Corporate governance should strive for the community good

Corporate governance authorities are presently contemplating changes to the rules governing three broad areas: quarterly reporting (QR), the tenure of independent directors (IDs) and dual class shares (DCS).

All three are contentious with no clear-cut answers as to what the "correct" way forward should be - for example, opponents of DCS worry about minority rights suffering under a structure that grants proportionately greater voting rights to founder shareholders, while many in the corporate sector wish to see QR done away with altogether as they think the practice is overly onerous and costly.

Given a multitude of differing views and having to accommodate sometimes conflicting needs, how are authorities to decide? The answer was provided almost 16 years ago, just after the Council on Corporate Disclosure and Governance (CCDG) was first formed in 2002, when its chairman JY Pillay said that the council would be guided by the principle of the greatest good for the community and not necessarily only shareholders.