Understanding, Longmans, New York, NY.

Lorsch, J.W. (2000), “Empowering the board”, in Harvard Business Review on Corporate Governance, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA, pp. 25‐52.

Monks, R.A.G. and Minow, N. (1996), Watching the Watchers: Corporate Governance for the 21st Century, Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, MA.

Pfeffer, J. (1992), Managing With Power: Politics and Influence in Organizations, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Porter, M.E. (1995), “How competitive forces shape strategy”, in Mintzberg, H., Quinn, J.B. and Voyer, J. (Eds), The Strategy Process: College Edition, Prentice‐Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 87‐102.

Pound, J. (2000), “Beyond takeovers: politics comes to corporate control”, in Harvard Business Review on Corporate Governance, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA, pp. 157‐86.

Ward, R.D. (1997), 21st Century Corporate Board, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Corporate Governance (Bingley)

Thông tin tác giả