Deciphering SingPost's governance review report
In future, the company should pick only consultants that provide practical advice and write reports that can be understood.
THE long-awaited report on the corporate governance review of Singapore Post (SingPost) by the consulting firm Heidrick & Struggles was finally published on July 4.
A recent Straits Times report (July 5) quoted me as saying that "I think that implementing the recommendations . . . should go a long way towards addressing not only the disclosure lapses but also some other issues I had raised, such as the size, independence and competencies of the board". The report did not mention what I thought about the SingPost report and my reservations about some of the findings and recommendations.
When I read the executive summary of the special audit report released in May, I wished that I was able to read the full report. When I read the executive summary of the corporate governance review report, my thought was "God help those who have to read the full report".
BT is now on Telegram!
For daily updates on weekdays and specially selected content for the weekend. Subscribe to t.me/BizTimes
Columns
‘Competition for talent’ a poor excuse to keep key executives’ pay under wraps
OCBC should put its properties into a Reit and distribute the trust’s units to shareholders
Why a stronger US dollar is dangerous
An overstimulated US economy is asking for trouble
Too many property agents? Cap commissions on home sales
Time to study broadening of private market access