Post on 18-Oct-2020
© Copyright Genius Methods Limited 2014 Page 1 of 7
corporate Governance panel debate series
Tone from the top: understanding
the role of the chairman WHITE PAPER BASED ON 26th February 2014 DEBATE HELD AT THE raf Club, London
The latest in Genius Methods’ Corporate Governance Panel
Debate series brought together a wide range of experts in the
field to discuss ‘Tone from the Top: Understanding the Role
of the Chairman’. Please review the panellists listed at the
end.
The panel was chaired by Sharon Constancon, CEO of Genius
Methods who set the scene of boardroom realities, known to
the public … “PPI mis-selling, LIBOR fixing, Deep Water
Horizon, horsemeat, Co-op, Flowers, BBC & Jimmy Saville to
name just some of the more publically known scandals that
have impacted Boards very recently and offered us lessons”.
The question – what is expected of a Chairman over and
above what the text books cover? The debate covered setting
the tone, ethics and culture, of doing the right thing, handling
difficult situations, communicating with the media and
stakeholders and being forward thinking; delivering strategic
thinking and vision within the culture, being the eyes on the
horizon and ears to the ground on behalf of the executive
team and mentoring the CEO though the minefield of day to
day challenges.
The reality – a tall order for a chairman to navigate over and
above legal responsibilities, duties of care and principles of
business! Who would want to take on this role for often little
reward and high personal and legal risk and then mentor on
average two (FTSE statistics) and often three CEO’s during
that term? One cannot help but think of the Queen and
respect the role she plays mentoring Prime Ministers. Non-
executive Chairman are expected to work 1 to 3 days a week
with Board and Committee meetings ranging from quarterly
to monthly.
The role – Chairman’s effort and legal responsibilities are
escalating, risks are real and public profile is paramount yet
remuneration is a fraction of that earned by executives. “The
Chairman brings experience, leadership and stability, steering
the organisation and keeping management accountable to
the strategic vision, encouraging creativity and foreseeing
strategic risks” says Sharon Constancon.
Characteristics of a good chairman
Our esteemed team defined the following characteristics that
would embed an appropriate “Tone from the Top”:
- Values, ethics, commitment
- Skills, experience, knowledge of the industry
- Communication, chairing competence, listener
- Respect of others, earns respect, respects regulation
- Vision, see horizon, strategic thinker
- Alert to risks, senses unknown, sees opportunities
- Mentor, supporter, decision maker
- Leader by example, visible, company agenda first
- Media savvy, digital & IT, changing external world
SYNOPSIS OF THE bp experience
David Jackson, Company Secretary or BP and formerly the
General Council and Company Secretary of Powergen
summarised key “Tone from the Top” learnings of his career
to date.
David noted that he had seen the leadership changing from a
combined Chairman and CEO, CEO style predominating,
supported by combined General Council and Cosec roles to
today’s model. Good governance defines the leadership role
is split between the Chairman leading the Board and setting
the tone, with the CEO leading the organisation and the
CoSec being the guardian of good governance.
© Copyright Genius Methods Limited 2014 Page 2 of 7
The role of General Council and Company Secretary has also
split and the CoSec governance agenda is the key driver and
the role is focused to support to the Non-Executive
Chairman.
David has worked with many Chairmen and the “tones” have
varied from legal, compliance, political, performance to
ethical, strategic, safety and transparency.
In David’s view, the true leadership qualities are shown in the
face of a crisis and true culture change can only readily occur
with a high degree of turnover on the Board; a change of one
NED, unless it is the Chairman, has little opportunity of
making a real impact.
Chairmen and NED’s need to be media savvy and in tune with
social media and public expectations. For example, BP
responded well on the ground to Macondo but did not
handle the PR response correctly – the reputational damage
has been huge - the share price has not yet fully recovered.
Additionally there are risks faced when heads are down
coping in that the world continues to move on and change
and Board behaviour can quickly be out of sync with best
practice.
Another change experienced in David’s time and correlated in
other FTSE companies and particularly the financial services
sector is the mirroring of Board Committees at management
level; providing direct line reporting, focus on the detail, the
strategic vision and all risks.
Planned succession can create inertia in the last chapter of
tenure and sudden change in a Chairman can leave the Board
rudderless. Chairmen need to be wise to human traits and to
avoid inertia, lack of direction and therefore risks to the
organisation, Nominations Committees need to be ready to
start recruiting immediately.
A learning for BP has meant that a key required character
trait prevalent in the CEO is the alignment of their values to
the BP ethical culture.
In summation David stated that Chairman and NED’s are
more accountable to shareholders today than ever before,
needing to engage in the detailed conversation
Culture & VALUES
Bob Garratt a governance consultant questioned “where
does the definition of values start, transfer and end between
the Chairman and the CEO?”
The phrase 'Tone from the Top' gained traction after a series
of well-documented corporate governance failures which
highlighted the need for Boards of Directors to develop an
ethical culture. What impact has this idea had in practice?
‘We just need leaders to encourage us to be grown-up
human beings first and business people second.’
Roger Steare, Author of Ethicability
Every organisation has a set of values which can be revealed
by looking closely at the behaviours and activities
demonstrated every day in business. These values exist
whether they have been discussed and explicitly agreed or
not.
Values are represented in the culture of the organisation
Problems arise when the set of values have either not been
considered or constructed at all; or, most often, when they
have been set at the Board-level and have not been
successfully embedded at every level in the organisation.
Uncommunicated values ‘remain as mere words on the
corporate website, bearing no resemblance to the practices
and attitudes lived by on a day to day basis’ (Grant Thornton,
2012).
“The financial services sector is undergoing a step change
where Conduct Risk and Customer Focus are behavioural
cultures that have to be embedded, demonstrable and
evidenced to be in line with the expectations of the FCA”
stated Constanҫon who is Chairman of a financial services
board Culture and Conduct Committee.
Sharon iterated the FCA (Financial Conduct Authority), a spin
out of the FSA, are forward looking into the realms of
behavioural economics to ensure that the correct cultures to
support good customer outcomes are prevalent in our
financial services market. Many would state that this is
needed but however simple it sounds, it is not an easy
transition for management as witnessed by Constanҫon in
her Board Evaluation work.
Barriers to effective leadership and business have been
highlighted time and time again; badly managed crises and
ineffective leadership. Genius’ question is, how can Boards
© Copyright Genius Methods Limited 2014 Page 3 of 7
best be advised to implement and embed values and ethics
throughout their organisations?
The Role of the Chairman
The role of the Chairman is a nigh impossible task that comes
with huge expectations and responsibilities. Through crises or
changes in CEO’s, the Chairman must oversee the proper
steering of the organisation for its long term sustainability.
These days, Chairmen often serve for 9 years with CEO’s
serving usually about 5 years in the FTSE 150 and less than 3
years in other organisations. This makes the Chairman’s role
in setting the ‘Tone from the Top’ a vital one.
‘It is not just the business you do but the way you do the
business that makes such a difference and it is the way
that chairmen conduct themselves that sets the
example.’
Sir Roger Carr, Chairman of BAE Systems
The ‘Tone from the Top’ is about the values of the
organisation over the long term. Corporate ethos should be
transmitted from the Chairman, who leads by example,
through the Board, the executive, management and down
into all reaches of the organisation.
The Chairman needs to lead a process for setting these
values, then for embedding them throughout the
organisation, and embody these values in their behaviour.
This key process can be facilitated externally to get the
creativity working and in co-operation with the Company
Secretary as the traditional ‘custodian of the company
conscience’.
However, the Chairman is a key representative of the
organisation, not only as a leader within the organisation, but
also as an outward facing position to the rest of the world
and the values must be represented and evident in all of the
Chairman’s activities and actions.
Long term VERSUS short term
One key issue for the Chairman and Board as a whole is
balancing long term values with investor demand for short
term success. It is a challenge for a CEO to drive the short
term success, deliver on strategic direction, appropriately
incentivise delivery while at the same time fully
encompassing the long term values, culture and ethics
defined by the Board.
Peter Montagnon, Associate Director of the Institute of
Business Ethics, suggests that “we need to revisit the question
of what corporations are actually here for. The idea that
corporations exist to increase shareholder value alone, isn’t
considered to be the full picture anymore”.
Peter’s view is that there are a wide variety of competing
interests at stake within a corporation and value setting is an
attempt to reconcile as many of these as possible to guide
the organisation in the right direction.
Incentive schemes, remuneration, expectations of delivery,
performance KPI focus, what is measured, personal agendas,
competitor behaviour, stakeholder expectations are all at risk
of creating counter intuitive behaviour to the culture desired
by the Board.
BARRIERS TO CULTURAL CHANGE
One study on culture change has found that when
implementing culture changes, it can take a year to get
through each layer of management. Even at the top level, it
can be very difficult to get behaviour and culture to change.
Bryan Foss explains “that when times get tough, boards tend
to revert to old ways. There is a tendency to believe that the
old, traditional way of doing things has a certain safety”.
The panel discussed and identified that in business many are
naturally risk averse. What is not always readily recognised is
that there are risks in change but equally there are also risks
in not making necessary changes and adaptations to new
environments and contexts.
Murray Eldridge, experienced business strategist, noted that
“culture change can miraculously occur when the ship is
sinking, but the problem is getting proactive momentum for
change in comfortable times”.
The Chairman’s challenge is to engender and motivate a
process of ongoing cultural development; rewarding the
people and the organisation for improved, less easily
measurable, behaviours that lead to a good business ethic.
Line of Sight
Oonagh Harpur an experienced Board Director and Board
Member of the City Values Forum, working to restore trust
© Copyright Genius Methods Limited 2014 Page 4 of 7
and build integrity in the City, raised the key issue of how the
Board can gain a line of sight right through the organisation.
“How does the Board most effectively keep their ‘noses in
and fingers out’?”
Oonagh’s believes a sound way to understand culture and
effectiveness is at the due diligence stage before joining a
Board; ask the CEO to let you see the reports; these may
provide some initial insights into the culture and
effectiveness of the organisation. “‘Tone from the Top’ after
all is not just about vision and values but also about people
delivering what is expected.”
How does the Board measure behaviour?
Examples were debated and the most unusual was the
recording of committee meetings and measuring the amount
of airtime being spent on each topic! Counting minutes, it
was agreed, was not likely to deliver the right outcomes.
More appropriate examples included carefully focused
questionnaires answered diagonally across the hierarchy,
mystery shopping, worker forums. third party reviews,
internal reviews, chatting to customers and asking
stakeholders.
Boards must determine what key outcomes and behaviours
they desire and construct measures that focus on the
outcome without unintended consequences. It will not be
perfect first time, as people are involved, so the process will
remain iterative as the measures improve and market
expectations continue to evolve.
‘That which is measured, improves.’
Peter Drucker
ACCOUNTABLE, SKILLS & EXPERIENCE
It is the Board’s role to hold management accountable to
deliver against the strategy.
The expectation of Non-Executive Directors is under the
spotlight – time, remuneration, contribution and liability.
Many board roles state they require 10 or 12 days a year of
their NED’s but in reality and given the huge responsibilities
today, this is no longer enough. In many large or regulated
firms 36 – 48 days is more realistic. Casal and Caspar, 2014,
state that 25 days is a realistic minimum. A crisis escalates
the time contribution of NED’s.
One panellist met with a Board and asked the Chairman,
‘how do your NED’s get out into the business?’, to which the
Chairman replied ‘we don’t encourage that sort of thing
around here’…. A warning to a prospective NED!
Work by Professor Andrew Kakabadse at Cranfield University
shows that 63% of executive directors believe that the non-
executive directors do not have the knowledge for the role.
This is likely to be twofold, industry and business experience
on the one hand and NED role competency on the other.
Constanҫon warns, from my observations during board
evaluations that “the research may reflect a different answer
if NED’s were to evaluate their peers; the reason for low
reviews of NED’s by executives is that the executives are on
the receiving side of challenge which is uncomfortable and
skews their responses”.
Notwithstanding this observation Constancon agrees that
often NED’s are not competent in the role from the
perspective of governance, knowledge and ability to
challenge appropriately. Being able to mentor and support
yet challenge rigorously for added value is not easy. The
boardroom is not meant to be a comfortable place but yet it
must not undermine management or fracture the team.
Qualifications such as the Chartered Director programme
offered by the IoD is one such way to equip non-executive
directors with a strong grounding in organisation direction,
strategic vision, corporate governance and the key business
drivers.
Boards lead constantly evolving businesses and it is becoming
more relevant for NEDs to get out into the business and
understand the business and the industry as much as they
can. The value is to better equip the NED’s to challenge
creatively, from a given point of knowledge yet in a focused
manner; to competently understand risks and strategically
see the right vision.
Knowledge and values are a good foundation to translate into
good leadership, tone and ethics. Therefore it is really key
that the Chairman is the leader in “tone” setting.
The counter fear from management is the risk of NED’s
knowing too much. In reality this is not the question or
desired culture, the real risk is the NED getting too involved
and not being able to objectively challenge the management.
© Copyright Genius Methods Limited 2014 Page 5 of 7
Risk management and STRATEGIC RISK
‘Tone from the Top’ is increasingly being seen as an integral
aspect of risk management. Empowering staff at all levels of
the organisation to take responsibility for their own ethical
behaviour and integrity.
Empowering rather than instructing delivers better, simpler
and embedded behaviours. Creating a culture of openness
allows space to ask difficult questions, particularly on issues
of ethics and integrity. Which in turn leads to better
governance and a Board truly engaged in risk management
from operational to strategic risk.
Richard Anderson, Chairman of the Institute of Risk Management, describes a motto for risk management as “the disruptive intelligence that pierces “perfect-place” arrogance”. Anderson notes that Boards are particularly immature at challenging operational risks; questions, if any, do not focus on what is missing and why risks rated as they are or how has the process evolved internally to result in the presented risk register.
The IRM have recently published an excellent guide on Risk Culture - frameworks, processes and standard wherein Anderson states “What is missing is the behavioural element: why do individuals, groups and organisations behave the way they do, and how does this affect all aspects of the management of risk? “
Murray Eldridge observes Boards spend a “very low amount
of time on strategy and the even lower amount is spent on
strategic risk. Boards can tend to get caught up with
operating risk, whereas focusing on strategic risk opens up
the opportunities that risk can provide”. An example was
provided that reflected complacency while things are working
well and carry on without thinking and invariably the stretch
point is reached and a crisis erupts.
Strategic risk assessment is looking in the less obvious places
for risk, the planning for the unknown and considering the
unlikely and to mitigate as much as possible and to be
proactive when the “left hook” happens. It appears to be a
common theme that strategic risks miss the risk register
which in itself can be a process rather than a live project.
Peter Neville-Lewis, founder of Principled Consulting,
discussed the relationship between risk, decision making and
values. He explained that “risk is the result of sub-optimal
decisions and decisions are based on values”.
The learning organisation
A key point raised was the concept of the ‘learning
organisation’. Even with the best set of values and the best
risk management systems, sometimes things still go wrong
and crises occur.
The true test of the organisation is whether it learns from
things that have happened in the past and uses these to
inform the company’s future values and activities. Business is
constantly moving on and the Board must negotiate crises
while still keeping a focus on strategy.
However, there is often a tendency to try to skate over
mistakes that have been made rather than to learn from
them. This is a natural human tendency and it takes the right
culture for individuals to be safe to learn from mistakes. A
culture shift towards openness, reflection and learning
creates a better, smarter and more ethical organisation.
A key set of values set from the Board level is an essential.
The corporate ethos may be promulgated and enforced
through inclusion in employees’ job descriptions and
operating processes. The Chairman leads by example as does
the rest of the Board. Each organisation will have unique
ways of engaging with their internal and external
stakeholders and communicating the values.
Compliance Versus Value setting
A participant recalled a board meeting attended which lasted
a whole day with the time spent entirely on compliance.
Regulated businesses, for example financial services and the
NHS, are driven by management’s need and efforts to satisfy
the regulator. An optimally run executive team should focus
on doing the right thing the right way which should
encompass the expectations of the regulator. This will leave
the Committees and Board to oversee and challenge not
allow compliance to override strategic thinking time.
The credit crisis did cause exceptional refocus in many
industries particularly financial services, which for last 5 years
had focused entirely on prudential risk to the exception of
the customer and other areas of operation.
© Copyright Genius Methods Limited 2014 Page 6 of 7
The pendulum has swung hard the other way and culture,
conduct and the customer experience are now the focus in
this sector requiring a complete mind set change of the
Chairman and the Board.
It takes a strong Chairman with good knowledge of the
industry to balance strategy, risk, business and the needs of
the regulator; keeping all in tandem at a focus and cultural
level and to embed the right behaviours such that natural
compliance is the outcome.
CHAIRMAN’S DUTIES & RESPONSIBILITIES
Bob Garratt noted “the focus on uncertainty is beginning to
develop in well led boards which often function with a virtual
‘Chairman’s Office’ populated by the Chairman and the
Company Secretary with the necessary support”.
This “uncertainty” being the challenge in relation to external
and internal environments and the organisation’s
understanding and mitigation of their impact. Typically an
uncomfortable place for the executive management who are
more familiar with certainties, registers and checklists!
Garrett explained: the Chairman Office focus is to “make
Board duties and responsibilities happen”. Therefore, the
Chairman leading on the definition of what is on the agenda,
what is discussed and then working with the executive team
for their contribution to the agenda and debates.
David Jackson explained how BP’s Board agenda had changed
over the years from the old style of “tell them as little as
possible” approach to the totally integrated role of the Board
today in leading the agenda, culture and debate focus to
enable the delivering key decisions.
Conclusions
David Jackson observed that “we all seem to agree on the
‘what’, the question is ‘how’?”
The conversation honed in on resources needed for the
“how”: knowledge, process and delivery. The need to turn
outside for this resource will depend on the organisation, the
type of resource and what is being addressed.
Risk needs to move from silos and a development of a risk
culture that at Board level is not about operational risk and
risk prevention but about entrepreneurial risk leadership
espoused by the Code and “looking forward to the horizon”.
McKinsey.
Boards are operating in an extremely complex space and
changes in the corporate governance environment are
rapidly evolving. Fresh thinking is required as organisations
will need to be creative and innovative in how they
communicate and embed the ‘Tone from the Top’.
Giving values and ethics real meaning and clout are of the
utmost importance in today’s corporate governance
environment and it is up to each Chairman to take the
initiative and show true leadership in setting the ‘Tone from
the Top’.
ALERT – bad leaders DO EXIST
Bad leaders exist and by definition, therefore there are bad
Chairmen; three crucial factors contribute to the success or
failure of a senior leader: BG Douglas Satterfield
Character
Leadership Style
Their Followers
Examples of bad leadership behaviours:
× Lack of direction (improper or no vision)
× Lack of energy and enthusiasm (no passion)
× Have poor judgement (poor decision-making processes)
× Don't collaborate (sees no need to enlist the assistance
of others)
× Resist new ideas (obedience is valued over creativity and
hard work)
× Lack interpersonal skills (also unwilling to improve social
skills)
× Don't develop others (interested for themselves, not
others)
© Copyright Genius Methods Limited 2014 Page 7 of 7
• demonstrating ethical leadership;
• setting a board agenda which is primarily focused
on strategy, performance, value creation and
accountability, and ensuring that issues relevant to
these areas are reserved for board decision;
• ensuring a timely flow of high‐quality supporting
information;
• making certain that the board determines the
nature, and extent, of the significant risks the
company is willing to embrace in the
implementation of its strategy, and that there are
no ‘no go’ areas which prevent directors from
operating effective oversight in this area;
• regularly considering succession planning and the
composition of the board;
• making certain that the board has effective
decision‐making processes and applies sufficient
challenge to major proposals;
• ensuring the board’s committees are properly
structured with appropriate terms of reference;
• encouraging all board members to engage in board
and committee meetings by drawing on their skills,
experience, knowledge and, where appropriate,
independence;
• fostering relationships founded on mutual respect
and open communication – both in and outside the
boardroom – between the non‐executive directors
and the executive team;
• developing productive working relationships with
all executive directors, and the CEO in particular,
providing support and advice while respecting
executive responsibility;
• consulting the senior independent director on
board matters in accordance with the Code;
• taking the lead on issues of director development,
including through induction programmes for new
directors and regular reviews with all directors;
• acting on the results of board evaluation;
• being aware of, and responding to, his or her own
development needs, including people and other
skills, especially when taking on the role for the first
time; and
• ensuring effective communication with
shareholders and other stakeholders and, in
particular, that all directors are made aware of the
views of those who provide the company’s capital.
Excerpt from the FRC Guidance on Board Effectiveness
The Chairman’s role includes…..
Written by Sharon Constanҫon, CEO Genius Methods Limited www.geniusmethods.com Tel: 01494 565 947
Board Panel David Jackson David was appointed a Director of BP Pension Trustees Limited in January 2004. David is Company
Secretary at BP p.l.c., and has held that position since July 2003. He is actively involved with the
Board and its Committees in the development of corporate governance. Previously he was General
Counsel and Company Secretary at PowerGen from 1989 to 2002 where he was responsible for all
legal matters relating to the PowerGen Group of Companies and all company secretarial matters
relating to the Board, its committees and their corporate governance. Prior to that David held a
number of legal positions with Matthew Hall, AMEC, Chloride Group, Nestle UK and Barlow Lyde &
Gilbert. David is Deputy Chairman of GC100, the Association of General Counsel and Company
Secretaries of the FTSE 100. He was previously on the Advisory Committee of the UKLA.
Oonagh Harpur
Oonagh has inhabited boardrooms for over 20 years as a CEO, Director and NED and Trustee in
both the private and not for profit sectors. She has worked in in the USA and UK and in local and
global businesses in the energy, health, financial services and professional services sectors.
Oonagh began her career in operational research and business strategy. Aged 35, she became
the first law firm CEO. In her second career, she developed her ideas about business values and
commercial success as the CEO of a national entrepreneurship campaign launched at No 10 by
the CBI, IoD and BCC. Her third career was at Linklaters, the global law firm, as Partnership
Secretary and Director of Corporate Responsibility. There, she led on governance and embedding
values across a firm that had tripled in size following five mergers. Oonagh is a Non Executive
Director of HM Treasury Solicitor's; Board Member, City Values Forum and Trustee, Scientific and
Medical Network. She is also one of Cranfield's FTSE 100 women to watch.
Murray Eldridge Murray has over thirty years of international experience in Shipping, Oil & Gas, Telecoms,
Water and Consulting. A board-level operator for the last twenty years, he has held executive
positions in Marketing, Sales, Strategy, Commercial roles and as Managing Director. He has also
held international non-executive roles. He has extensive experience in setting up and managing
international joint ventures and alliances (UK, China, Japan, and Indonesia). Murray is a
Chartered Director and this year released a must read business book “Leading High
Performance”. Murray applies winning principles of sports coaching to Boardroom leadership.
Professor Bryan Foss
Bryan has been an independent non-executive director (NED) and board level adviser for eight
years, having worked most of his 30 year career with IBM Corporation and previously with Nestle.
Bryan’s current roles include a Senior Independent Director and Risk & Audit Chair role with LSE
listed Motive Television PLC (broadcast software) also with aSource Global Group (Financial
services risk and assurance services). Previous NED and Audit roles included the government
Department for Work & Pensions, also the Department for Communities & Local Government.
Bryan also provides independent board advisory, interim management and business development
support to a number of start-ups and fast-growing commercial enterprises and is Visiting Professor
of Business-to-business marketing with Bristol Business School, also honorary president of the CIM
Finance Group and a member of the City of London Marketors Think Tank and has co-authored six
marketing books with Prof. Merlin Stone.
Genius Methods Corporate Governance Panel Debate:
Tone from the Top – Understanding the Influence of the Chairman
26 February, 2014 ● RAF Club, Piccadilly, London
The Panellists
Professor Bob Garratt
Bob is an International Corporate Governance & Board Development Consultant. He has 30 years
of international consulting on board and director review and development in Europe, US, China &
South East Asia, Africa, South Africa and Australia/New Zealand. Previously Bob was an Advisor on
Board Effectiveness and Corporate Governance at KPMG. Currently, he is a visiting professor at
Cass Business School, Chairman of the Unit for Corporate Governance in Africa at University of
Stellenbosch Business School and Director of Garratt Learning Services. His academic experience
includes The Management School, Imperial College of Science & Technology London; Judge at the
Institute of Management Studies, University of Cambridge; Ulster College, Belfast; Architectural
Association School, London.
Peter Montagnon Peter Montagnon became an Associate Director of the Institute of Business Ethics in Sept
2013 having joined the Financial Reporting Council as Senior Investment Adviser in May 2010,
after almost ten years as Director of Investment Affairs of the Association of British Insurers.
Previously Mr Montagnon was a senior journalist on the Financial Times, including spells as
Head of the Lex Column and in charge of coverage of the international capital markets. Peter
was a member of the European Commission’s Corporate Governance Forum from 2005 to
2011. He is past Chairman of the Board of the International Corporate Governance Network
and is also a visiting Professor in Corporate Governance at the Cass Business School of the City
University, London.
Peter Neville Lewis
Peter is a highly experienced Business Adviser, Coach and Mentor with over 30 years’
practical delivery at Managing Director level. Having trained at RMA Sandhurst, he left
the Army to work in the City and in the early 70’s started his own business which was
successfully sold to a quoted PLC in 1986. Since then Peter has held various independent
senior roles and Non Exec positions, as well as establishing two other businesses. Peter
now heads Principled Consulting which he founded 6 years ago to advise Boards and
Senior Teams on principles driven decision making and business ethics. He also delivers
the ethicability® courses and programmes originally developed by his business
colleague, Prof Roger Steare of Cass Business School.
Richard Anderson Richard, Chairman of the Institute of Risk Management , is a Chartered Accountant, a
former partner at PwC where he led the Strategic Risk Services practice in EMEA and until
recently was the Managing Director of Crowe Horwath Global Risk Consulting in the UK. For
the last seven years Richard has developed his own business as a governance and risk
management advisor to Boards. He has a particular interest in matters relating to ERM and
how that fits with Corporate Governance, and wrote a report on Corporate Risk
Management which addresses these topics for the OECD. He is chairman of IRM's Thought
Leadership panel and a member of the BSI Committee that produced BS31100.
Chairman for the Evening : Sharon Constanҫon Sharon is CEO of Genius Methods, a Board Evaluation and Board Development consultancy
that provides robust board evaluations for FTSE, Financial Services, public sector and private
companies. Sharon listed her previous financial services company on the Johannesburg Stock
Exchange in the late 1990’s. Sharon is a Chartered Director, MBA and Chartered Secretary
and has a passion for effective operation of business. Sharon is NED of Buckinghamshire
Building Society and an interviewer for the Chartered Director program of the Institute of
Directors. Sharon is South African Chamber, London Woman in Business, 2013.
Governance Panel