Friends,
In view of the corporate governence issues already being a widely discussed and debated issue in some western countries and also becoming a major issue here, isn't Hr personnel uniquely positioned in administering corporate governance? That is what this article discusses courtesy workindex.com
Quote:
The increase in reported fraud and the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 brought the topic of corporate governance to the top of the corporate agenda for many domestic and international companies, particularly public companies in the United States.
While much of the discussion has centered around the roles and responsibilities of boards of directors, CEOs, CFOs and outside auditors, HR executives are uniquely positioned to provide a leadership role in developing and administering certain aspects of corporate governance programs.
Control of the main HR functions allows human resource executives to set the tone for the company’s corporate culture and administer the outreach to employees.
Administration of an effective corporate governance program is accomplished through the development of an efficient infrastructure through which the program is communicated and dispensed, including comprehensive training of personnel and appropriate follow-up of reported violations.
The structure of the corporate governance program itself should place strong emphasis on both preventing and detecting violations.
Functions controlled by HR include:
• screening candidates for new positions,
• guiding the process for ongoing employee evaluations and promotions and
• providing employee training.
Following a recent financial restatement, a large public company, which shall remain unnamed, undertook a significant overhaul of its HR function as part of an overall plan to The consultant firm was engaged to assist the company in evaluating a number of aspects of its operations, including those HR functions that could be used to help prevent and detect fraudulent operating subsidiaries around the world. Based on a review of the effectiveness of those functions, the company updated its policies, rewrote its personnel handbook, restructured its employee orientation training program and periodic refresher courses, and expanded pre-employment background checks performed as part of the hiring process. Among other control enhancements the updated personnel handbook included communication of senior management’s focus on honesty and integrity in dealing with employees, customers, suppliers and shareholders, including fraud identification and reporting.
The company’s HR leader actively recruited the commitment and participation from local HR directors at subsidiaries around the world to obtain their commitment and follow-through to help ensure the success of the program. Early employee reaction was positive but continued participation and commitment by HR directors around the world will be necessary to ensure the success and effectiveness of the changes.
Code of Conduct
The backbone of any corporate-governance policy is a corporate code of conduct that expresses the company’s ethical standards for dealing with customers, suppliers and interaction among employees. It should be developed in conjunction with the company’s legal counsel and should specifically address corporate core values, fraud, illegal acts, and harassment as well as the reporting and resolution of violations of the policy. The secret to its effectiveness is the framework put in place to administer the program and the buy-in by all members of the corporate organization. The framework should eliminate uncertainties about corporate expectations of employee behavior, the manner through which violations are reported and management’s obligations to investigate and resolve issues raised by employees. Formal documentation of all aspects of the program is very important and should include procedures to be followed by management in the investigation and resolution of all matters reported under the program.
Buy-in by everyone from the board to the lowest-level employee is critical to effective operation of the program. Creating “tone at the top” through supportive communication by senior management and demonstrative actions is also very important to convince all employees of management’s commitment to the program. In addition, all employees should have ready access to the code of conduct and the procedures for reporting violations on the intranet and/or in the employee handbook. Corporate-code-of-conduct reminders, along with the available means to report violations, should be posted on employees’ portals and in their lounges, cafeterias and break rooms.
In another recent case, based upon recommendations arising from a fraud prevention program review, the HR manager for a large service business, also to remain unnamed, expanded the requirement for a complete background check to include promotions of existing personnel to management level positions. This background check level included professional license checks as well as educational achievements. In this particular case, a “model” employee of eight years was being considered for promotion to a mid-level management position with responsibility for customer contact and oversight of a team of 15 employees. The newly amended background check found that, not only did the promotion candidate not have the professional license claimed, he had never completed course requirements for graduation and had not achieved the grade-point average claimed.
A corporate governance program should include formal policies with respect to hiring, promotions and periodic performance reviews. Hiring policies should include specific requirements for background investigations on all new hires. Investigation requirements vary depending on the nature of the position being filled. Such requirements can include:
• financial profile,
• bankruptcy search,
• employment history,
• education verification,
• personal reference checks,
• criminal investigation record search,
• civil litigation record search,
• motor-vehicles search,
• professional licenses search,
• executive name search,
• media search and
• drug screen
Promotions to strategic positions should also include updated background checks and an independent interview by one of the HR professionals prior to promotion. Periodic performance evaluations should consider the individual’s participation in, and commitment to, the corporate code of conduct.
The corporate-governance program should also include employee-training modules to supplement other employee training programs. New employee orientation programs should include training on corporate values and the code of conduct along with the employee’s obligations to report violations. Periodic employee training should include refresher courses on the code of conduct as well as procedures to be followed in reporting violations. To be most effective, training should be tailored to the specific roles of individual employees as well as their geographic location to ensure that employees are provided guidance specific to their positions and locations and understand their obligations should they observe unethical behavior. Employees should acknowledge an understanding of the code of conduct at the initiation of employment as well as annually thereafter.
The program should provide a means for employees to report violations on an anonymous or named basis to a code of conduct compliance officer and/or the company’s audit committee or board of directors through a telephone hotline, e-mail or regular mail. To assure confidentiality to the individual reporting the violation, many companies are using a third- party provider telephone hotline to manage the reporting process and ensure that all violations are reported to the appropriate parties in accordance with the program.
HR should also consider a periodic self-assessment of the operating effectiveness of the corporate-governance program to ensure that communication, training and functionality of the program is operating in a manner consistent with management’s expectations and that reported violations are documented, researched and resolved in a timely manner.
In our experience HR professionals should play a key role in any corporate-governance program, adding significant value to the process. They can develop an efficient infrastructure to maintain and monitor compliance with the program and can help ensure buy-in by employees. Key aspects of HR’s role also include dissemination and acceptance of a code of conduct, effective hiring and promotion practices, and periodic training about fraud and illegal acts.
Unquote:
Interesting??
Feedback from all mt HR friends please................
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
20In view of the corporate governence issues already being a widely discussed and debated issue in some western countries and also becoming a major issue here, isn't Hr personnel uniquely positioned in administering corporate governance? That is what this article discusses courtesy workindex.com
Quote:
The increase in reported fraud and the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 brought the topic of corporate governance to the top of the corporate agenda for many domestic and international companies, particularly public companies in the United States.
While much of the discussion has centered around the roles and responsibilities of boards of directors, CEOs, CFOs and outside auditors, HR executives are uniquely positioned to provide a leadership role in developing and administering certain aspects of corporate governance programs.
Control of the main HR functions allows human resource executives to set the tone for the company’s corporate culture and administer the outreach to employees.
Administration of an effective corporate governance program is accomplished through the development of an efficient infrastructure through which the program is communicated and dispensed, including comprehensive training of personnel and appropriate follow-up of reported violations.
The structure of the corporate governance program itself should place strong emphasis on both preventing and detecting violations.
Functions controlled by HR include:
• screening candidates for new positions,
• guiding the process for ongoing employee evaluations and promotions and
• providing employee training.
Following a recent financial restatement, a large public company, which shall remain unnamed, undertook a significant overhaul of its HR function as part of an overall plan to The consultant firm was engaged to assist the company in evaluating a number of aspects of its operations, including those HR functions that could be used to help prevent and detect fraudulent operating subsidiaries around the world. Based on a review of the effectiveness of those functions, the company updated its policies, rewrote its personnel handbook, restructured its employee orientation training program and periodic refresher courses, and expanded pre-employment background checks performed as part of the hiring process. Among other control enhancements the updated personnel handbook included communication of senior management’s focus on honesty and integrity in dealing with employees, customers, suppliers and shareholders, including fraud identification and reporting.
The company’s HR leader actively recruited the commitment and participation from local HR directors at subsidiaries around the world to obtain their commitment and follow-through to help ensure the success of the program. Early employee reaction was positive but continued participation and commitment by HR directors around the world will be necessary to ensure the success and effectiveness of the changes.
Code of Conduct
The backbone of any corporate-governance policy is a corporate code of conduct that expresses the company’s ethical standards for dealing with customers, suppliers and interaction among employees. It should be developed in conjunction with the company’s legal counsel and should specifically address corporate core values, fraud, illegal acts, and harassment as well as the reporting and resolution of violations of the policy. The secret to its effectiveness is the framework put in place to administer the program and the buy-in by all members of the corporate organization. The framework should eliminate uncertainties about corporate expectations of employee behavior, the manner through which violations are reported and management’s obligations to investigate and resolve issues raised by employees. Formal documentation of all aspects of the program is very important and should include procedures to be followed by management in the investigation and resolution of all matters reported under the program.
Buy-in by everyone from the board to the lowest-level employee is critical to effective operation of the program. Creating “tone at the top” through supportive communication by senior management and demonstrative actions is also very important to convince all employees of management’s commitment to the program. In addition, all employees should have ready access to the code of conduct and the procedures for reporting violations on the intranet and/or in the employee handbook. Corporate-code-of-conduct reminders, along with the available means to report violations, should be posted on employees’ portals and in their lounges, cafeterias and break rooms.
In another recent case, based upon recommendations arising from a fraud prevention program review, the HR manager for a large service business, also to remain unnamed, expanded the requirement for a complete background check to include promotions of existing personnel to management level positions. This background check level included professional license checks as well as educational achievements. In this particular case, a “model” employee of eight years was being considered for promotion to a mid-level management position with responsibility for customer contact and oversight of a team of 15 employees. The newly amended background check found that, not only did the promotion candidate not have the professional license claimed, he had never completed course requirements for graduation and had not achieved the grade-point average claimed.
A corporate governance program should include formal policies with respect to hiring, promotions and periodic performance reviews. Hiring policies should include specific requirements for background investigations on all new hires. Investigation requirements vary depending on the nature of the position being filled. Such requirements can include:
• financial profile,
• bankruptcy search,
• employment history,
• education verification,
• personal reference checks,
• criminal investigation record search,
• civil litigation record search,
• motor-vehicles search,
• professional licenses search,
• executive name search,
• media search and
• drug screen
Promotions to strategic positions should also include updated background checks and an independent interview by one of the HR professionals prior to promotion. Periodic performance evaluations should consider the individual’s participation in, and commitment to, the corporate code of conduct.
The corporate-governance program should also include employee-training modules to supplement other employee training programs. New employee orientation programs should include training on corporate values and the code of conduct along with the employee’s obligations to report violations. Periodic employee training should include refresher courses on the code of conduct as well as procedures to be followed in reporting violations. To be most effective, training should be tailored to the specific roles of individual employees as well as their geographic location to ensure that employees are provided guidance specific to their positions and locations and understand their obligations should they observe unethical behavior. Employees should acknowledge an understanding of the code of conduct at the initiation of employment as well as annually thereafter.
The program should provide a means for employees to report violations on an anonymous or named basis to a code of conduct compliance officer and/or the company’s audit committee or board of directors through a telephone hotline, e-mail or regular mail. To assure confidentiality to the individual reporting the violation, many companies are using a third- party provider telephone hotline to manage the reporting process and ensure that all violations are reported to the appropriate parties in accordance with the program.
HR should also consider a periodic self-assessment of the operating effectiveness of the corporate-governance program to ensure that communication, training and functionality of the program is operating in a manner consistent with management’s expectations and that reported violations are documented, researched and resolved in a timely manner.
In our experience HR professionals should play a key role in any corporate-governance program, adding significant value to the process. They can develop an efficient infrastructure to maintain and monitor compliance with the program and can help ensure buy-in by employees. Key aspects of HR’s role also include dissemination and acceptance of a code of conduct, effective hiring and promotion practices, and periodic training about fraud and illegal acts.
Unquote:
Interesting??
Feedback from all mt HR friends please................
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
I'm not sure I qualify as a Guru, but I would tell you that the challenges faced with so many of the items listed in your Corporate Governance guidelines list are impacted by Court decisions and the legality of use of some of these items you've listed is questionable at least, indefensable, at best--at least in the USA.
Part of HR Management's process over the past few years has been in simply hiring acceptable employes while simultaneously keeping companies out of litigation. Honestly, it's a tightrope in many cases, and I've seen HR Execs that want to depart HR for that very reason--they're tired of being second-guessed and facing court time and legal sanctions for hiring decisions made on what they believe to be valid assessments. If one is not concerned about that, he/she faces those challenges at their own peril.
Potential employees, as you may realize, have been known to seek out opportunities for litigation with employers based on the interview and screening process. They would definitely file suit if denied a position based on some of the elements included in this CG list. Perhaps a case can be made that all elements on your CG list are appropriate once a candidate is hired and has attained tenure in a position.
Also, you must understand that this isn't a uniquely "American" posture; it's showing up through both Europe and, now, in South America. I'm doing an HR Seminar in Beijing in a few weeks--check back with me mid-October and I'll tell you what HR Directors and VPs are telling me about the situation there.
As a matter of fact, I can't think of one recent Seminar I've conducted on an HR topic where the issues of litigation in the hiring/assessment/termination process haven't arisen either as a question or as a topic for discussion; I'm very cognizant, and stress to our other orchestration partner-consultants---how you handle these questions in a Seminar setting can have a positive or negative impact on an entire corporate view of the challenges faced.
Let's also focus on a key element--- HR areas generally shy away from litigation; those involved in Corporate Governance generally walk hand in hand with Corporate Legal--whether in-house or outsourced; indeed, I've had better experiences with "out of house" Legal groups because they are impacted less by corporate decisions predicated on political positioning.
HR Gurus that are employed in-house are concerned with not only positioning the company for growth and stimultating personnel development and management growth, but also in keeping their job. That's probably a bit harsh, but in the real world, if we like our job, we probably want to keep it, and focusing Corporate Governance as an area on the backs of HR offers even more opportunity for mistakes and consequent negativity.
I'd love to hear from a variety of HR Experts across a variety of sizes of businesses out there; my best guess, based on my experience, would be that the larger the company from which they respond, the more they would support what I've said; smaller groups are more focused on generalist positions, but really don't have the CG mindset when it comes to personnel and decision making.
Alan
From United States, Bluff City
Part of HR Management's process over the past few years has been in simply hiring acceptable employes while simultaneously keeping companies out of litigation. Honestly, it's a tightrope in many cases, and I've seen HR Execs that want to depart HR for that very reason--they're tired of being second-guessed and facing court time and legal sanctions for hiring decisions made on what they believe to be valid assessments. If one is not concerned about that, he/she faces those challenges at their own peril.
Potential employees, as you may realize, have been known to seek out opportunities for litigation with employers based on the interview and screening process. They would definitely file suit if denied a position based on some of the elements included in this CG list. Perhaps a case can be made that all elements on your CG list are appropriate once a candidate is hired and has attained tenure in a position.
Also, you must understand that this isn't a uniquely "American" posture; it's showing up through both Europe and, now, in South America. I'm doing an HR Seminar in Beijing in a few weeks--check back with me mid-October and I'll tell you what HR Directors and VPs are telling me about the situation there.
As a matter of fact, I can't think of one recent Seminar I've conducted on an HR topic where the issues of litigation in the hiring/assessment/termination process haven't arisen either as a question or as a topic for discussion; I'm very cognizant, and stress to our other orchestration partner-consultants---how you handle these questions in a Seminar setting can have a positive or negative impact on an entire corporate view of the challenges faced.
Let's also focus on a key element--- HR areas generally shy away from litigation; those involved in Corporate Governance generally walk hand in hand with Corporate Legal--whether in-house or outsourced; indeed, I've had better experiences with "out of house" Legal groups because they are impacted less by corporate decisions predicated on political positioning.
HR Gurus that are employed in-house are concerned with not only positioning the company for growth and stimultating personnel development and management growth, but also in keeping their job. That's probably a bit harsh, but in the real world, if we like our job, we probably want to keep it, and focusing Corporate Governance as an area on the backs of HR offers even more opportunity for mistakes and consequent negativity.
I'd love to hear from a variety of HR Experts across a variety of sizes of businesses out there; my best guess, based on my experience, would be that the larger the company from which they respond, the more they would support what I've said; smaller groups are more focused on generalist positions, but really don't have the CG mindset when it comes to personnel and decision making.
Alan
From United States, Bluff City
Hi Alan,
Let me first thank you for your response.
"While much of the discussion has centered around the roles and responsibilities of boards of directors, CEOs, CFOs and outside auditors, HR executives are uniquely positioned to provide a leadership role in developing and administering certain aspects of corporate governance programs.
Control of the main HR functions allows human resource executives to set the tone for the company’s corporate culture and administer the outreach to employees. "
By this it is meant that the HR personnel in the organisation are uniquely positioned to provide a key role in in developing and administering corporate governanace.
I am quoting from your response:::
"Potential employees, as you may realize, have been known to seek out opportunities for litigation with employers based on the interview and screening process. They would definitely file suit if denied a position based on some of the elements included in this CG list. Perhaps a case can be made that all elements on your CG list are appropriate once a candidate is hired and has attained tenure in a position. "
I have not come to know any such instances here so far.
However the points which you have raised could be valid under those type of circumstances prevailing in the US.
I would request other CiteHR members to come forward and join the discussion.
Thanks Alan once again
Bala
From India, Madras
Let me first thank you for your response.
"While much of the discussion has centered around the roles and responsibilities of boards of directors, CEOs, CFOs and outside auditors, HR executives are uniquely positioned to provide a leadership role in developing and administering certain aspects of corporate governance programs.
Control of the main HR functions allows human resource executives to set the tone for the company’s corporate culture and administer the outreach to employees. "
By this it is meant that the HR personnel in the organisation are uniquely positioned to provide a key role in in developing and administering corporate governanace.
I am quoting from your response:::
"Potential employees, as you may realize, have been known to seek out opportunities for litigation with employers based on the interview and screening process. They would definitely file suit if denied a position based on some of the elements included in this CG list. Perhaps a case can be made that all elements on your CG list are appropriate once a candidate is hired and has attained tenure in a position. "
I have not come to know any such instances here so far.
However the points which you have raised could be valid under those type of circumstances prevailing in the US.
I would request other CiteHR members to come forward and join the discussion.
Thanks Alan once again
Bala
From India, Madras
Some facts about HR Gurus:
Guru is one who 'dispels darkness'. A Guru is not necessarily a person; it could be an incident, an article, a happening, a book..... Gurus are known to manifest in infinite forms.
It is not usually the Guru's duty to search for disciples... if he/she has to then he is not usually a worthwhile Guru.
As it is said,"Prepare yourself as a disciple and your Guru will manifest before you."
An HR Guru is one who knows the human being the deepest. He goes beyond the various theories and theorums and knows the person intimately. Only after a knowing the fundamentals of humans and more so the 'said disciple' can the Guru embark on an enlightening journey.... a mentoring approach for the disciple.
I do hope this makes some sense to you in your quest for a HR Guru. Will be ahppy to share more details and points of view
Thanks and Happy Guru hunting :lol:
Amul
From India, Pune
Guru is one who 'dispels darkness'. A Guru is not necessarily a person; it could be an incident, an article, a happening, a book..... Gurus are known to manifest in infinite forms.
It is not usually the Guru's duty to search for disciples... if he/she has to then he is not usually a worthwhile Guru.
As it is said,"Prepare yourself as a disciple and your Guru will manifest before you."
An HR Guru is one who knows the human being the deepest. He goes beyond the various theories and theorums and knows the person intimately. Only after a knowing the fundamentals of humans and more so the 'said disciple' can the Guru embark on an enlightening journey.... a mentoring approach for the disciple.
I do hope this makes some sense to you in your quest for a HR Guru. Will be ahppy to share more details and points of view
Thanks and Happy Guru hunting :lol:
Amul
From India, Pune
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
CORPORATE HR ASSOCIATES.doc
Perfman HR - Corporate Profile.pdf