Transcript English

Toolkit II – In Practice
The Case of Bulgaria
Prof. Bistra Boeva Co-Chair of the
Bulgarian Corporate Governance
Code of Best Practice Task Force
and member of Private Sector
Advisory Group (PSAG)
Managing the Process
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Scope
The Task Force
Master Schedule
Budget
Logistics
International Expertise
Code Peer Review
Evaluation of the Work of the Task Force
Future looking (ROSCs, Monitoring and Action Plan, etc
The Task Force- the human factor that changed the status
quo of the Bulgarian CG milieu
• How the Task Force was established:
• A core group of like minded peoplebusiness, NGO, academia-regular
participants in OECD SEE Roundtables on
CG(2001-2006)
;
• BSE management;
• Newcomers- representatives of the
Employers’ association, Government,
consulting companies;
The quick transformation from a
group to a team
• Short-term cycle of Forming, BrainStorming, Formulating (of norms) ,
Performing;
• Motivated and responsible people;
• A good, balanced mix of knowledge and
experience- lawyers, economists,
sociologists,
Key factors
Key factors for the good working process of the Task
Force:
- Composition in terms of experience and knowledge;
- Well crafted assignment ;
- Proactive Task Force members
- Commitment of the Task Force members
- Motivation and coordination instead of commands;
- Monitoring and controlling of the execution of
assignments
- Good communications within the Task Force
Standard Evaluation Criteria and
Methods
• Why is it important to evaluate the
Committee’s work?
• How to improve the Committee’s
performance
• Staying on track and
• reassigning tasks
Principles of the evaluation process
• Good reporting procedures: meetings’
minutes; free discussions
• Strict or soft criteria for evaluation;
• Focus on results-based evaluation;
• A reliable and knowledgeable project
manager;
• Good work examples instead of strict
control and evaluation
Lessons learned
• Country specifics, Task Force composition
determine some deviations from the Toolkit
Guidance;
• Evaluation has to be based on “soft” criteria and
on reporting of the progress of the execution of
assignments at every meeting;
• A benchmarking approach instead of a formal
evaluation of the Task Force members’
contribution
• Strict evaluation could block the initiative of
proactive and enthusiastic Task Force members
Lessons learned
• The evaluation has to support the
progress of the elaboration of the code
• Thank you for your attention!
•
Prof Bistra Boeva