CEO tenure is one of the trickiest governance questions faced by boards. How do they identify the right time to change CEO? There are no easy answers, says Parmi Natesan, Executive: Centre for Corporate Governance at the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA), but there are warning signs boards should look out for. “CEO performance has a direct link to company performance, which is why best practice around appointing, overseeing and evaluating the CEO is contained in King III,” Natesan explains. “Putting a CEO succession plan in place, and initiating it at the right time, are key strategic considerations a board must take.” Boards do have some research to help them. One study by researchers at the Fox School of Business at Temple University[1] shows that CEOs go through discernible phases, which can help boards identify CEOs heading close to the danger zone. In their early years of tenure, CEOs tend to learn rapidly and take risks, moving onto sponsoring new initiatives and acquiring new skills. Over time, though, they tend to turn inwards, becoming risk-averse and relying overmuch on experience—and possibly obsolete paradigms. The Temple study found that the optimal CEO tenure was 4.8 years, a figure backed up by Fortune magazine’s finding that the 500 largest US companies have a median CEO tenure of 4.9 years. A wider-ranging sample of companies in another study showed variances in median CEO tenure from year to year, possibly linked to economic cycles.[2] A key factor to be borne in mind is the rapid change in the business environment: even the most highly skilled CEO could find his or her skillsets inadequate as time goes by. In addition, CEOs can damage their own reputations by staying too long at one company as opposed to exiting on a high note. “Clearly, boards have to exercise their judgement—one can’t just act by rote and remove a CEO after a certain number of years,” Natesan comments. “But based on the research and accumulated experience, boards should look out for five warning signs.” Flattening corporate performance Falling revenues or market share would be one indicator, but other factors also need to be considered, such as the company’s ability to retain and attract staff, particularly those with the skills and attitude to take the company forward. Complacency within the executive team Annual, in-depth performance reviews are critical, as well as feedback from peers and staff. Additionally, feedback from external stakeholders such as clients and business partners would be valuable. Emergence of a CEO’s court Does the CEO surround him- or herself with weak executives? Board members need to develop ways for assessing the calibre of the people CEOs surrounds themselves with, monitoring new appointments to these roles carefully. Lack of innovation The board should assess how many fresh initiatives originate within the executive team. Innovation quality is also important, so boards will need the expertise to form an opinion as to how valuable this innovation is. Undesirable corporate culture or disquiet Board members should find ways to interact spontaneously with employees to assess how the quality of leadership is perceived and affecting the company as a whole. To do this, board members will have to develop networks within the company. [1] Xueming Luo, Vamsi K Kanuri & Michelle Andrews ‘How does CEO tenure matter? The mediating role of firm‐employee and firm‐customer relationships.’ (2014) 35:4 Strategic Management Journal 492-511. [2] The Conference Board’, CEO Succession Practices, available at https://www.conference-board.org/publications/publicationdetail.cfm?publicationid=2935. ENDS MEDIA CONTACT: Juanita Vorster, 012 664 2833, juanita@thatpoint.co.za, www.atthatpoint.co.za For more information on the IoDSA please visit: Website: www.iodsa.co.za Twitter: @The_IoDSA LinkedIn: The Institute of Directors in Southern Africa group
0 Comments
As a first step to restore confidence in the governance structures at the national broadcaster, the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Communications should follow best practice as regards to the due diligence process on director appointments. Acting with a high standard of care will ensure that fit and proper persons are appointed to oversee and direct the entity and avoid the kind of embarrassment caused by news of faked qualifications and other performance furores. “On the face of it, the recent decision to re-advertise the board posts should be applauded because it shows an awareness of how important it is to appoint competent board members who can make a real contribution to the collective knowledge, skill, experience and diversity of the current board,” says Parmi Natesan, Executive: Centre for Corporate Governance at the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA). The IoDSA’s comments follow on from recent press reports that the Portfolio Committee on Communications will be re-advertising the positions of three members of the SABC board, including the Chair. The Committee had previously said that it was dissatisfied with the quality of the applications it had received for the three posts. “Board composition has such a significant impact on board and ultimately company performance that it’s worth taking the time to get it right,” adds Natesan. Natesan adds that the IoDSA’s Director Competency Framework could also be used as a basis to help assess the candidates’ competency to serve. In addition, the IoDSA launched a professional designation for directors—the Chartered Director or CD(SA)—last year, in order to help individuals ensure they had the necessary skills for a board appointment, and to help selection committees identify the most competent candidates. While there are relatively few CD(SA)s at present, government should encourage present and future public sector board members to embark on accreditation. On a positive note, two large parastatals already have a CD(SA) each on their boards; and in addition, one public sector entity has shown an interest in putting their whole board through the IoDSA’s CD(SA) accreditation process. On a broader level, Natesan also recommends that government follow established governance best practice by avoiding excessive interference in board dynamics and operations. In particular, the practice of suddenly removing board members for political reasons has not only made boards dysfunctional, it has meant that fewer and fewer good candidates will come forward. The re-advertisement is proof of this, and the IoDSA believes that other parastatals are likely to face the same challenge. The Committee chair, Joyce Moloi-Moropa, alluded to this, reportedly saying, “We will again not get good candidates because people know that they will have no security of tenure if they can be removed at a whim by the board, with the backing of the minister.” Natesan comments that while it’s perfectly proper for the shareholder—government in this case—to appoint the board, it should then leave the oversight and direction of the organisation to the board, including the appointment of executives. Making the right appointments upfront after proper due diligence, and maintaining role clarity without undue influence and interference will go a long way to solve these public sector challenges. “One of the problems facing the SABC—and other parastatals—can be traced to the confusion caused by the shareholder appointing executives that the board seemingly does not support and cannot truly call to account. The ongoing furore around the SABC COO, Hlaudi Motsoeneng, is an example,” Natesan says. “In general, good governance practices have a beneficial effect on corporate performance. We have seen the results when they are not followed. The Portfolio Committee will only make progress towards putting the SABC back onto the right path if it implements a rigorous process to appoint the right directors—and then if all parties adhere to good governance principles.” ENDS MEDIA CONTACT: Cathlen Fourie, 012 664 2833, cathlen@thatpoint.co.za, www.atthatpoint.co.za For more information on the IoDSA please visit: Website: www.iodsa.co.za Twitter: @The_IoDSA LinkedIn: The Institute of Directors in Southern Africa group
South Africa’s state-owned enterprises have a key role to play not only in delivering services to citizens, but also in funding the National Development Plan. However, it is clear that many major parastatals are still not in a position to fulfil this mandate. A recent editorial in Business Day places the blame squarely on a lack of governance. Parmi Natesan, Executive: Centre for Corporate Governance at the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA) broadly agrees, arguing that solving this problem begins with the board. “The challenges besetting our parastatals are complex, so it would be naïve to suggest that there is a silver bullet that can magically fix them. But, as many commentators have pointed out, one common shortcoming is the effectiveness of the boards. One of the findings of the IoDSA’s board appraisals benchmark study was that public sector boards lag behind private sector boards in their performance. Given that boards play such an important strategic and governance role, the IoDSA believes that the parastatals should seriously consider a professionalisation mandate including Chartered Director(SA)’s for the boards of state-owned entities,” she says. Natesan says that greater attention needs to be paid to the selection of board members at parastatals to ensure that they have the necessary professional and personal skills, as well as industry knowledge and experience. As the IoDSA’s annual board appraisal benchmarking study consistently shows, public-sector boards suffer from the fact that board members (as well as members of the executive team) are often seen to be appointed or political reasons. “It’s vital that proper due diligence on potential directors is carried out. Being a director is a tough job, particularly in the public sector, and much depends on his or her performance,” Natesan says. “Care must be taken to find and appoint such people, or the board’s—and ultimately the company’s—performance will be adversely affected.” According to Angela Oosthuizen, Chief Executive Officer at the IoDSA, the directorship role in both the public and private sectors is so important and so complex now that the IoDSA has launched a formal professional designation, the Chartered Director(SA), or CD(SA). The IoDSA’s intent is to professionalise directorship. The CD(SA) initiative recognises that directors require specialist skills, experience and integrity alongside their purely business skills. Administered by the IoDSA, the CD(SA) designation gives directors a way to demonstrate their qualifications objectively, and to enhance them through a formal continuous professional development programme. Professional directors also subscribe to a code of professional ethics, and can be subject to the designation being revoked under certain circumstances. A credible professional designation also helps selection committees identify candidates with the right skills, objectively assessed. Oosthuizen says that government is aware of the potential for using the CD(SA) designation as a way of identifying the right calibre of directors. For example, at a recent IoDSA event, the Public Protector, Thuli Madonsela, indicated that the Minister of Public Enterprises, Lynne Brown, would support the certification of directors as part of the appointment criteria for parastatal boards. “The CD(SA) designation is relatively new, so the pool of people entitled to use it is still small, but the Minister should certainly be encouraging parastatal board members to begin the process of certification,” Oosthuizen says. “In the meantime, members of parastatal boards need to keep abreast of developments, attend governance training, and generally make sure they understand their role. Board members who are professional in their attitude, their skillsets and their commitment to a code of conduct will do better for the company.” Another benefit of improving the skills of directors would be the strong signal that government is serious about governance, and that it respects the role that boards have to play. “The board sets the tone for the whole company, oversees its strategy and ensures it is governed properly—a successful company needs a good board,” says Natesan. “If parastatals are going to be able to become contributors to the fiscus, they need to be properly governed, and ensuring that their directors are at the match makes sound business sense.” Editor’s note: Click http://bit.ly/1gGntmW for supportive audio of Parmi Natesan, Executive: Centre for Corporate Governance at the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa ENDS MEDIA CONTACT: Cathlen Fourie, 012 664 2833, cathlen@thatpoint.co.za, www.atthatpoint.co.za For more information on the IoDSA please visit: Website: www.iodsa.co.za Twitter: @The_IoDSA LinkedIn: The Institute of Directors in Southern Africa group Based on recent research, Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) estimates that the typical organisation loses 5 percent of its revenue to fraud each year. In South Africa, this equates to around R160 billion. The three main categories of fraud are asset theft, corruption and misstatement of financial statements. “Corruption and other sorts of fraud are all different aspects of the same problem—the improper use of an official position for personal gain. The direct costs are very high, as these figures show, but when one takes into account the indirect costs such as reputational damage, investigation costs, loss of business opportunities and lost efficiencies, they are even higher,” says Parmi Natesan, Executive: Centre for Corporate Governance at the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA). “The best defence against fraud of all kinds is corporate governance that really works, and that is the responsibility of the directors.” Principle 1.1 of King III states that the “board should provide effective leadership based on an ethical foundation” and Principle 2.1 that the “board should act as the focal point for and custodian of corporate governance”. Speaking at an IoDSA Corporate Governance Network (CGN) event on the board’s role in combatting corruption, Chairman of the CGN and Director at PwC, Anton van Wyk reiterates that corporate governance is critical because it seeks to create a climate that is inhospitable to fraud of all types. “It’s important to acknowledge that these things feed off each other, making a company that acts corruptly more vulnerable to other sorts of fraud. For example, when employees see that the company is willing to act illegally by bribing officials, they can begin to feel it’s OK to steal equipment,” he says. “The ethics of the company have to be consistent and pervade every aspect of its business.” This is particularly important because many companies argue that they have to participate in corrupt activities in order to do business in certain countries. But the rot cannot be contained, and such companies soon find themselves suffering from other types of fraud and also potentially losing business as their reputations are tarnished. For that reason, one of the most important contributions that directors can make is setting the right “tone at the top”, showing in the way they conduct board meetings, and the way in which they reward or censure the executive team, that the corporate leaders stand for ethical behaviour. This is the first step in actively managing the organisation’s ethics as required by King III. This active management means that boards have to ensure that the right structures are in place to combat fraud and corruption, and that they know who the company’s customers and suppliers are—as well as how the industry operates. Such knowledge will help boards not only understand the risks the company faces but also what is average in terms of performance. The board is then in a much better position to spot tell-tale signs of fraud or corruption. Signs might be a higher-than-average propensity to win government tenders, or a lower margin than comparable companies. “There’s no fixed checklist of things that directors should look out for, but the better informed they are, the more likely they are to understand what the red flags are,” says van Wyk. “But the best defence, in the end, is a clear and widely accepted moral or ethical corporate identity.” ENDS MEDIA CONTACT: Cathlen Fourie, 012 664 2833, cathlen@thatpoint.co.za For more information on the IoDSA please visit: Website: www.iodsa.co.za Twitter: @The_IoDSA LinkedIn: The Institute of Directors in Southern Africa group Current news reports relating to the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa) indicate once again the damage that poor governance can cause to institutions that are funded by public money and whose influence on society is huge. Insofar as they can be ascertained, the facts seem to be that the board of Necsa suspended the CEO for disciplinary lapses, apparently with the approval of the Minister of Energy, Tina Joemat-Pettersson. Subsequently, the Minister changed track, instructing the board to reverse the suspension, which it refused to do. The Minister then announced a task team to investigate the board. Allegations of political maneuvering ahead of the proposed deal to build nuclear reactors continue to fly. “The ins and outs of this situation are not really the main issue here. The real casualty here is Necsa itself, and by implication the whole process around the forthcoming nuclear build programme,” says Parmi Natesan, Executive: Centre for Corporate Governance at the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA). “Poor governance practices continue to hamstring our public sector institutions, and we need to understand the issues here so they are not repeated.” Suspension of CEO requires balancing act Natesan says that one important issue is the suspension of the CEO. Such an action causes severe damage to the reputation of the individual concerned, obviously, but also to the institution itself. Accordingly, suspension should be seen as a last resort, and only if the board is certain it has all the facts, and that the executive’s continued presence would harm the organisation or interfere with further investigation of the allegations. Suspension can be seen as showing a board’s commitment to accountability, but it also opens it to accusations of bias and the suspicion of prejudgment. Consider the case of the Pikitup CEO, who was suspended for a long period but who has recently been cleared and reinstated. The lengthy and public suspension has caused severe damage to the reputations of both the individual and the company—something that could have been avoided or minimised. However, it’s also worth mentioning that the board has to have confidence in the executive management of the company, and thus must have full control over who holds the executive positions. An additional complication at Necsa is the fact that the executive committee appears to have come out in support of the CEO and thus in opposition to the board. The spectacle of a board at loggerheads with the executives who are supposed to report to it is extremely damaging to the company, and is typically a result of loyalties being divided. The litmus test, she concludes, must always be the company’s best interest and its long-term, strategic goals. Lack of role clarity A second important issue is the lack of role clarity in the public sector, here shown by the way in which the Minister “instructed” the board to perform certain actions. Shareholders appoint Boards to direct and oversee the company, and thus these Boards must be free to exercise their collective judgement and make their own decisions. A powerful, single shareholder can break down this necessary distance, so that the board merely becomes a rubber stamp for the shareholder, or the two are in constant conflict. Another example of this lack of role clarity between the shareholder and the board in the public sector is the Minister of Communications’ attempts to make the SABC board seek her approval on any rule changes to the SABC’s governance, and her determination to appoint Hlaudi Motsoeneng as COO despite the board’s reservations. “Again, the company’s well-being must be paramount. Boards have to be given the space to take a more deliberate, long-term and objective view of the company’s best interests,” she argues. Improper use of funds A third issue concerns allegations that the CEO improperly diverted company funds to the ANC, with allegations of nepotism continuing to break in the media. The question here is whether the CEO acted within the bounds of the powers delegated to him by the board. Delegation of authority is a vital tool used by boards to retain adequate control while enabling the company to operate effectively and efficiently. These allegations also highlight the need for a strong audit committee to oversee the proper use of public money. Each year, the Auditor-General’s reports show increasing levels of fruitless and wasteful expenditure in the public sector; audit committees have a vital role to play in ensuring that processes are put in place to prevent and detect this waste of public money. “In the end, the CEO role is critical for a company’s success,” says Natesan. “The board must act in the company’s best interest, and must be allowed to do so. The minister, representing the shareholder, should also have the company’s well-being at heart, and should desist from undue interference.” ENDS MEDIA CONTACT: Cathlen Fourie, 082 222 9198, cathlen@thatpoint.co.za For more information on the IoDSA please visit: Website: www.iodsa.co.za Twitter: @The_IoDSA LinkedIn: The Institute of Directors in Southern Africa group The Institute of Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA) is adding a governance view to the concern being expressed in recent new articles around proposed changes to the SABC’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI) by Minister Faith Muthambi. Parmi Natesan, Executive: Centre for Corporate Governance at the IoDSA, says that some of the reported changes do not align to governance best practice. One issue raised by Natesan is the fact that the changes to the MoI has the potential to blur the governance roles played by the shareholder (the state) and the SABC board. In the private sector it is very clear that the shareholders hold shares in a company and appoint a board to direct and oversee the company on their behalf. “The board could bear liability if its decisions are wrong, so it’s important that it has the power to make its own decisions,” Natesan explains. “Thus if shareholders interfere too much in the way that the company is run, then governance breaks down. This is unfortunately a common problem that exists in the public sector as boards become rubber stamps for the dominant shareholder—which results in poor board and ultimately poor company performance.” Another adverse result is that these boards find it increasingly difficult to attract directors with the right levels of knowledge and skills. Individuals with governance knowledge would be reluctant to serve on such boards because they realise they will incur great responsibility and liability, whilst their true power to make the right decisions are restricted. The MoI also permits the Minister to appoint the COO as acting CEO when the latter position is vacant, and also gives her the power to extend employment contracts for the CEO, CFO and COO. Natesan points out that there is a danger of sacrificing general principles in order to achieve short-term goals. There’s widespread agreement that boards have to be responsible for executive appointments because executives are responsible and accountable to the board. When executives are appointed by the shareholder, they tend to feel accountable to the Minister, as the representative of the shareholder, and not the board. Again, as the IoDSA’s studies show, this causes significant confusion around role clarity and reporting lines within the governance structure. A more complex, though related, issue is the power given to the Minister to recommend the removal of a board member. Shareholders have always had the power to remove directors but Natesan cautions that the dynamics are complicated when there is a single shareholder represented by a single individual. In the private sector, the fact that there are generally multiple shareholders ensures that alternative viewpoints compete, and the delicate balance between shareholders and board can be maintained. “The fact that public sector corporations have only one shareholder who is politically driven, makes it much harder to strike the right governance balance, and this in turn compromises the board’s ability to do its job,” says Natesan. “If the single shareholder refuses to follow governance best practices in pursuit of short-term, political ends, it will fatally damage the ability of an entity to function effectively. South Africa is a global leader in corporate governance—we should practice what we preach.” ENDS MEDIA CONTACT: Cathlen Fourie, 012 664 2833, cathlen@thatpoint.co.za For more information on the IoDSA please visit: Website: www.iodsa.co.za Twitter: @The_IoDSA LinkedIn: The Institute of Directors in Southern Africa group Recent CIPC warnings to state-owned companies raises the spotlight on public sector governance25/9/2014 The recent warnings issued by the Company and Intellectual Property Commission to five state-owned companies demonstrate once again just how seriously boards need to take their governance role, says Parmi Natesan, Executive: Centre for Corporate Governance at the Institute for Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA).
As reported in Business Day Live, the CIPC warned the boards of the South African Express Airways, South African Forestry Company, South African Broadcasting Corporation, South African Post Office and the Central Energy Fund that they risked being declared delinquent or of being placed on probation if they failed to address their non-compliance with the Companies Act. A finding of delinquency will adversely affect the long-term reputation of these directors, effectively calling their fitness for office into question. It could also results in these directors being disqualified in terms of the Companies Act, from taking up Directorship positions in the future. “The CIPC has indicated that it intends to be proactive in holding these companies and their boards to account,” observes Natesan. Governance best practice, as denoted in King III Principle 6.1, is for the board to take ultimate accountability for ensuring compliance with laws and regulations. “Compliance with the law is not optional, and directors need to make sure that the companies that they are overseeing are doing so.” Natesan points out that the IoDSA’s 2014 benchmark study of board performance shows that public-sector boards, by their own admission, are lagging those in the private sector in most areas. Aside from the board, Natesan says that in the public sector, the audit committee should play a big role in ensuring that the company, inter alia, complies with the applicable legislation. However, audit committees in the public sector generally need to be strengthened, as is indicated by the high percentage of public-sector entities whose financial statements are disclaimed annually by the Auditor-General—for example, only 48 percent of audited organisations obtained an unqualified audit opinion in 2011-12, while 94 percent were found to be materially non-compliant with legislation. The CIPC said it is particularly concerned about irregular expenditure, which points directly to a lack of quality audit committee oversight. “The long and short of it is that audit committees have a vital role to play in assisting their boards with discharging their duties as regards to compliance. In the public sector, particularly, audit committees sometimes face several challenges which make it difficult for them to adequately fulfil their responsibilities,” says Natesan. “As this latest development shows, boards in both the public and private sectors will bear the consequences of their audit committee’s lack of performance, and should thus be looking for ways to improve it—such as participating in the Public Sector Audit Committee Forum, a forum created to strengthen Audit Committees in the public sector.” ENDS MEDIA CONTACT: Cathlen Fourie, 012 664 2833, cathlen@thatpoint.co.za For more information on the IoDSA please visit: Website: www.iodsa.co.za Twitter: @The_IoDSA LinkedIn: The Institute of Directors in Southern Africa group Parmi Natesan’s job requires her to lead a balanced life and have it all. It requires her to attend detailed strategic discussions with clients, and helping her two children with their homework. It demands a focus to detail on complex corporate governance issues, and to apply the same attention to detail when sewing costumes for a school play. Although this might seem like the perfect life, it requires being “fast-paced and super-organised” according to Parmi, who was recently promoted to Executive: Centre for Corporate Governance at the Institute of Directors of Southern Africa (IoDSA). “I am also very fortunate to work for a company that allows me the flexibility that I need in order to be able to have it all.” As an Indian female with deceivingly youthful features, Parmi has experienced her fair share of discrimination in the workplace, but did not allow it to influence her focus on making valuable contributions during her 12-year career serving a variety of industries. In her new role as part of the leadership team of the IoDSA, Parmi can combine her knowledge, experience and passion to further the IoDSA goals of Better directors, Better boards, Better business. With Bcom (Honours) and Bcom (cum laude) degrees from the former University of Port Elizabeth, Parmi is a Chartered Accountant (South Africa) passionate about the value of corporate governance for South African corporate and private citizens alike. “We should all pay attention to corporate governance, even if we are not we are shareholders or directors of companies, as we are all inevitably stakeholders,” said Parmi in an interview following her appointment. In line with her helpful nature, Parmi has provided a glimpse of her views on the world of work: Q: What do you think about when you are alone in your car? A: What I need to be doing, I am an absolute PLANNER. Always thinking of what is next, organising myself Q: Describe a balanced lifestyle in 5 words or less A: “Having it all” - I don’t believe that having a demanding career means that I cannot be doing other things like taking my kids to the park, watching them play sports, cooking dinner, sewing costumes and doing other projects for school, helping my kids with their homework, organising my household etc. Q: What song best describes your work ethic? A: "Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger" by Daft Punk Q: What is the most common misconception about you? A: That I am younger than what I am. People often get shocked at my appointments to bodies, at the fact that I have two children etc. because they don’t realise my age. When I first joined the IoDSA someone commented (when he heard my actual age) “Oh now your appointment makes more sense”. Some may say I have lucky genes, but from a business perspective I sometimes feel under-estimated at first because of this ... that is until they interact with me and I prove them wrong! Q: What is your view on discrimination in the workplace, irrespective of the apparent reason for discrimination? A: My stance on discrimination in the workplace is that everyone should be given equal opportunity; it’s a fair playing field. It is up to each individual to grab the opportunities available and make something of it. I find that sometimes people use discrimination as an excuse, when they are not willing to put in the time and effort to succeed. Q: Why is a focus on corporate governance important? A: For many reasons! Corporate governance: · increases accountability · increases entity value of companies, it improves share & credit ratings · lowers cost of capital · improves access to capital · improves operational performance · lowers risk of corporate scandals and damage to reputation. · improves decision making · ensures greater boardroom effectiveness · strengthens transparency Q: What would corporate governance look like in a perfect world? A: In a perfect world we wouldn’t need as many rules. So less laws/regulations and more self-governance with ethics and integrity permeating leadership, decision-making and oversight. ENDS _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ MEDIA CONTACT: Cathlen Fourie, 012 664 2833, cathlen@thatpoint.co.za For more information on the IoDSA please visit: Website: www.iodsa.co.za Twitter: @The_IoDSA LinkedIn: The Institute of Directors in Southern Africa group |
Archives
March 2024
Categories
All
|