Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Company Responses to Cadbury

Company Responses to Cadbury Richard Bostock Introduction n December 1992, the Cadbury committee published the final draft of its recommendations on the financial aspects of corporate governance. The main aim of this committee was to enhance accountability and disclosure in the light of a perceived failing of corporate governance in the recent past. This failing was particularly evident in large scale collapses such as Maxwell, Polly Peck and BCCI despite being given clean audit reports prior to their demises. The committee’s general terms of reference included how to increase standards of financial reporting and accountability. At the heart of the committee’s recommendations is a voluntary code of best practice. The Cadbury code received a mixed response. Some companies claimed to be already implementing it in full, some said it was irrelevant, others that they recognised it was necessary to introduce more rigorous self regulation if political intervention was to be avoided. It is interesting to examine the responses to these main recommendations by the top 100 companies by market capitalisation. In particular the following will be examined: i. the composition of board structures (e.g. the number of executives (compared to non-executives); ii. power structures (the chairman and chief executive structure); iii. the http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Corporate Governance Wiley

Company Responses to Cadbury

Bostock, Richard
Corporate Governance , Volume 3 (2) – Apr 1, 1995
Download PDF
6 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/company-responses-to-cadbury-RUKuBVXeI4

References (2)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0964-8410
eISSN
1467-8683
DOI
10.1111/j.1467-8683.1995.tb00099.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Richard Bostock Introduction n December 1992, the Cadbury committee published the final draft of its recommendations on the financial aspects of corporate governance. The main aim of this committee was to enhance accountability and disclosure in the light of a perceived failing of corporate governance in the recent past. This failing was particularly evident in large scale collapses such as Maxwell, Polly Peck and BCCI despite being given clean audit reports prior to their demises. The committee’s general terms of reference included how to increase standards of financial reporting and accountability. At the heart of the committee’s recommendations is a voluntary code of best practice. The Cadbury code received a mixed response. Some companies claimed to be already implementing it in full, some said it was irrelevant, others that they recognised it was necessary to introduce more rigorous self regulation if political intervention was to be avoided. It is interesting to examine the responses to these main recommendations by the top 100 companies by market capitalisation. In particular the following will be examined: i. the composition of board structures (e.g. the number of executives (compared to non-executives); ii. power structures (the chairman and chief executive structure); iii. the

Journal

Corporate Governance – Wiley

Published: Apr 1, 1995

There are no references for this article.