Search

Tilnefningarnefndir eru tiltölulega nýjar sem þáttur í stjórnarháttum fyrirtækja á Íslandi, en slík nefnd var fyrst sett á laggirnar árið 2014. Frá þeim tíma hafa slíkar nefndir verið að ryðja sér til rúms á Íslandi en þær eiga sér lengri sögu erlendis. Meirihluti skráðra fyrirtækja á Íslandi hefur í dag stofnað tilnefningarnefndir, en það eru þó skiptar skoðanir um ágæti nefndanna bæði meðal fræðimanna og stjórnenda. Innan Norðurlandanna starfa tilnefningarnefndir ólíkt hvað stjórnarhætti viðkemur, þar sem þær heyra ýmist beint undir hluthafa eða eru skipaðar sem undirnefndir stjórna. Hér er um að ræða mikilvægan mun eftir því hvor leiðin er farin, því áhrif á meðal annars gagnsæi í starfi nefndanna, valferli vegna nýrra stjórnarmanna og upplýsingagjöf til hluthafa, getur verið ólík eftir því hvor leiðin er valin. Erlendar rannsóknir á starf tilnefningarnefnda sýna að tilvist þeirra getur haft jákvæð áhrif á stjórnarhætti, fyrst og fremst þannig að starf þeirra leiði til skilvirks ferlis við val stjórnarmanna. Íslenskar tilnefningarnefndir hafa enn sem komið er lítið verið rannsakaðar. Þessi rannsókn leitast við að varpa ljósi á skoðanir hagaðila um það hvort tilnefningarnefndir á Íslandi eigi að vera undirnefndir stjórna eða heyra beint undir hluthafa. Blandaðri rannsóknaraðferð er beitt, annars vegar með viðtölum við hluthafa, stjórnarmenn í skráðum fyrirtækjum og nefndarmenn tilnefningarnefnda. Hins vegar er stuðst við niðurstöður könnunar sem send var til hluthafa, stjórnarmanna og tilnefningarnefndarmanna meðal 300 stærstu fyrirtækja á Íslandi. Niðurstöður sýna að hagaðilar telja að tilnefningarnefndir á Íslandi eiga frekar að heyra undir hluthafa en stjórn og þær eiga að vera kosnar af hluthöfum á hluthafafundum. Niðurstöðurnar gagnast hluthöfum og stjórnum fyrirtækja þegar kemur að stofnun og ákvörðun um skipulag í starfi tilnefningarnefnda.

The Executive Committee presently includes the president, executive secretary, associate secretary, treasurer, editor, member-at-large, and Melville Society Cultural Project representative, but the composition of the executive committee has evolved over time. Donald Yannella was acting secretary-treasurer for Hennig Cohen 1973–1974, then became secretary-treasurer in 1975, a role he filled until 1989. Bryant oversaw the transformation of the newsletter, first called Extracts and later Melville Society Extracts, into the award-winning journal Leviathan: A Journal of Melville Studies, now published by Johns Hopkins University Press. President (elected, one-year term, serves on Executive Committee) Timothy Marr, 2021 Samuel Otter, 2020 Branka Arsic, 2019 Giorgio Mariani, 2018 Arimichi Makino, 2017 John Bryant, 2016 Hester Blum, 2015 Geoffrey Sanborn, 2014 Steven Olsen-Smith, 2013 Dennis Berthold, 2012 Wyn Kelley, 2011 T. Walter Herbert, 2010 Robert Milder, 2009 Carolyn Karcher, 2008 Andrew Delbanco, 2007 Gail Coffler, 2006 Edgar Dryden, 2005 Mary K. Bercaw Edwards, 2004 Christopher Sten, 2003 Robert K. Wallace, 2002 Douglas Robillard, 2001 Thomas Farel Heffernan, 2000 Harrison Hayford, 1999 Sanford E. Marovitz, 1998 Elizabeth Schultz, 1997 Lea Bertani Vozar Newman, 1996 Stanton Garner, 1995 Marvin Fisher, 1994 H. Bruce Franklin, 1993 Harrison Hayford, 1992 Hershel Parker, 1991 Donald Yannella, 1990 Walter Bezanson, 1989 Joyce Sparer Adler, 1988 Jay Leyda, 1987 William B. Dillingham, 1986 John Seelye, 1985 Milton R. Stern, 1984 Warner Berthoff, 1983 G. Thomas Tanselle, 1982 Edward Rosenberry, 1981 Henry A. Murray, 1980 Walter D. Kring, 1979 Robert G. Newman, 1978 Lewis Mumford, 1977 Jay Leyda, 1976 Hennig Cohen, 1975 Robert Penn Warren, 1974 [none], 1973 Nathalia Wright, 1972 Leon Howard, 1971 Harrison Hayford, 1970 Howard P. Vincent, 1969 [no record], 1968 Walter Bezanson, 1967 Henry A. Murray, 1966 Merlin Bowen, 1965 Merlin Bowen (in absentia), 1964 William B. Stein, 1963 Merrill Davis (deceased), 1962 Richard H. Fogle (served 2 years), 1961 Tyrus Hillway, 1960 Lawrence Barrett, 1959 Wilson L. Heflin, 1958 Howard C. Horsford, 1957 Nathalia Wright, 1956 Harrison Hayford, 1955 Walter Bezanson, 1954 Merton M. Sealts, Jr., 1953 Willard Thorp, 1952 Howard P. Vincent, 1951 Elizabeth Foster, 1950 F. Barron Freeman, 1949 William Braswell, 1948 Luther S. Mansfield, 1947 Charles R. Anderson, 1946 [none], 1945 Executive Secretary (elected, three-year term, serves as Chair of the Executive Committee) Matthew Rebhorn, 2020–present Colin Dewey, 2017–2019 Tony McGowan, 2014–2016 Mary K. Bercaw Edwards, 2007–2013 Jill Barnum, 2003–2006 Christopher Sten, 1997–2002 Sanford E. Marovitz, 1994–1996 Stanton Garner, 1990–1993 Donald Yannella, (secretarytreasurer), 1975–1989 Donald Yannella (acting secretarytreasurer for Hennig Cohen), 1973–1974 Hennig Cohen (secretary-treasurer), 1969–1972 Howard P. Vincent (secretarytreasurer), 1964–1968 Richard Stavig (secretary-treasurer), 1960–1963 Tyrus Hillway (acting secretarytreasurer for Howard Horsford), 1958–1959 Tyrus Hillway (secretary-treasurer), 1946–1957 Tyrus Hillway (founding secretarytreasurer), 1945 Associate Secretary for Programs and Conferences (elected, three-year term, serves on Executive Committee) Meredith Farmer, 2017–present Colin Dewey, 2014–2016 Joseph Fruscione, 2009–2013 Treasurer (elected, three-year term, serves on Executive Committee) Zach Hutchins, 2020–present Steven Olsen-Smith, 2014–2019 Tony McGowan, 2009–2013 John Matteson, 2006–2008 Dennis Berthold (acting treasurer), 2004–2005 Bryan Short, 2002–2003 Dennis Berthold, 1995–2001 John Wenke, 1990–1994 Member-At-Large (elected, three-year term, serves on Executive Committee) Kelly Ross, 2020–present Jennifer Greiman, 2017–2019 Melville Society Cultural Project Representative (elected, three-year term, serves on Executive Committee) Christopher Sten / Robert K. Wallace (shared seat), 2008–present Editor (elected, three-year term, serves on Executive Committee) Brian Yothers, 2020–present Samuel Otter, 2014–2019 John Bryant, 1990–2013 Donald Yannella, 1976–1989 Hennig Cohen, 1969–1975 Associate Editor (appointed by Editor) Jennifer Greiman, 2020–present Brian Yothers, 2014–2019 Samuel Otter, 2010–2013 Wyn Kelley, 2000–2010 (also served as Assistant Editor 1996–2000) Book Review Editor (appointed by Editor) Paul Hurh, 2021–present Dawn Coleman, 2014–2020 Extracts Editor (appointed by Editor) Mary K. Bercaw Edwards, 2014–present Historian (elected, three-year term, serves on Executive Committee;discontinued in 2008) Christopher Sten, 2003–2007 Douglas Robillard, 2002 rederick J. Kennedy, 1996–2001 Ruth T. Degenhardt, 1990–1995 Richard Colles Johnson, 1975–1989 Henry Wasser, 1970–1974 Director of Development (elected, three-year term, serves on Executive Committee;discontinued in 2014) John Matteson, 2012–2013 Dennis Berthold, 2005–2011 Communication Committee Chair (elected, three-year term) Carie Schneider 2020–present Zach Hutchins, 2017–2020 MLA Panel Chair(s) (elected, one-year term;beginning in 2011, MLA moved from late December to early January) Paul Downes / Mary Grace Albanese, 2022 John Levi Barnard / Jordan Alexander Stein, 2021 Michael Jonik / Michael D. Snediker, 2020 K.L. Evans / Rodrigo Lazo, 2019 Munia Bhaumik, 2018 Branka Arsic / Christopher Freeburg, 2017 Colin Dewey / Eliza Richards with Emily Dickenson International Society, 2016 Hsuan Hsu / Coleman Hutchison, 2015 Timothy Marr, 2014 Hester Blum, 2013 Milette Shamir, 2012 Jeff Dailey / Joseph Fruscione, 2011 Ivy Wilson, 2010 Peter Norberg, 2009 Chris Castiglia, 2008 Charlene Avallone, 2007 M. Thomas Inge, 2006 Geoffrey Sanborn, 2005 Susan Garbarini Fanning, 2004 Robert Levine, 2003 Linda Costanzo Cahir, 2002 Timothy Marr, 2001 John Wenke, 2000 Laurie Robertson-Lorant, 1999 Stanton Garner, 1998 Robert Martin, 1997 Gail Coffler, 1996 Susan Weiner, 1995 Wyn Kelley, 1994 Robert K. Wallace, 1993 Robert DeMott, 1992 Milton R. Stern, 1991 Gail Coffler, 1990 Carolyn Karcher, 1989 James Duban, 1988 Dennis Berthold, 1987 Chris Sten, 1986 (Thomas F. Heffernan also chaired a conference on Nantucket in 1986) Joyce Sparer Adler, 1985 Bainard Cowan, 1984 Thomas F. Heffernan, 1983 Robert Milder, 1982 Bette Weidman, 1981 Watson G. Branch, 1980 Hershel Parker, 1979 H. Bruce Franklin, 1978 Curtis Dahl, 1977 Deborah C. Andrews, 1976 Johannes Bergmann, 1975 Sanford Marovitz, 1974 Donald Yannella, 1973 Donald Yannella, 1972 Hershel Parker, 1971 Frederic Tuten, 1970 John Seelye, 1969 ALA Panel Chair(s) (elected, one-year term) Brian Yothers / Leonora Warren, 2021 Jose Alfaro / Tom Nurmi, 2020 (cancelled because of COVID-19) Wyn Kelley / Nathan Wolff, 2019 Wendy Anne Lee / James Noel, 2018 David Greven / Hoang Gia Phan, 2017 Paul Hurh / Dominic Mastroianni, 2016 Elizabeth Duquette / Andrew Kopec, 2015 Anne Baker/ Matthew Giordano, 2014 Zach Hutchins/Cody Marrs, 2013 Ralph Savarese, 2012 Christopher Phillips, 2011 Brian Yothers, 2010 Maurice Lee, 2009 Steven Olsen-Smith, 2008 Elizabeth Renker, 2007 Faith Barrett, 2006 Carol Colatrella, 2005 Jonathan A. Cook, 2004 Rachela Permenter, 2003 Juana Djalal, 2002 Robert Milder, 2001 Samuel Otter, 2000 Edgar Dryden, 1999 Sterling Stuckey, 1998 Sally Hoople, 1997 John Samson, 1996 David Leverenz, 1995 Sheila Post-Lauria, 1994 Kathleen E. Kier & Larry J. Reynolds, 1993 Charlene Avallone & Richard Kopley, 1992 Mary K. Bercaw Edwards, 1991 Sanford E. Marovitz (appointed), 1990 Murray Endowment Committee (elected, three-year term) Samuel Otter, 2021–2024 Jordan Alexander Stein, 2020–2023 Dennis Berthold, 2019–2022 Tony McGowan, 2018–2021 Wyn Kelley, 2017–2019 Dennis Berthold, 2016–2018 Carolyn Karcher, 2015–2017 Robert D. Madison, 2014–2016 Brian Yothers, 2012–2013 James Duban, 2010–[2015] Sandy Marovitz, 2009–2011 Hank Galmish, 2008–[2014] [information missing 2007] Marty Bickman, 2006–2008 Helen Trimpi, 2005–2007 Watson Branch, 2004–2006 Sanford E. Marovitz, 2003–2005 Lea Bertani Vozar Newman, 2002–2004 Sally Hoople, 2001–2003 Linda Costanzo Cahir, 2000–2002 Martin Torodash, 1999–2001 Stanton Garner, 1997–1999 Donald Yannella, 1996–1998 Lucy Freibert, 1995–1997, 1998 Curtis Dahl, 1994–1996 Sanford E. Marovitz, 1993–1995 Donald Yannella, 1992–1994 G. Thomas Tanselle, 1991–1993 Harold B. Lehrman, 1990–1992 Thomas Norton, 1990–1991 Walter Bezanson, 1990 [information missing 1988–1989] Robert G. Newman (chair), William B. Dillingham, Sally Hoople, Thomas Norton, 1987 Robert G. Newman (chair), William B. Dillingham, Sally Hoople, Merton M. Sealts, Jr., Thomas Norton, 1986 (initial committee) Nominating Committee (appointed by ou going President, three-year term) James Noel, 2019–2022 Michael Jonik, 2018–2021 Ivy Wilson, 2017–2020 Lenora Warren, 2015–2018 Maurice Lee, 2015–2017 Jennifer Greiman, 2014–2016 Elizabeth Renker, 2013–2015 Dawn Coleman, 2012–2014 Bryan Sinche, 2011–2013 Colin Dewey, 2010–2012 Elizabeth Duquette, 2009–2011 Steven Olsen-Smith, 2008–2010 Wendy Stallard Flory, 2007–2009 Samuel Otter, 2006–2008 Henry Hughes, 2005–2007 Rachela Parmenter, 2004–2006 Dennis Berthold, 2003–2005 Timothy Marr, 2002–2004 Kathleen E. Kier, 2001–2004 Gail Coffler, 2000–2002 Wyn Kelley, 1999–2001 Lynn Horth, 1998–2000 Carolyn Karcher, 1997–1999 Haskell Springer, 1996–1998 John Wenke, 1995–1997 Laurie Robertson-Lorant, 1994–1996 Edward Grejda, 1993–1994 (resigned for overseas commitment) Joyce Kennedy, 1992–1995

Research Summary: We employ an exploratory approach to understand what differentiates boards that retain limited, potentially tokenistic, gender diversity (i.e., a single female director), and boards that more genuinely diversify their composition by appointing additional female directors. Previous studies have speculated that strategic leaders responsible for board appointments may influence this occurrence. Using longitudinal data on U.S. firms, we find that more female top managers and having the sole female director serve on the nominating committee increase the likelihood of additional female director appointments. Boards and nominating committees with younger members amplify these effects, respectively. We use interviews with board members and professional corporate governance consultants to discuss the probable causal mechanisms that underpin these relationships, highlighting novel theoretical insights related to gatekeeping and social psychology. Managerial Summary: We explore what compels firms to appoint additional female directors after the first one, as only one female director could be considered a token. Using data on U.S. firms, we find that more female top managers and having the sole female director serve on the nominating committee make firms more likely to appoint additional female directors. These likelihoods are highest when younger directors make up the board at large and/or nominating committee. Chief executive officers can be change agents for gender diversity in their organizations by hiring female top managers and pushing for better representation of women on boards. Likewise, younger directors appear to enhance board gender diversity. These findings can inform the director selection process.

This document updates the criteria for qualifying volunteers to participate in the IETF Nominating Committee. It therefore also updates the criteria for qualifying signatories to a community recall petition. The purpose is to make the criteria more flexible in view of increasing remote participation in the IETF and a probable decline in face-to-face meetings. This document updates RFC8713.

This study investigates gender spillovers from women on supervisory boards to women on management boards in a two-tier system with employee codetermination. The supervisory board consists of a nominating committee mainly responsible for the appointment of directors in the management board. By combining similarity attraction theory with power theory, we predict that only female shareholder representatives who serve on the nominating committee drive the positive effect on the presence of women on management boards. The results of the correlated random effects models in a sample of 95 German codetermined and publicly listed companies (2009–2016) confirm the predicted relationship.

Jacqueline Herd, DNP, MSN, RN, NEA-BC is the Executive Vice President and Chief Nursing Officer (CNO) at Grady Health System in Atlanta, Georgia. She is a California native and moved to Georgia in 2009 as the chief nursing officer at Grady Health Care in Atlanta (Tenet Health Care). With over 20 years' experience as a nurse executive, her passion is inspiring and empowering nurses to lead. Before moving to Georgia, she was a member of the Association of California Nurse Leaders (ACNL), and since moving to Georgia, she is a member of the Georgia Nurses Association, American Nurses Association, and an active member of Georgia Organization of Nurse Leaders (GONL). She has served as a member at large, president elect, president and immediate past president on the GONL State Board. She is an active member of American Organization of Nurse Leaders (AONL), has volunteered on the by-laws committee and the publication committee for the "Voice of Nursing Leadership," and is current AONL board member elected to represent Region 4. She is a strong advocate for the March of Dimes (MOD) and has served on the MOD Atlanta Planning Committee and the Nurse of the Year nominating committee. She has also served on the Georgia State Community Advisory Board and is currently on the Emory University Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing DNP Community Advisory Board. She is married with 3 children and 7 grandchildren.

The 2020-2021 Nominating Committee (NomCom) is to be formed between IETF 107 and IETF 108, and the issue of eligibility of who can serve on that NomCom needs clarification. This document provides a one- time interpretation of the eligibility rules that is required for the exceptional situation of the cancellation of the in-person IETF 107 meeting. This document only affects the seating of the 2020-2021 NomCom and any rules or processes that relate to NomCom eligibility before IETF 108, and does not set a precedent for the future.

This study analyzes the role of women on supervisory boards of German companies. In particular, we investigate the likelihood of women to hold senior positions such as (vice) chair of the board and their membership in standing committees. Based on the logic of the lack of fit model, we argue that once women overcome the first glass ceiling and become board members, they still face a second glass ceiling preventing them from gaining senior board positions. We test our hypotheses using a sample of 103 parity co-determined and publicly quoted companies from 2009 to 2016. We find that women directors are underrepresented in senior board positions. This gap is particularly large and even increasing for the position of the board chair. It is also present for the position of the vice chair and (in the case of shareholder representatives) for memberships in standing committees except for the nomination committee. These findings are consistent with the presence of a second glass ceiling. Our study contributes to the literature on the prevalence of women in senior board positions. In particular, we provide novel evidence on the progress of women on boards in a two-tier system with co-determination. One potential implication of our study is that women’s influence on board decision-making might still be limited despite the recent increase of the number of women on boards.

Directors are not one-dimensional. We characterize their skill sets by exploiting Regulation\ud S-K’s 2009 requirement that U.S. firms must disclose the experience, qualifications,\ud attributes or skills that led the nominating committee to choose an individual as a director.\ud We then examine how skills cluster on and across boards. Factor analysis indicates that the\ud main dimension along which boards vary is in the diversity of skills of their directors. We\ud find that firm performance increases when director skill sets exhibit more commonality.

SIGWEB is a medium-sized special interest group within ACM. Financially, SIGWEB is in an excellent position to develop and experiment with new initiatives to help promote a vibrant scientific community within our domain. This spring, ACM will hold SIG elections. The SIGWEB nominating committee has decided to offer a new slate of candidates for each of the three elected positions at SIGWEB: the Chair, the Vice-Chair and Secretary/Treasurer.

Drawing from the Enlightened Shareholder Theory that the author first developed in 2011, this theoretical paper with practical and normative ambitions achieves a better definition of independent director, while improving the understanding of the roles he fulfils on boards of directors. The first part defines constructs like firms, Governance system and Corporate governance, offering a clear distinction between the latter two concepts before explaining the four main missions of a board. The second part defines the ideal independent director by outlining the objective qualities that are necessary and adding those subjective aspects that have turned this into a veritable profession. The third part defines the ideal process for selecting independent directors, based on nominating committees that should themselves be independent. It also includes ways of assessing directors who are currently in function, as well as modalities for renewing their mandates. The paper’s conclusion presents the Paradox of the Independent Director.

The fulfilment of the legal duties and responsibilities of the board of directors with respect to compliance with corporate governance regulations and principles is typically led by a board-level governance and nominating committee. This chapter covers regulatory requirements relating qualifications of directors, including “independence” and financial expertise; the scope of duties and responsibilities of the committee, including identification and selection of qualified directors, development and implementation of governance codes and policy statements and oversight of directors’ education and performance assessment; and processes for evaluation of the performance of the committee and the entire board (including individual members of the board).

תקציר בעברית: הדגם השכיח לקריירה שיפוטית בישראל אינו שגרתי במבט השוואתי. הוא משלב מיסודו מאפיינים השכיחים הן במדינות המשפט המקובל והן מאפיינים השכיחים במדינות המשפט הקונטיננטלי. עם זאת, בשלושים השנים האחרונות נצפתה תופעה חדשה: עלייתם של שופטי המערכת. עורכות דין – מרביתן נשים – שבשלב מוקדם בקריירה המשפטית החלו לעבוד במסגרת מערכת השפיטה, כסגל עזר שיפוטי או/ו כרשמות, טרם בחירתן לשופטות מן המניין. המאמר הנוכחי מבקש לעמוד על שלושה היבטים של תופעת שופטי המערכת: היקפה ומאפייניה, הגורמים המרכזיים בעיצובה, ומשמעויותיה. ההיבט הראשון נוגע למגמות בדפוסי המינוי. בהתבסס על מחקר אמפירי מקיף ראשון מסוגו, המכסה את כלל השופטים שכיהנו בישראל מהקמת המדינה ועד לסוף שנת 2016, המאמר מבקש להראות את הדפוסים השונים במינויים שהם חלק מהתופעה. זאת, לרבות הירידה במספר ובשיעור השופטים המתמנים לערכאות הבכירות, הגידול בהיקף מערך הרשמים ושיעור השופטים שמשרתם האחרונה טרם מינוי היה כסגל עזר שיפוטי. ההיבט השני נוגע לגורמים המרכזיים המעצבים את התהוותו של דגם שופטי המערכת. התגבשותו של דגם זה לא הייתה תוצאה של החלטה סדורה אלא של סדרת החלטות טכניות לכאורה, המצטברות לכדי דגם של ממש. החלטות אלו התקבלו באתרים שונים, בכנסת, בממשלה, בוועדה לבחירת שופטים, ובמנהלת מערכת השפיטה. על אף ריבוי השחקנים והאתרים שבהם התרחש השינוי, המאמר מצביע על שני גורמים מרכזיים בהתרחשותו: מעבר מערכת השפיטה לתפיסה של ניהול סכסוכים והפרויקט של שיפוט כמקצוע. שני פרויקטים אידיאולוגיים אלה הם מרכזיים בעיצובו של הדגם, ובהתאם המנהלה של מערכת השפיטה והוועדה לבחירת שופטים הם אתרים משמעותיים שבהם הדגם התהווה. לבסוף, המאמר מבקש לעמוד על ההשלכות והמשמעויות של אימוץ הדגם. העמידה על השלכות אלו חשובה כבסיס לדיון עתידי בתופעה ובהסדרתה על ידי המערכת הפוליטית, שצפויה להתממש כחלק מהמאבקים הבין-מוסדיים המתרחשים בישראל בין שלושת הרשויות. המאמר מתמקד בשתי השלכות: בכך שדגם שופטי המערכת מקבע באופן מוסדי את "התסריט המוסדי" של הרשות השופטת; והפיכת הדגם לדרך כניסה משמעותית למערכת השפיטה עבור נשים שנעדרו ממנה בעבר: נשים ערביות, נשים יהודיות בעלות רקע דתי, ונשים יהודיות שגדלו בפריפריה החברתית-כלכלית של ישראל. שתי ההשלכות גם יחד – לרבת המתח שבניהן – מדגישות את מורכבות התופעה והשפעותיה, ועל כן את הצורך בהמשך מחקר ודיון ציבורי-מקצועי בעיצובה העתידי. English Abstract: The Israeli path to the judiciary is unusual from a comparative perspective. It incorporates properties common both to common law and civil law systems. In the past thirty years, this hybrid stance was further intensified by the emergence of a new phenomenon: the rise of system judges. These are lawyers—predominately women—who early in their legal careers began working in the judiciary, as law clerks and/or registrars, and were appointed to be judges from those positions. These judges are not recognition judges, nor are they strict career judges with a separate career path. This article presents this phenomenon and explores it. It traces its contours through the biographies of the judges. Based on an empirical study that covered the biographies of all judges appointed from between 1948 and 2017, it presents the different patterns in judicial appointments, such as a decline in the direct appointment of lawyers to appellate courts; the growth of the judicial staff, and the gradual rise of system judges across the judiciary. The article further elaborates on the central factors that shaped the system judges pathway. It argues that it has emerged not as the result of a premeditated plan, but rather through a series of seemingly technical reforms pushed by different actors in the judicial nomination committee, the Knesset, the government, and the director of the courts. Even though the process was promoted by different actors and in different arenas, the article demonstrates the central role played by the managerial shift of the judiciary in the past decade, and by the attempts to promote judgeship as a separate profession. Finally, the article discusses two possible implications that the emergence of system judges may have for the judiciary as a whole: the potential of system judges to institutionally solidify the voice of the judiciary, and the potential of system-judgeship as a pathway for marginalized groups.

This study examines the association between the board chairman’s (BC’s) characteristics (independence, age, ethnicity, tenure, family membership, dual chair with nomination committee (NC), dual chair with remuneration committee (RC)) and the firm’s financial stability. The Altman (1993) Z-Score indicator was used to determine the financial stability of Malaysian suspect-listed firms, i.e., firms with lowest positive earnings for the years 2013–2015. Ordinary Least Square regression indicates that only the age and tenure of the BC are associated with high financial stability. This means that the chairman’s age and tenure could protect the company against financial distress. However, the results showed a negative effect of the BC’s ethnicity, family membership and dual chair with the NC on the firm’s financial stability. These results, in general, are similar to the Feasible Generalized Least Squares regression and other robustness tests. This study is the first to investigate the influence of the board chairman’s characteristics on the firm’s financial stability. Thus, it alerts policymakers, firms and their stakeholders, as well as researchers, to the importance of strengthening the board chairman’s characteristics to protect the company against financial distress, especially in emerging countries such as Malaysia, where it has been observed that the board chairman attempts to dominate the entire firm’s decisions.

Management stock option is a form of compensation which as a hypothetical function to maintain key management, that in the end, the goal is improving company performance. This study aims to prove the hypothesis using Indonesia listed companies' data over the 2012-2016 period. The turnover rate measures management retention. The effectiveness of management stock options is examined during the vesting and exercised period, while management stock options are measured in three ways, i.e., a dummy of the existence of stock option, the amount of stock option, and the number of shares that are offered as stock options. Management stock options are found limited in Indonesia listed companies. Overall, the results showed that granting management stock options are only useful in retaining the management only during the vesting period. This study contributes to the remuneration and nomination committee in regulating the optimal management stock options. Keywords: Management stock option, management retention, performance.

Many corporate governance codes and reports emphasize the importance of creating nominating committees within boards. Focusing on banks, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (2015) recommends that boards of directors should create an internal nomination/human resources/governance committee. In this context, we have analysed the presence and main characteristics of this committee in the 30 systemically important banks (G-SIBs). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper describing in depth the activities of the nominating committees. Our analysis shows that the nominating committee is often also a “governance committee”. Its main responsibilities towards the full board of directors usually include identifying individuals qualified to become board members, guiding the board in its annual review, reviewing succession plans and, occasionally, monitoring education programs for directors. Most charters also entrust the appointment committee with the role of identifying members, and/or reviewing the composition, of board committees and, in a minority of cases, reviewing the suitability of the charters adopted by each board committee. The nominating committee is also frequently required to oversee for the board corporate governance policies and occasionally required to review policies relating to public/strategic issues, relationships with external entities affecting the bank’s reputation and ESG matters. Many charters also entrust the appointment committee with reviewing/appointing directors to the boards of important subsidiaries (9 out of 29) and reviewing/appointing managers (14 out of 29). The nominating committees of G-SIBs are primarily composed of independent directors. The male gender is the most represented. In 2016, the effective average number of meetings of nominating committees in was seven.

In this paper, we investigate the association between outside board directorships and family ownership concentration. Using a sample of 1091 firm-year observations of non-financial publicly listed firms from Gulf Cooperation Countries (GCC) during the 2005 to 2013 period, we find a positive association between family ownership and the number of outside directorships held by board members. This finding is consistent with the notion that family ownership reduces a board's monitoring capabilities. We also test whether the recent corporate governance reforms in GCC, which were designed to protect investors and minority shareholders, affect firms' incentives to establish a board nomination committee (NC). We find the existence of a board NC and the quality and characteristics of NC membership act to suppress the positive association between outside directorships and family ownership. Our results are robust to the use of alternative measures of outside directorships and family ownership and models that test for endogeneity. Overall, our results suggest that the institutional specificities of emerging economies such as those in the GCC can sustain high levels of multiple directorships, which could impair the quality of corporate governance.

The aim of this study is to examine the views of chairman and members of nomination committee on motives in appointing an independent director in Malaysian public listed companies. Semi-structured interview was used and 21 directors were interviewed. The results indicate that independent directors were expected to execute their monitoring role, exercise unbiased judgment in questioning decisions made and safeguard balance of power between the board and management. In addition, the respondents believe that independent director should utilize their capacity from related background, expertise and experience in board meeting discussion in addressing issues or risks and making relevant suggestions.

This study investigates how the level of board co-option might affect a borrowing firm's ex ante covenant intensity and ex post covenant violations. As the fraction of co-opted directors (those who joined the board after the CEO assumed office) increases, creditors include more covenant restrictions in their loan contracts, indicating that more co-opted boards are considered as weaker monitors. The results remain robust to various approaches accounting for endogeneity, and are not driven by alternative explanations such as CEO tenure, director inexperience, or CEO's involvement in the nominating committee. Ex post tests reveal that firms with more co-opted boards are more likely to violate loan covenants after controlling for covenant intensity. Non-co-opted independent directors appear to be the most effective monitors in mitigating covenant violations among revolving loans and loans to unrated borrowers.

Purpose – This paper investigates the impact of the two main aspects on selecting the right Board candidate including best practices within the position and structure along with the recruitment activities proposed under the Malaysian Corporate Governance Code (Code) compared across 2012 and 2017.Design/ methodology approach - For this analysis, a target list of the top 50 PLCs based on market capitalization was gathered from 784 Malaysian PLCs as of 14 August 2020. In the annual review of the reports, this study includes statistical methods to quantify and interpret the disclosures.Originality - This study reviews the developments of the policies from the Code in 2012 to the Code in 2017. Also applicable to other PLCs other than the top 50 Malaysian PLCs would be the Board Nomination Committee – Role and Structure and the Board Nomination Committee – Recruitment Activities scoring indices designed.

Objective - This paper aims to determine the efficacy of Nominating Committee in a company considering several factors that are argued to undermine its functions. Methodology/Technique - his research adopts qualitative type of research method where the non-doctrinal approach is used. Findings - The independence of Nominating Committee in a company is affected by several factors hence rendering it less functional. Novelty - This paper highlights several factors that are argued to be undermining to the practicality of Nominating Committee in a company. The factors of social network and influence from the management are further discussed to verify the independence of Nominating Committee. Following the findings of this research, establishment of an independent body or panel outside the company to nominate directors is humbly proposed for further deliberations. Type of Paper - Conceptual Keywords: Corporate governance; Nominating Committee; directors; independence; Malaysia.

We use the 2003 NYSE and NASDAQ listing rules for board and committee independence as a quasinatural experiment to examine the causal relations between board structure and CEO monitoring. Noncompliant firms forced to raise board independence or adopt a fully independent nominating committee significantly increased their forced CEO turnover sensitivity to performance relative to compliant firms. Nominating committee independence is important even when firms had an independent board, and the effect is stronger when the CEO is on the committee. We conclude that greater board independence and full independence of nominating committees lead to more rigorous CEO monitoring and discipline

The Award for Meritorious Contributions to Neuropathology recognizes members who have made significant contributions to the advancement of knowledge in neuropathology and have provided service to the American Association of Neuropathologists (AANP). This award is the highest recognition of professional achievement that the association bestows upon our exceptional colleagues. To be recognized for this award, one’s influence in neuropathology must be felt beyond colleagues, students, and patients in one’s own hospital, and at the national and international levels. Each recipient of the award is nominated by the president, in conjunction with the nominating committee and with the approval of the executive council. The qualities of outstanding scientific achievement and service are embodied in this year’s recipients, Drs. Barbara J. Crain and Dennis W. Dickson. They join the rich roster of distinguished former award recipients. The American Association of Neuropathologists (AANP) recognizes Barbara Crain with the 2016 Award for Meritorious Contributions to Neuropathology for her research, diagnostic work, teaching, and, especially, her leadership in our profession. Barbara Crain, MD, PhD is a transplanted Californian; she was born and raised in Long Beach and is the oldest of 5 children (3 sisters and a brother). She attended Robert A. Millikan High School and after graduating from the University of California at Irvine with a degree in biological sciences (Summa Cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa) she migrated east and received her PhD (William C. Hall, mentor) and MD (Alpha Omega Alpha) at Duke University as well as residency training in pathology, and in neuropathology with Stephen Vogel. On the faculty at Duke, Barbara variously served as Autopsy Director (including the rapid autopsy program), Parkinson Center Core Director, and Neuropathology Core Director of the Alzheimer Disease Research Center, in addition to shouldering a heavy teaching load. In 1993 she accepted a position at Johns …

This specification formalizes an ad hoc practice used to provide advice to the IETF Nominating Committee (NomCom) about the operations of the IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC). This document updates RFC 7437.

This study looks at the relationship between nomination committee (NC) and the financial performance of firms among United Kingdom (UK) financial institutions. The result indicates a positive and statistically significant association between the NC of a firm and its Market Value (MV). The relationship between NC and the Return on Asset (ROA) of the firm as a measure of financial performance was positive. The second study examines the impact of NC on UK financial firms during the 2007/2008 global financial crises. The empirical evidence gleaned highlights that firms adopting NC for corporate boards witness a positive and statistically significant impact on the ROA of the firms. There was also an inverse relationship demonstrated, in terms of financial performance on the MV of the firms during the pre- and post-global financial crisis.

Al’aide d’une base de donnees originales sur les nominations dans les cours de justice provinciales et superieures de l’Ontario de 1972 a 2012, l’auteure du present article analyse l’effet du systeme de nominations judiciaires sur la representation des femmes dans la magistrature. En plus d’examiner de facon exhaustive les nominations judiciaires en Ontario, l’auteure demontre que depuis l’adoption de nouveaux systemes de nominations judiciaires par les gouvernements federal et ontarien en 1989, le systeme provincial a nomme environ cinq pour cent plus de femmes juges. Les donnees revelent aussi qu’au cours des 40 annees etudiees, les partis conservateurs ont ete moins enclins que le parti liberal et le NPD a nommer des femmes a la magistrature. La recherche presentee indique que si les gouvernements veulent vraiment faire de la diversite de la magistrature un objectif politique, certaines approches s’averent plus efficaces que d’autres. En particulier, le systeme de comites sur les nominations a la magistrature de l’Ontario a reussi a nommer plus de femmes juges que le systeme de comites d’examen du gouvernement federal, surtout durant les annees ou les candidates etaient activement recrutees. Abstract: Using an original dataset of appointments to Ontario’s provincial and superior courts from 1972 to 2012, this article explores whether the system of judicial appointment affects the representation of women on the bench. In addition to providing a comprehensive review of judicial appointments in Ontario, the article finds that since the introduction of new judicial appointments systems by the federal and Ontario governments in 1989, the provincial system appointed approximately 5 percent more women judges. The data also reveals that Conservative parties were less likely to appoint women to the bench than the Liberal Party and NDP over this forty-year period. If diversity on the bench is to be a serious policy objective for governments, this research indicates that certain approaches may prove more effective than others. In particular, Ontario’s provincial nominating committee system has been more successful in appointing women judges—especially in the years it actively recruited women applicants—than the federal government’s review committee system.

Přispěvek se zabýva problematikou vývoje corporate governance u spolecnosti v Ceske republice a ve Velke Britanii v letech 2012-2013. Cilem přispěvku neni pouze seznamit se se zakladnimi předpisy dane problematiky, ale take upozornit na stav corporate governance v oblasti výborů pro audit, odměňovani, jmenovani a interniho auditu u těchto zemi. Clanek porovnava vývoj v zavaděni výborů pro audit, odměňovani, jmenovani a interniho auditu u vybraných kotovaných spolecnosti na pražske Burze cenných papirů v letech 2012 a 2013.

The nominating committee (NC) of the board identifies and nominates individuals for board service, thus establishing the board's composition. Despite this important role, relatively little is known about the NC process, including NC members' actions and thought processes. Based on interviews of 20 U.S. public company NC members, including 16 chairs, we focus on two primary questions: (1) what is the extent of influence that the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) has over committee processes, and (2) to what extent are committee processes formalized (i.e., framed and acted upon in a mechanistic way)? We find that there is continuing recognition of CEO influence in the director nomination process, the level of which varies widely by company. Also, there is considerable variability in the formalization of the director nomination process (e.g., some NCs use search firms and a matrix/grid approach to assessing director skill sets across the board, while others do not). Finally, we find that many interviewees have professional or personal ties to the CEO and that nearly all of the NCs focus on �chemistry� and comfort in the director nomination process, where the often-stated goal is to enhance the board's ability to function effectively and to reduce risk in the director nomination process. The overall message of the interviews perhaps is best captured by one interviewee, who described a �strange little dance.� Throughout the interviews, we find evidence that the NC must �dance� through a complex decision landscape.

This study investigates the governance attributes of firms that have been subject to securities class actions (SCAs). There has been a recent sizable increase in the number of firms subject to SCAs in Australia. We examine a sample of firms that have been subject to SCAs due to disclosure breaches and match the firms by industry and size to a control sample. First, we examine the compliance culture of the SCA firms via the frequency of Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) queries of the firm and find that the frequency of ASX queries is positively associated with the occurrence of a SCA. Secondly, we provide evidence that SCA firms exhibit weaker levels of corporate governance than the matched control sample. In addition, we contribute to the understanding of firms subject to SCAs and their corporate governance attributes. Our results suggest the presence of a nomination committee may be associated with higher agency costs and that the influence of CEO duality may reduce the effectiveness of a nomination committee.

The first meeting of the 2012 Executive Committee was called to order at 10:01 a.m. on April 27, 2012 in the Writer Room of the Renaissance O’Hare Hotel, Chicago, IL. Members present were: Orley Ashenfelter, Alan Auerbach, Janet Currie, Pinelopi Goldberg, Claudia Goldin, Jonathan Gruber, Robert Hall, Anil Kashyap, Rosa Matzkin, Christina Paxson, Monika Piazzesi, Andrew Postlewaite, Valerie Ramey, Nancy Rose, John Siegfried, Christopher Sims, and Michael Woodford. Executive Committee members David Autor and Esther Duflo participated in parts of the meeting by phone. Caroline Hoxby participated in part of the meeting and Abhijit Banerjee and Vincent Crawford participated by phone as members of the Honors and Awards Committee. Angus Deaton participated in part of the meeting as chair of the Nominating Committee. Associate Secretary-Treasurer Peter Rousseau also attended. Sims welcomed the newly elected members of the 2012 Executive Committee: Claudia Goldin, President-elect; Christina Paxson and Nancy Rose, Vice-presidents; and Anil Kashyap and Rosa Matzkin, and recognized the Secretary at the last meeting of his 16-year tenure. The Minutes of the January 5, 2012 meeting of the Executive Committee were approved as written. Report of the Secretary (Siegfried). Siegfried reviewed the schedule for sites and dates of future meetings: San Diego, January 4–6, 2013 (Friday, Saturday, and Sunday); Philadelphia, January 3–5, 2014 (Friday, Saturday, and Sunday); Boston, January 3–5, 2015 (Saturday, Sunday, and Monday); San Francisco, January 3–5, 2016 (Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday); Chicago, January 6–8, 2017 (Friday, Saturday, and Sunday); Atlanta, January 5–7, 2018 (Friday, Saturday, and Sunday); Philadelphia, January 4–6, 2019 (Friday, Saturday, and Sunday); and San Diego, January 3–5, 2020 (Friday, Saturday, and Sunday). The Executive Committee meets the day prior to the Annual Meeting each year. Minutes of the Meeting of the Executive Committee Chicago, IL April 27, 2012

Physics Flash is the newsletter for the Physics Division at Los Alamos National Laboratory. This newsletter is for August 2016. The following topics are covered: "Accomplishments in the Trident Laser Facility", "David Meyerhofer elected as chair-elect APS Nominating Committee", "HAWC searches for gamma rays from dark matter", "Proton Radiography Facility commissions electromagnetic magnifier", and "Cosmic ray muon computed tomography of spent nuclear fuel in dry storage casks."

We investigate Australian CEO compensation following mergers and acquisitions (M&As). We find CEOs of acquiring firms receive higher compensation in the year of M&A completion and one year after. We also find a positive correlation between CEO compensation and firm performance, and some measures of CEO effort and skill in completing the deal. However, CEOs of bidding firms receive a lower bonus and other compensation if they wield more managerial power (that is, if the CEO sits on the nominating committee, has a higher level of share ownership, or the board has more executive directors). This result is in sharp contrast to the US where compensation is influenced by CEO power. Overall our findings are more consistent with the predictions of the incentive alignment theory rather than the managerial power theory.

PurposeThis paper seeks to examine the relationship between board committees and firm performance and the moderating effect of family ownership for public companies in Hong Kong.Design/methodology/approachThis study employs publicly available data from financial databases and annual reports of a sample of 346 firm‐year observations of public companies in Hong Kong for the periods 2001‐2003.FindingsThe empirical evidence indicates that a nomination (remuneration) committee is positively (negatively) related to firm performance, depending on the independence of its composition. Furthermore, family ownership does have an adverse effect on the relationship between board committees, specifically the remuneration committee, and the performance of public companies in Hong Kong.Research limitations/implicationsThis study is based on publicly available data and the board process is not actually observed.Practical implicationsThe effectiveness of a board committee is contingent on its independence and family ownership.Originality/valueThis paper provides empirical evidence that an independent board committee could enhance the corporate governance of public companies in Hong Kong and would be of interest to regulatory bodies, business practitioners, and academic researchers.

We provide evidence that firms appoint independent directors who are overly sympathetic to management, while still technically independent according to regulatory definitions. We explore a subset of independent directors for whom we have detailed, microlevel data on their views regarding the firm prior to being appointed to the board: sell-side analysts who are subsequently appointed to the boards of companies they previously covered. We find that boards appoint overly optimistic analysts who are also poor relative performers. The magnitude of the optimistic bias is large: 82.0% of appointed recommendations are strong buy/buy recommendations, compared with 56.9% for all other analyst recommendations. We also show that appointed analysts' optimism is stronger at precisely those times when firms' benefits are larger. Last, we find that appointing firms are more likely to have management on the board nominating committee, appear to be poorly governed, and increase earnings management and chief executive officer compensation following these board appointments. This paper was accepted by Brad Barber, finance.

October 2011 F over thirty years now I have participated in a dialogue group in the United States called the Society for BuddhistChristian Studies (SBCS). The society, now with about 400 members, meets for two days prior to the annual American Academy of Religion meetings in late November. Meetings consist of two three-hour sessions where Buddhists and Christians present papers or lead discussions on topics of common interest.1 I have been an active participant. In addition to attending every year, I have presented papers, I served for a number of years as the chair of the nominating committee, I rewrote, revised, and edited the society’s by-laws, and for ten years I was the editor of Buddhist-Christian Studies, the society’s annual journal, published by the University of Hawai‘i Press. I have just begun a four-year term that will include serving successively as program chair, vice president, and president. I have participated as an evangelical Christian, a position shared by only a handful of the Christians in SBCS. Most of my fellow Christians are convinced that one must be a liberal Christian in order to properly dialogue. And although the Buddhists use different nomenclature, it is safe to say that Buddhist participants also come from a certain approach to Buddhism drawn from educated, globalized groups. Many of the Buddhist participants are Western converts from Christianity. My experience in this group has taught me many things about interreligious dialogue and Christian mission, in particular: (1) how interreligious dialogue is defined and the place it has visa-vis other modes of Christian interaction with Buddhists; (2) a realistic definition of dialogue; and (3) an outline of what I will call a missional theology of dialogue. Throughout this article I use Buddhist-Christian dialogue as my primary case, but I think the lessons I relate can be generalized to relationships with Hindus and Muslims as well.