Response to Melvin Dubnick’s Remarks ‘Separated by a Common Subject’

1. Response to Melvin Dubnick’s Remarks ‘Separated by a Common Subject’ Presented to the BAA Special Interest Groups in Corporate Governance and Public Services Accounting Conference ‘Governance of the Private and Public Sectors: Distant Cousins or Non-Identical Twins?’ University of Nottingham, 14-15 December 2004 Professor Chris Mallin, Director Centre for Corporate Governance Research, The Birmingham Business School, University of Birmingham, UK

2. Key points from Melvin’s remarks • Time spent in trying to create disciplinary bridges • Common language, common subject – accountability – but the devil is in the detail • Emphases of different disciplines in relation to accountability • Differences even within disciplinary boundaries • Implications of legal structure

3. Key points from Melvin’s remarks • Some ‘global’ developments too, such as the ‘crisis of trust’ leading to demands for a ‘new accountability’ • Regulatory aspects emphasised • More demand for transparency and an inclusive approach taking account of other stakeholder interests • Value of virtual and real venues for interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary research

4. Accountability • Charkham (1994) ‘Keeping Good Company’: • Cadbury Committee (1992) ‘They [i.e. the managers] must be free to drive their companies forward but exercise that freedom within a framework of effective accountability’ (page 4) • ‘….”accountability” covers standards of behaviour as well as standards of competence’ (page 355) • An adequate system of accountability should encompass adequate and timely information for management, and they should be capable of understanding it and using it appropriately.

5. ‘Corporate Governance: An International Review’ • The journal was founded by Professor Bob Tricker • First volume published in January 1993 by Blackwell Publishers • Bob stated that the journal would ‘adopt an international and comparative perspective’

6. ‘Corporate Governance: An International Review’ • Bob had great foresight stating that adopting this international and comparative perspective ‘means having to reflect differing company law jurisdictions, regulatory regimes and board level practices; but this is precisely where the real interest and longer term developments are going to come from, given the increasing globalisation of business, the harmonisation of law and accounting practices and the interaction of securities markets and their regulators’.

7. ‘Corporate Governance: An International Review’ • Given the emphasis of the journal on international and comparative research, the published papers reflect this approach • An analysis of papers published in the 4 volumes making up the 2003 issue shows the following:

8. ‘Corporate Governance: An International Review’ • Country studies from Volume 11 (4 issues, 2003): - US - Malaysia - Turkey - UK - Australia - New Zealand - Taiwan - Bahrain - China - Korea - Singapore - Denmark

9. ‘Corporate Governance: An International Review’ • A review of earlier volumes would add many more countries including, for example: Nigeria, Belgium, Saudi Arabia, Estonia, Poland, Ireland, Argentina, Germany, Russia, Greece, Sweden. • The papers may concentrate on a specific facet of corporate governance structure in a particular country, for example, directors’ remuneration, board structure, audit committees; or may look at a particular aspect of corporate governance, for example, corporate governance and corporate performance

10. ‘Corporate Governance: An International Review’ • Avenues for future publications: - country specific studies - structural studies - comparative studies - well written case studies - special issues based either on conferences/colloquia, or on a particular theme

11. Conclusions • Accountability and transparency are • fundamental to good governance • Interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary • research draws on not only subject • complexities, but also cultural, legal and • market complexities

12. Response to Melvin Dubnick’s Remarks ‘Separated by a Common Subject’ Presented to the BAA Special Interest Groups in Corporate Governance and Public Services Accounting Conference ‘Governance of the Private and Public Sectors: Distant Cousins or Non-Identical Twins?’ University of Nottingham, 14-15 December 2004 Professor Chris Mallin, Director Centre for Corporate Governance Research, The Birmingham Business School, University of Birmingham, UK