Corporate Governance

Earlier this week, I shared a brief post on social media reflecting on a question that has stayed with me throughout my career, "How can we evaluate effectiveness without first being clear about purpose?" The post pointed to a deeper issue that deserves more careful treatment. Whenever I am asked to assess effectiveness, I start in the same place. Before looking at structure, process, or performance, I ask a simple question, "What is the purpose of what I am being asked to assess?"

The Malta Financial Services Authority has set out a clearer line on what it expects from those steering Malta’s financial institutions, publishing a new General Code of Conduct for Decision Makers in the Financial Services Industry aimed squarely at governance, culture, and leadership behavior.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has issued a legal opinion declaring Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies unconstitutional across Texas state and local government, a move that significantly alters the compliance landscape for public institutions and potentially for private organizations operating in the state.

There is a growing problem in how applicant tracking systems are being used in hiring, and it is one that deserves more honest scrutiny. Too often, ATS platforms are treated as decision engines rather than what they actually are: administrative tools designed to support process, not replace judgment.

As noted in my most recent LinkedIn post, 2025 turned out to be an unexpectedly big year for these conversations, with more than one million views and over 200,000 reactions. That level of engagement doesn’t happen by accident. It suggests there’s a deep and growing frustration across the risk, audit, and governance community that something fundamental still isn’t clicking inside corporate boardrooms.

The UK’s corporate governance watchdog is taking a closer look at how the country’s largest private companies explain their governance decisions and sees both progress and room to grow. In its first reporting insights since taking over oversight of the Wates Corporate Governance Principles earlier this year, the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) says many companies are using the framework effectively to articulate how boards oversee risk and engage with stakeholders. But when it comes to explaining corporate purpose, how boards are structured, and how directors are paid, disclosures are still often falling flat.

The UK’s Financial Reporting Council has issued a new thematic review highlighting persistent weaknesses in the corporate reporting of smaller listed companies and offering practical guidance aimed at narrowing the quality gap with larger firms.