Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

Make SGTI framework for listed companies more transparent

The Singapore Governance and Transparency Index (SGTI) must have required time and effort from various parties, including the National University of Singapore (NUS), CPA Australia and the Singapore Institute of Directors (“Singtel tops in governance, transparency practices: Index”; Aug 1, Channel NewsAsia).

The Singapore Governance and Transparency Index (SGTI) must have required time and effort from various parties, including the National University of Singapore (NUS), CPA Australia and the Singapore Institute of Directors (“Singtel tops in governance, transparency practices: Index”; Aug 1, Channel NewsAsia).

A total of 606 Singapore-listed companies had to be assessed in order to produce the data.

While the assessment framework, published on the NUS Business School’s website, has a scoring system, there is an inconsistency: Points are not provided for the 31 penalty questions, compared with the guidance provided in the rest of the methodology.

Are penalty points a subjective judgement? Unless there is scoring transparency in the complete set of criteria, any penalty point awarded is or seems arbitrary.

The statistical purpose of this project is useful in certain aspects, but given the time and effort spent, the project could have more uses.

Providing the companies with the detailed result of the assessment done by the professionals would enable the companies to better address their weaknesses and make improvements.

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to get daily news updates, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.