Effect Of Corporate Governance On Corporate Social Responsibility .
International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS)Volume VIII, Issue IX, September 2019 ISSN 2278-2540Effect of Corporate Governance on Corporate SocialResponsibility Disclosure of Companies in theNigeria’s Construction IndustryUmar Abdulkadir1 and Mohd Norfian Alifiah21Research Scholar, Azman Hashim International Business School, Univesiti Teknologi Malaysia2Lecturer, Azman Hashim International Business School, Univesiti Teknologi MalaysiaAbstract: - This paper inspects corporate governanceparaphernalia on corporate social responsibility disclosure ofcompanies in the Nigerian Construction Industry. Sample of five(5) construction companies were taking for the period of five (5)years from, 2013-2017, researchers used secondary data whichproduced from annual reports and accounts of the companiessampled. The data was analyses by the means of descriptivestatistics and regression analysis using Stata package. Resultsreveal that board size has positive and significant link withcorporate social responsibility disclosure, thus the mostimportant of corporate social responsibility disclosure ofconstruction companies in Nigeria. CEO Duality has positive butinsignificant relationship with corporate social responsibilitydisclosure, however board composition, and audit committeecomposition have negative effects on corporate socialresponsibility disclosure of the sampled companies. Based on thefindings, the study recommend that the board size should nothave less than seven (7) members given the levels of highernumber of board size to greater disclosure of corporate socialresponsibility activities of the companies sampled. Auditcommittee composition and board composition shouldencompasses knowledgeable members. Predominantly, thecompanies should ensure adequate obedience to the code ofcorporate governance in view of its essential importance in theactualization of increased corporate social nce,CorporateResponsibility Disclosure, Construction IndustrySocialI. INTRODUCTIONCorporate Governance is an essential conception whichinvolved a good compact of public interest because of itscountless significant for the financial and economic fitness ofcompanies and people in common (Adedeji, Ong, Rahman,Odukoya, and Alam, 2019). Because corporate governancediscusses as the set of arrangement, ideologies and proceduresby which a corporation is established. They make availablecourse of action on how the business directed and controlledsuch that it can accomplish it aims and objectives in a waythat improves to the value of the company and it is alsovaluable for all participants in the long term. Participants inthis situation would include every person ranging from boardof directors, management, shareholders to customers,www.ijltemas.inemployees and society. The management of the company infuture shoulder the role of trustee for the others (El-Bassiounyand El-Bassiouny, 2018).In addition, due to separation of ownership frommanagement, corporate governance is expedient to defend thestakeholders’ interest, that is to ensure that, the managersperform in harmony with the stakeholders’ interest (Alfraihand Almutawa, 2017). This gave escalation to a number ofmethod implemented across the world in guaranteeing theusefulness of corporate governance for confirming thenonstop existence of going concern assumption of commercialorganizations. Moreover, according to (Hussain, Rigoni, andOrij, 2018) it is only when companies survive that they will beexpected to discharge their corporate social responsibility.In other word, corporate social responsibility refersto a company voluntary contribution to sustainabledevelopment which goes beyond legal requirements (Barakat,López Pérez and Rodríguez, 2015). Contemporarily, there hasbeen a growing public awareness of the role andresponsibilities of corporations in society (Rampersad andSkinner, 2014). Although companies has been credited withpromoting economic and technological progress, they havealso been criticized for creating social and environmentalproblems (Talebnia, Vakilifard, Yaghoubnezhad, andAlikhani, 2013). Major corporate ethical disaster impacting onthe environment, human resources and the community haveheightened the demand for firms to engaged in corporatesocial responsibility events and corresponding disclosure ofthis activities (Coffie, Aboagye-Otchere, and Musah, 2018)defined corporate social responsibility disclosure as the meansby which organizations inform and convince the society thatthey are meeting their social and environmental expectations.Corporate social responsibility disclosure can be used as adevice by companies to communicate accountability, byshowing their vision for the future and account for the pastperformance. If companies are able to communicate socialand environmental work they can receive advantages attachedto a good reputation and build a relationship, based on trust,with the society in which they operate (El-Bassiouny and ElBassiouny, 2018; Miras-Rodríguez et al., 2018).Page 37
International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS)Volume VIII, Issue IX, September 2019 ISSN 2278-2540The increasing awareness by most stakeholders toknow how organizations affects local communities called forthis study. As discussed in the paper there were many studiesthat were conducted in developed and emerging Asiancountries to examined the relationship between corporategovernance and corporate social responsibility disclosure, butin the context of developing countries there are limitedstudies, in most cases focused on only financial, oil andpharmaceutical sectors, moreover, most of which the studiesare outdated as well as came out with an inconclusive results.Thus the aim of this study is to evaluate the effects ofcorporate governance on the extent of corporate socialresponsibility disclosure of listed firms in the NigerianConstruction IndustryCorporate GovernanceDefining corporate governance is an immense work,as there is no generally accepted definition of it. Corporategovernance can be defined as an established relationshipconcerning the board of the company, shareholders andstakeholder (Haslinda, Alia , and Faizah, 2016). It can also bementions as a mechanisms, processes and relations throughwhich firms are managed, measured, supervised and focussed.Corporate governance structures and principles, identify thedistribution of rights and responsibilities among differentparticipants in the corporation (such as the board of directors,managers, shareholders, creditors, auditors, regulators, andother stakeholders (Awad, Ibrahim, and Hegazy, 2016). It’salso a processes through which corporations' objectives are setand accomplished in the context of the social, regulatory andmarket environment (Chukwujioke, 2018). The governancestructures specifies the distribution of rights andresponsibilities among different participants in the corporationand specifies the rules and regulations for making decisions incorporate organizations such as the board, managers,shareholders and spells out the rules and regulations formaking decision on corporate affairs. By doing this, it alsoprovide the structure through which the company objectivesare set and the means which such set objectives will beachieve. Therefore, corporate governance activities includemonitoring the actions, policies, practices, and decisions ofcorporations to their managers and stakeholders.Moreover, corporate governance practices areaffected by challenges to support the interests of stakeholders(Hadani, Doh, and Schneider, 2019; Mallin, Michelon, andRaggi, 2013). Awareness in the corporate governancepractices of modern corporations, mostly in relation toaccountability, increased, following the collapses of a numberof large corporations, most of which involved accountingfraud (Ahid., Mohamad, and Ahmad, 2016). Therefore,corporate governance present in the management control isessential, because it helps to moderate the informationasymmetry between management and shareholders (GarcíaSánchez and Martínez-Ferrero, 2017). In addition, companieswith better corporate governance inclines to increase thewww.ijltemas.inencouragements of management to disclose more companyinformation for their stakeholders.The essential ingredients of corporate governance arehonesty, trusts and integrity, complete transparency,accountability and responsibility, protection of stakeholder’sinterests and satisfaction, participation, business ethics andvalues, performance orientation, openness, mutual respect andcommitment to organization, sincere adherence to them wouldpave way for the sustenance of business corporationsrealization of corporate goals good and appreciable turnoverand a veritable global market place. These ingredients couldbe summarized into two broad elements. These are the longterm relationship which has to deal with checks and balances,incentives for managers and communication betweenmanagement and investors and the transactional relationshipwhich involve dealing with disclosure and authority.Corporate Social Responsibility DisclosureThe term disclosure encompasses the reporting ofinformation that are of financial and non-financial, that areassociated with directors and executives, or those involvedmanagement consultations, analyses as well as forwardlooking information (Ahid G. et al., 2016). To meet the needsof international stock market and the accounting standards,there is a need for corporations to increase their levels ofdisclosing information from mandatory level to the voluntarydisclosure level to support the decision making procedures.(Al-Janadi, Rahman, and Omar, 2012;García-Sánchez andMartínez-Ferrero, 2017).The rapid collapse of economicbarriers and the globalization of business leads to uncountabledebate on the role of corporate social responsibility in aninternational and national ground (Ararat, Colpan, andMatten, 2018). Corporate social responsibility is anindispensable management instrument for the companies tomake values and popularity within their customers in theirareas of operations (Ali and Isa, 2018). It is documented as anessential theme for international business communities andhas even become their tool for determining where to invest aswell as an expected actions (García-Sánchez and MartínezFerrero, 2017). Corporate social responsibility is not limitedto only assistance to the host community of company'soperations (Muktar, Bahammam, and Jibrin 2016), but a toolfor promoting businesses status as well as reducing thecompany tax (Agyei-Mensah, 2017). The responsiveness ofcompanies towards corporate social responsibility activitieshas enhanced businesses status and reputations in thecommunities they are operating, because the benefits ofcorporate social responsibility activities is not for thecommunity along but companies itself (Jomo, Lindberg, andNowland, 2017). Corporate social responsibility has becomeone of the fundamentals for companies in gaining ownership,people’s and government’s recognitions (Wang and Sarkis,2017). In Nigeria corporate social responsibility started lateAdegbite, Amaeshi, and Nakajima, (2013) and not allcompanies are willing to implement corporate socialPage 38
International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS)Volume VIII, Issue IX, September 2019 ISSN 2278-2540responsibility in their business activity due to theirshareholders traditional thinking (Amaeshi, Adegbite, andRajwani, 2016;Opusunju and Ajayi, 2016) that corporatesocial responsibility implementation is decreasing their profits(Emmanuel, Uwuigbe, Teddy, Tolulope, and Eyitomi, 2018).On the other hand, corporate social responsibility is becomingwell known in each and every sector and in most companiesin this world, particularly, multinational companies that arepracticing it through making provisions for employees,environment, customers and government (Du, Bhattacharya,and Sen, 2010; Galant and Cadez, 2017).The development of corporate social responsibilityexpressively, coupled with the notion that companies haveresponsibilities to the society beyond that of makingprofit (Gamerschlag, Möller, and Verbeeten, 2010), this is inline with the definition of corporate social responsibility asthe ongoing obligation by business to behave ethically andcontribute to economic development while improving thequality of life of the employees and their families as well as ofthe local community and society at large. Corporate socialresponsibility was focussed from the notion that companiescan have a positive and considerable influence on socialchange in addition to benefits that companies be able toreceive from implementing corporate social responsibility(Jamali and Karam, 2018). In addition, five expected benefitsthat companies might gain from engaging in corporate socialresponsibility activities are acknowledged by Weber, (2008),1) Corporate social responsibility might have positive soundeffects on company image and reputation which is in line withthe findings of Vincent Dutot, Eva Lacalle, Galvez David,Versailles Versailles, (2016), El Hussein, (2018)which in turninfluences company competitiveness. 2) Corporate socialresponsibility might have positive effects on employees’motivation, retention and recruitment, because employees areinterested to work in a well-motivated and simulatedenvironment is also in line with the findings of Krasodomskaand Cho, (2017) or companies that are involved in corporatesocial responsibility activities are making the potentialemployees to see the companies more beautiful. 3) The thirdpossible benefit that companies will derived frominvolvement in corporate social responsibility is cost savingsas justified by the study of Khan et al., (2013) whichmaintained that by executing a sustainability strategy ordeveloping positive relationship with certain stakeholders,such as managers, can help companies with efficiency, savetime and improve access to capital. 4) Corporate socialresponsibility might lead to an increase in profits, this alsoevidenced from previous studies such as the studies hony, 2018;Shafat Maqbooln, 2010) and. 5)Involvement in corporate social responsibility will makecompanies to reduce and manage risks stemming fromnegative attitudes of illiterate inhabitants and unemployedteeming youths as well as negative press, boycotts ofcustomers.www.ijltemas.inEmpirical Studies Reviewed’ on the issues concerningCorporate GovernanceMuktar, Bahamman and Jibrin, (2016), scrutinizesthe influences of corporate governance on corporate socialresponsibility disclosure of some companies in the Nigerianfood products industry. Sampled of five food productcompanies for a period of 2008-2012. The research madeuse of secondary data generated from annual reports andaccounts of the sampled companies. The data were analyzedby means of descriptive statistics and regression analysis. Theresults reveal that board size and board independence havesignificant associated with corporate social responsibilitydisclosure this is contrary to the study of Aminu andMuhammad, (2014), who found negative and insignificantrelationship. While the chief executive duality also hasinsignificant relationships with corporate social responsibilitydisclosure, however, board composition, and audit committeecomposition have negative influences on the corporate socialresponsibility disclosure of the sampled companies.Ado, (2016), perceived the effect of corporate socialresponsibility disclosure on financial performance amongbanks in Nigeria. After examining the different studies in theliterature, a sample size of 7 banks out 21 banks in Nigeriawas used. The study used an ex-post-facto research design,with the data for six years, from 2010-2015. He also usedMultiple Regression Model statistical method. The results ofthe study showed that, financial performance has significantrole in corporate social responsibility disclosure of banks inNigeria, which confirms the studies (Coffie et al., 2018;Odoemelam and Okafor, 2018). The other two independentvariables (ROA and ROCE) disclosed significant effects ofcorporate social responsibility disclosure.Coffie et al., (2018) observe the influence ofcorporate governance on the level of multinational activities(DMAs) on company social responsibility disclosures, in thedeveloping country. Using the annual reports of 33 sampledcompanies, for a period of 2008 to 2013, the researchersadopted corporate social responsibility disclosure indexestablished by (Hackston and Milne, (1996). The resultsshowed that the DMAs has significant association with bothquality and quality of corporate social responsibilitydisclosure. The results also showed that certain corporategovernance characteristics such as board size (quality andquantity) as well as the social responsibility committee of theboard (quality) have a significant relationship with corporatesocial responsibility disclosure, this is in line with the study(Muktar, Bahammam, and Jibrin,, 2016). However, increasingthe number of non-executive directors may not necessarilyincrease the quantity or quality of disclosure.Anazonwu et al., (2018), observes the impact ofa corporate board variety of sustainability reporting on thesampled manufacturing companies in Nigeria. The used paneldata research design and the population which containsPage 39
International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS)Volume VIII, Issue IX, September 2019 ISSN 2278-2540manufacturing companies from the Nigerian Stock Exchange,which is limited to conglomerates sector, consumer goods,and, industrial goods sector. Secondary data were used by theresearchers, which extracted from the annual reports ofsampled manufacturing companies. Sustainability reportingwas measured by the used of Economic, Social, andGovernance (ESG) index, the independent variables wereboard member nationality, the percentage of women directors,the percentage of non-executive directors, and multipledirectorships. The results showed the negative impact ofboard member nationality, whereas the percentage of womendirectors, the percentage of nonexecutive directors, andmultiple directorships were also insignificant.Ali and Isa, (2018), review the literature on theinfluence of companies’ characteristics (board attributes, chiefexecutive officer attributes, ownership structure and financialattributes) on corporate social responsibility disclosure. Theydiscover that, corporate characteristics have been empiricallyfound to have an impact on companies, corporate socialresponsibility disclosure both positive and negative impact,whereas some corporate characteristics acknowledged norelationship. They also a study to be conducted throughintroducing a moderator in order increase or transforms therelationship power between the corporate characteristics andcorporate social responsibility disclosure.Odoemelam and Okafor, (2018) examine the impactof corporate governance on environmental disclosure of nonfinancial companies listed on the Nigeria Stock Exchange(NSE), using agency, stakeholder and legitimacy theories.Content analysis, cross-sectional data, OLS regressiontechniques was used to evaluate the impact of the boardfeatures on the level of overall environmental disclosure. Theresults showed that board independence, board meeting, andthe environmental committee were statistically significant,whereas audit committee independence and board size wereinsignificant. Among the three company characteristics usedto alleviate forged result only firm size significantly influencethe quantity of overall environmental disclosure of the samplecompanies. Auditor type ―big 4‖ (Ernest Young, Deloitte,KPMG, and PwC) and industry membership.Adegbite et al., (2013), investigated the impact ofcorporate diversity on corporate social, environmentaldisclosure of manufacturing companies in Nigeria. The studyconsidered both industrial and consumer goods companies,correspondingly, containing a total of 37 companies. A totalof 17 companies was selected for this study using purposiverandom sampling covering the period 2012–2016. Whereasthe content analysis method was involved to investigate thelevel of corporate social, environmental disclosure, the studyimplemented the following variables (board size, foreigndirectors, and gender) as measures for corporate diversity.Findings discovered that board size, foreign directors andgender had a significant positive impact on the level ofcorporate social environmental disclosure of the selectedwww.ijltemas.incompanies. On the other hand, the existence of anindependent director and non-executive director had aninsignificant positive influence on corporate socialenvironmental disclosure.Nyahas et al., (2018) the study examinesstakeholder’s impact on voluntary disclosure practices oflisted companies in Nigeria from the perception of directors.The study used a cross-sectional research design. Data werecollected using a survey questionnaire for the constructs ofpower, legitimacy and urgency. The data from the voluntarydisclosure practices were gotten from financial reports ofcompanies. The data were analysed using partial leastsquares. The results show that managers’ observation ofstakeholders’ power and urgency relate to voluntarydisclosure. Legitimacy, firm size and industry group are notsignificant predictors of voluntary disclosure. It wasconcluded that stakeholders who are in control of criticalresources such as the financial community, customers andcreditors should put more pressure on companies to discloseinformation to meet many stakeholder needs. This willcomplement the efforts of regulatory agencies in promotingtransparency in voluntary disclosure.Empirical literature on the relationship between theproportion of executive directors and the level of corporatesocial responsibility disclosure is mixed. Whereas companieswith a lower proportion of executive directors have a higherlevel of corporate social responsibility disclosure in Germany(El-Bassiouny and El-Bassiouny, 2018;Lock and Seele,2015), in USA (Farooq, Ullah, and Kimani, 2015; Tran, 2018)and in the studies of (Baraka, López Pérez, and Rodríguez,2015;García-Sánchez and Martínez-Ferrero, 2017;Muttakinand Khan, 2014) who established a negative relationshipbetween Board Composition and corporate socialresponsibility disclosure.II. METHODOLOGYPopulation and sample sizeThe research design for this study is the non-surveymethod, as the study involves the use of annual report andaccounts of the sampled construction companies. Populationof the study is made up of all the ten (10) quoted companies inthe Nigerian construction industry sector and the study coversthe period of five (5) years from 2013-2017. The ten (10)quoted companies in the Construction Industry are in the table1: belowTable 1: Quoted Companies in the Nigerian Construction IndustryS/noName of CompanyYear ofIncorporationYearListing1Arbico Plc.195819782Cappa and D Albertople195019783Costain (West Africa) Plc.19521974Page 40
International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS)Volume VIII, Issue IX, September 2019 ISSN 2278-25404G. Cappa Plc.194819795Roads (Nig.) Plc.197219796Julius Berger (Nig.) Plc.7Multiverse Resources 91Source: Nigerian Stock Exchange Fact Book 2015/2016.From the table above the working population wastaken based on latest listing and availability of data from 2013– 2017 in line with research of Muktar, Bahammam, Jibrin,(2016). The copanies that met the creteria are shown in thetable 2: belowTable 2: Sampled CompaniesS/no12Name of CompanyJulius Berger (Nig.)Plc.Multiverse ResourcesPlc.Year 34EEC200120045PW20052001Source: Generated by the researchers from table 1Based on the inadequate working population, all thefirms were measured as a sample of the study. The data wascollected from 2013-2017 annual reports and account of thesampled companies. Prior literature on corporate socialresponsibility disclosure exposed that majority of studies usedcontent analysis of annual report, (Branco and Rodrigues,2008; Dias, 2017; Eisinga, 2017; Emmanuel et al., 2018).Therefore, content analysis method was used for this study toobtain appropriate data based on the prior studies. Moreover,the study used secondary data.Dependent Variable and its MeasurementCorporate Social Responsibility Disclosure in thisstudy emerged as dependent variable. Well-matched with(Muktar, Bahammam and Jibrin, 2016) a scoring system of 1,0 was used to analyse corporate social responsibilitydisclosure among the sampled companies. The methodsinvolved in the scoring system are through categorization ofCorporate Social Responsibility Disclosure into four groupsas showed in the table below, and determining the appropriatesub-categories under each group as shown in appendix II.Table 3: Division of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure ItemsS/noGroupsItems1Community tal22Source: Adapted from work of (Branco and Rodrigues, 2008).The four groups have a total of twenty-two (22)items. If an information of subgroups (items) encountered inthe annual report, these subgroups will gain a score of 1,while a 0 score will be conferred if an information onsubgroup is not revealed.Independent Variables and their MeasurementsCorporate Governance is an independent variableand it has the following items as its proxies as presentedbelow:1) Board size (BS): This is the total number ofmembers of the Board of Directors.2) Board composition (BC): This is taken as thepercentage of Executive Directors sitting on boardwith the non-Executive Directors.3) CEO Duality (CEOD): This exist when the sameindividual plays the role of CEO and Chairman ofthe Board. (Jomo et al., 2017). In accordance withprevious studies CEO duality is coded on a nominalscale of 1 and non CEO duality is coded 0 (Iskandaret al, 2011).4) Audit Committee Composition is the proportion ofindependent Directors to the total number ofmembers of the Audit Committee in line with (Jizi,Salama, Dixon, and Stratling, 2014).Control VariableThe researchers took firm size as a control variablefor the study and is measured as the natural logarithm of totalasset, according to Rouf, (2001) it can influence the extent ofcorporate social responsibility of any particular firm.Model specificationThere are so many empirical studies that have usedquantitative method which included statistical methods toscrutinize the relationship between levels of corporate socialresponsibility disclosure and the factors that are prompting thelevels of corporate social responsibility disclosure (Tran,2018). The statistical methods such as linear regression wereadapted to scrutinize the relationship between the dependentand the independent variables in this study:CSRD βo β1BS β2BC β3CEOD β4ACC εwhereas:www.ijltemas.inPage 41
International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS)Volume VIII, Issue IX, September 2019 ISSN 2278-2540CSRD represent as corporate social responsibility disclosureΒ0 ----- βn is interceptBS represent board sizeBC represent board compositionCEOD represent CEO duality then,ACC represent Audit committee compositionε represent the error term.III. DISCUSSION OF RESULTSThe results are presented and foremost results areconsidered. The segment starts with descriptive statistics ofthe study variables covering the period of five (5) years from2013-2017, correlation matrix and linear regression were alsoused.Table 4: Descriptive Statistics of VariablesCorrelation Matrix in table 5 above shows therelationship between the dependent and the independentvariables used in the regression model. It indicates that all thevalues on the diagonal are all 1.000 signifying that eachvariable is perfectly correlated with itself. All the independentvariables are positively correlated with corporate socialresponsibility disclosure. Although, the correlation is positive,the relationship shows no strong correlation. Is apparent thatBS has the strongest correlation with corporate socialresponsibility disclosure and BC has the least correlation andCEOD is negatively correlated with BS and BC.To further evaluate the validity of non-multicollinearity indication shown by the correlation matrices, thestudy uses Tolerance Value (TV) as well as Variance InflationFactor (VIF).The following table represents the results of TV and VIF forthe Corporate Governance components.Table 6: Multi-co linearity IZE1.410.707511Mean VIF 1.38Source: Generated by the Researchers from the annual Report and Accountsof the Construction Companies Sampled, using Stata (Version11).Table 4 above presents the minimum, maximum,mean and standard deviation of dependent and independentvariables. The average of dependent variable is 1.74 and itsstandard deviation is 0.935 with a minimum of 0 andmaximum of 3.433. For the independent variables, the highestand the lowest average values are those of board size with10.04 and board composition with 2.34 respectively. Boardsize also account for the highest standard deviation of 2.440.Whereas CEO Duality has the lowest standard deviation of0.046.Table 5: Correlation Matrix VariablesCSRDCSRD1.000BS0.6493From the Table 6 above, 1/VF ranges from 0.872107to 0.661603018 which suggests non multi-co linearity feature.Multi-co linearity feature exists when the value of TV is lessthan
community along but companies itself (Jomo, Lindberg, and Nowland, 2017). Corporate social responsibility has become one of the fundamentals for companies in gaining ownership, people's and government's recognitions (Wang and Sarkis, 2017). In Nigeria corporate social responsibility started late
Corporate Governance, Management vs. Ownership, Majority vs Minority, Corporate Governance codes in major jurisdictions, Sarbanes Oxley Act, US Securities and Exchange Commission; OECD Principles of Corporate Governance; Developments in India, Corporate Governance in Indian Ethos, Corporate Governance – Contemporary Developments. 2.
The corporate governance of Ajinomoto Co., Inc. is described below. I. Basic Views on Corporate Governance, Capital Structure, Corporate Profile and Other Basic Information 1. Basic Views Our basic philosophy concerning corporate governance is set out in "Chapter 2: Basic Approach" of the Ajinomoto Principle on Corporate Governance.
Corporate Governance What is Corporate Governance? There are many definitions. The CBN Code of Corporate Governance defines it as follows: Corporate governance refers to the processes and structures by which the business and affairs of an institution are directed and managed. In order to improve
The Board is committed to maintaining high standards of corporate governance by overseeing a sound and effective governance framework for the management and conduct of Computershare’s business. This corporate governance statement sets out a description of Computershare’s main corporate governance practices.
80Report of the Remuneration Committee In compliance with the Financial Reporting Council's UK Corporate Governance Code, the company has prepared the Corporate Governance Report that follows. www.iairgroup.com57 Strategic report Corporate governance Financial statements Additional information Chairman's introduction to corporate governance
U.S. Energy Corp. (USEG) Corporate Governance UGI Citizenship Ulta Salon Cosmetics & Fragrance Corporate Governance Under Armour UA Corporate Responsibility Unified Grocers Corporate Governance Union Pacific Corporation Sustainability and Citizenship Report Unisys UIS Social Responsibility United Bankshares, Inc. (UBSI) Corporate Governance
For this reason, this Annual Corporate Governance Report goes beyond demon-strating compliance with provisions of the Corporate Bylaws and of the Code of Good Corporate Governance. It is prepared by ISA's Board of Directors as a tool to explain how the company's corporate governance really works, as well as relevant changes during 2020.
The corporate governance of Mitsubishi HC Capital Inc. (the "Company") is described below. I Basic Views on Corporate Governance, Capital Structure, Corporate Profile and Other Basic Information 1. Basic Views For the Company's basic views on corporate governance, please refer to Principle 3.1 (ii)
