Hindustan Times (East UP)

The weaknesses of corporate governance systems in India

- Lloyd Mathias is a business strategist and angel investor The views expressed are personal.

Over the past few weeks, India Inc. was rocked by the Ashneer GroverBhar­atPe controvers­y and the revelation­s around the National Stock Exchange (NSE)-Chitra Ramkrishna-Himalayan yogi saga. The fact that BharatPe, a celebrated start-up that became a unicorn last year with a subsequent three-fold valuation jump within six months, and NSE, a shining star in the evolution of India’s capital markets, were allegedly run arbitraril­y with little or no internal check mechanisms points to gaping holes in India’s corporate governance system.

Beyond co-founder Grover’s now-infamous outburst against a bank employee, BharatPe’s bigger problems include alleged malpractic­es, financial irregulari­ties and a toxic work culture. What is surprising was the silence of many reputed venture capitalist­s (VCs) who are investors and have board seats in the company. The fact that the board ordered an inquiry only after Grover’s purported audio clip went viral raises larger questions. What if the public relations disaster had not happened? Perhaps then the alleged mismanagem­ent of the company’s funds and related party transactio­ns, all unconfirme­d and likely to be the basis for a protracted dispute, may never have come to light.

Grover is not the only founder facing ouster from his company. In 2015, Housing.com chief executive officer (CEO) and co-founder Rahul Yadav was fired after repeated run-ins with investors and the media.

Neither is the issue of poor governance and reckless CEOs restricted to India’s startups and promoter-driven companies. Former ICICI Bank CEO Chanda Kochhar’s fall from grace following allegation­s of quid pro quo in a loan case is another key lesson in weak corporate governance. The board’s role in this case, too, left a lot to be desired. Initially, the board of directors rallied behind Kochhar and gave her a clean chit. As the case caught public attention and came under intense media scrutiny, the bank was left with no option but to form an internal probe panel. The rest is history.

The revelation­s emerging from the NSE investigat­ion seem outlandish, with Ramkrishna’s admission of depending on a mysterious yogi for her business decisions. Equally bizarre was her appointing Anand Subramania­n as a strategic advisor at a salary that was 10 times more than what he was drawing at the time, and his rapid elevation to group operating officer in a span of two years, at a trebling of salary. It is hard to believe that this happened unbeknowns­t to the board in such a critical organisati­on. The board’s actions could at best be described as irresponsi­ble and at worst, complicit.

The sordid saga at NSE revealed how arbitraril­y one of the country’s most important market institutio­ns was run. Other recent governance lapses resulted in the IL&FS collapse, the Yes Bank crisis and the DHFL scandal. In all these cases, the shareholde­rs’ interest seemed to be the least priority. Each of these crises laid bare India’s weak corporate governance system.

Many issues plague corporate governance in India. First is the lack of accountabi­lity of controllin­g shareholde­rs or promoters who pursue policies and practices in their own interest at the expense of minority shareholde­rs. Many appoint friendly independen­t directors, ensuring them a free run. Next is the lack of transparen­cy and inadequate disclosure requiremen­ts. This is compounded by weak enforcemen­t of regulation­s by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), the country’s market regulator. As a result, cases of management lapse may take years to resolve and end with warnings or mild punishment­s. Just last week, SEBI backtracke­d on a rule requiring the separation of the roles of the chairperso­n and MD/ CEO for India’s top 500 companies that was to come into effect on April 1– a recommenda­tion made by the Uday Kotak committee on corporate governance in 2017.

And, finally, the fact that markets in India do not punish poorly managed companies adequately for their misdeeds adds to the problem.

Last year, India’s startup ecosystem mopped up record investment­s of nearly $36 billion amid massive demand for digitisati­on due to the pandemic. At a time when India is rapidly emerging as the start-up capital of the world, it’s critical to fix the inadequaci­es in our corporate governance system to pave the way for future growth.

Analysts and investors have serious concerns about weak corporate governance ranging from opacity, lack of diversity and related party transactio­ns, to concentrat­ion of powers and authority in promoters. India must seriously penalise auditors and boards of companies for overlookin­g management follies. A combinatio­n of disclosure, regulation, enforcemen­t and investor activism can improve corporate governance.

Trust, transparen­cy and accountabi­lity are hallmarks of strong corporate governance that can help build investor confidence and earn their trust. Companies where promoters act in the interests of shareholde­rs tend to do better in the long run. What we need to remember is that global investors are watching the lacunae in our current corporate governance structure and, more importantl­y, if we are serious about fixing them.

 ?? SHUTTERSTO­CK ?? Global investors are watching the lacunae in our current corporate governance structure and, more importantl­y, if we are serious about fixing them
SHUTTERSTO­CK Global investors are watching the lacunae in our current corporate governance structure and, more importantl­y, if we are serious about fixing them
 ?? Lloyd Mathias ??
Lloyd Mathias

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India