Political governance and corporate governance

Résumé du document

The 20th century was viewed as the age of management; the early 21st century is predicted to be more focused on governance. There is a distinction between politics and governance, where the former is regarded as cooperation between people with different points of view in order to improve the situation in the country and bring profit to it and the latter is more concentrated on administration and orientating a process of ruling. But on second thoughts we still can speak both about corporate governance and political governance. According to James McRitchie corporate governance is "most often viewed as both the structure and the relationships which determine corporate direction and performance." The board of directors is typically central to corporate governance. Its relationship to the other primary participants, typically shareholders and management, is critical. Additional participants include employees, customers, suppliers, and creditors. The corporate governance framework also depends on the legal, regulatory, institutional and ethical environment of the community.

Extraits

[...] Those reforms were named “Draghi reforms” and they aimed to increase minority shareholder protection in order to further the development of Italian equity finance and securities markets. Also D'Alema approved some acts to enforce the security regulations of companies. Prior to 1990, a set of particular and tightly linked institutional and informal relationships among corporate stakeholders distinguished German corporate from other countries' situations. It combined integration and institutionalization of financial and employee power. German corporate governance regime could be called as a consensual stakeholder model that incorporates managers, creditors, and employees within the firm. [...]

[...] CHAIRMAN The chairman's role in securing good corporate governance is crucial. Chairmen are primarily responsible for the working of the board, for its balance of membership subject to board and shareholders' approval, for ensuring that all relevant issues are on the agenda, and for ensuring that all directors, executive and non-executive alike, are enabled and encouraged to play their full part in its activities. Chairmen should be able to stand sufficiently back from the NON EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS The calibre of the non-executive members of the board is of special importance in setting and maintaining standards of corporate governance. [...]

[...] The parliament could thus practise an almost absolute power insomuch as it had the sovereignty and the executive power was subjugated to the legislative one. Carré de Malberg said: domesticating the executive power, the IIIrd Republic gave birth to the assembly regime or the absolute parliamentary government” Managerial Capitalism and the executive power's comeback In 1967, John Kenneth Galbraith takes this thesis back and adapts it to the new configurations of the firm. According to him, because of the fact that the firm is getting bigger and bigger, and that information is asymmetrical between managers and shareholders, from then on, it was the “technostructure” that governs the firm and not the shareholders, who become almost useless in terms of governance. [...]

[...] Political governance and Corporate Governance Table of contents Introduction 1. POLITICAL AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE: SIMILIRATIES The term Governance Simultaneous evolution The entrepreneur and the Industrial Revolution The apparition of the Shareholder and the Parliamentary Government Managerial Capitalism and the executive power's comeback Shareholder Capitalism and the legislative power Simultaneous structure: Checks and Balances Separation of powers Control Influent actors 2. HOW DO POLITICS INFLUENCE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE? Foreign policy and Corporate Governance The regulation of business 3. HOW DO CORPORATIONS INFLUENCE POLITICS? [...]

[...] This mean of contribution reflects how limitations are not always useful. It started as PAC became a key source of endowment; political parties began to lose some of their authority with their candidates. So the Congress amended the Act in 1979 in a way as to try to reinforce political parties' role. These amendments stated was that political parties could assemble funds for party building activities and for voter registration drives as long as they did not support any particular candidate. [...]