UK: Being Able To Distinguish An Effectively Governed Company From A Poor One Is Critical

Last Updated: 29 July 2019
Article by Paul Moxey

Over a quarter of a century since the Cadbury Code, we should fully understand governance and be able to tell a well, from a poorly, governed company. Unfortunately it remains difficult to distinguish good from bad. When I was asked by ICSA in early 2017 to write a text book for the new Certificate in Corporate Governance I tried to make this distinction – how to tell good from bad.

I was writing during the most intense period of regulatory focus on governance in governance's relatively brief history. Shortly after I completed the first draft in Autumn 2017, the FRC launched its consultation on a new code. I rewrote the text to take account of this and the Guidance on Board Effectiveness and address the other regulatory activity taking place and then undertook further revisions to reflect the final Code and Guidance published in July 2018 along with other developments such as the wide ranging Companies (Miscellaneous Reporting) Recommendations 2018. The text was published in November 2018.

The Carillion Collapse

In January 2018 Carillion plc went bust causing some people to question corporate governance and what if anything had been learned since Cadbury. As I revised the book, which included chapters on risk management, the question constantly in my mind was how Carillion could have happened in what looked like a well governed company and how to prevent similar failure in future.

Carillion gave the impression of being both financially sound and profitable. It claimed high standards of corporate governance, with rigorous policies and procedures, training and a responsible business culture. It also claimed rigorous risk management and gave assurances that there were no risks that would significantly affect business model, future performance, solvency or liquidity. The board and committee performance evaluation concluded that the board, each of the committees and the directors were all highly effective.

The audit committee report claimed it had considered significant accounting judgements, in particular regarding revenue recognition, contracts and goodwill, going concern and viability. The Committee declared the annual report and accounts a 'fair, balanced and understandable assessment of the Group's position'. During the inquiry into Carillion's failure by the House of Commons Business Energy and Industrial Strategy and Work and Pensions Committees its directors, executive and non-executive, called to give evidence expressed surprise that their company had failed.

Misleading Statements

After the event it became clear Carillion was neither financially sound nor profitable and the board should have known this - but did they? It is difficult not to conclude the financial statements were misleading. Although after the failure people claimed that it should have been obvious back in 2016 or early 2017 after the publication of the 2016 Annual Report that Carillion had terminal problems, it was not obvious ex ante to many apart from those, like Standard Life Investments, with access to the executives.

There were some disclosures which, with the benefit of hindsight, gave some indication of problems to come. These included flat profitability when stated revenues were increasing – suggesting undisclosed problems with contracts or that new contracts may not be profitable and cash flow which was slightly lower than reported profit. There was disclosure of £112m of funding secured from the Schuldschein market; this is a German private debt market popular in recent years with non-German companies wanting finance without all the burdensome documentary and disclosure requirements of most debt markets.

In nearly all other respects the Annual Report strongly conveyed a picture of a well governed, established, profitable, financially secure, competent and sustainable company. It claimed 'leadership positions in good markets', good contracts, good staff, an effective board, a strong order book, sufficient finance for its needs and a track record of performance.

The Report emphasised that there was adequate funding stating that 'the vast majority of the Group's £1.5bn of funding matures in November 2020 and beyond'. The Report confirmed that the directors had carried out a 'robust assessment of the principal risks facing the Group, including those that would threaten its business model, future performance, solvency or liquidity' and 'on the basis of both reasonably probable and more extreme downside scenarios, the Directors believe that they have a reasonable expectation that the Company will be able to continue in operation and meet its liabilities as they fall due over the three-year period of their assessment'. The Report also said the Group is 'well positioned to continue funding the dividend, which continues to be well covered by cash generated by the business'.

Just a few weeks after publication of the Annual Report, a trading update was issued in early July 2017. It reported progress against strategic objectives, strong work winning performance and cost reduction underway but also disclosed 'an unexpected contract provision of £845m. There was little detail of what this was but the City was not fooled and realised this meant a catastrophic loss.

The half year financial results published in September showed a further provision of £200m and the company balance sheet showed negative net assets of £400m. The goodwill of £1,500m was almost certainly an overstatement. Carillion looked bust but nevertheless the half year statement was upbeat about prospects and the company reported that 'Taking account of the projected trading for the Group over the remainder of the year and the additional bank facility, the Board has a reasonable expectation that the Company and the Group will be able to operate within the level of its available facilities and cash for the foreseeable future' and 'The Group is compliant with its covenants at 30 June 2017 and is forecast to be in compliance with covenants as at 31 December 2017 and 30 June 2018'. By December, however, the group had run out of money.

Shareholder Action

The contrast between the actions of two major shareholders is interesting. At the start of 2016 Standard Life Investments, now part of Standard Life Aberdeen, held over 10% of Carillion. SLI was an active investor with a programme of regular engagement. In a letter to the Work and Pensions Committee SLI reported it reduced its holding as it did not like what the company's management told them in response to SLI's concerns about debt, earnings and cash generation. SLI had sold all its shares by July 2017 when trading update was issued.

Another institutional investor, Kiltearn Partners LLP, also held c10% of Carillion. Unlike SLI, it relied on public information from Carillion. In their letter to the Work and Pensions Committee Kiltearn noted that 'Nothing in Carillion's 2016 Annual Report indicated to Kiltearn that Carillion was likely to announce a significant provision within the next six months'. Kiltearn held its shares until after the trading update and lost considerably as a result. The benefit of engaging with companies is obvious. But this is not available to all, not all investors are resourced to engage and companies will not want to engage with retail investors.

Leadership is so important that with the benefit of hindsight more of us could have been on the alert. Carillion's chairman, Philip Nevill Green, was managing director of Coloroll, the wallpaper and home furnishings group, when it collapsed amidst an accounting scandal in 1990. He was fined by the Pensions Ombudsman in 1994 for breach of trust and maladministration of the pension scheme. It was the failure of Coloroll, along with BCCI, which led to the Cadbury Committee's review of the financial aspects of corporate governance and the Cadbury Report and Code in 1992.

In presenting a rosier situation than the facts allowed, was it a masterpiece of spin or was it the result of judgement or lack of challenge affected by optimism and confidence bias? Even after inquiry it is not clear what the board knew. Although it is hard to believe that the directors who gave evidence could have been as surprised by events as they claimed, it is plausible if you consider cognitive biases.

The inquiry report referred to the confidence and misguided self-assurance of the chief executive and to the chairman being unquestioningly optimistic. The report made frequent mention of optimism. Over optimism led to a failure to challenge and reckless pursuit of growth. Optimistic judgements led to the annual report presenting an over optimistic picture and may have enabled the board to believe its statements about going concern and viability. Over optimism and confidence may have enabled the board to conclude in its effectiveness review that it, its committees and all the directors were highly effective. It may have enabled the board to think it could turn the company around when it should have realised that was impossible. Another bias is confirmation bias where decision makers reject with little consideration any information which challenges their position but rely on information which supports it. In conjunction with optimism and confidence bias it is toxic.

It the responsibility of the board as a whole to question whether cognitive bias is affecting them and ensure their decisions are unaffected. One approach is for the board to imagine scenarios where a crisis affects the company and then consider the root causes of failure. Known as a pre-mortem, such an exercise can go a long way to removing bias.

The Carillion board may also have been prone to groupthink. Alfred Sloan, who ran General Motors from 1923 to 1956, said in one executive meeting 'I take it we are all in complete agreement on the decision here'. After everyone nodded he postponed further discussion of the matter until the next meeting to give everyone time to develop disagreement.

Sloan knew how to reduce groupthink and encourage challenge.

It remains difficult to tell from public statements a well governed healthy company from a company where the board misguidedly believes it is well governed and healthy. The greater focus now on culture may help boards and management be more aware of inadequacies, including their own, but there is no guarantee. If you are interested in knowing more about how boards can be a risk factor, the study text discusses these issues, and more, in detail.

Paul Moxey FCIS is a chartered accountant and visiting professor of corporate governance at London Southbank University

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions