Case Study: In early 2013, the remuneration committee of Boom Co (a listed company) met to determin

Aug 25th, 2016
Studypool Tutor
Abraham Lincoln University
Price: $30 USD

Tutor description

Case Study: In early 2013, the remuneration committee of Boom Co (a listed company) met to determine the rewards for the executive directors. It was the practice of the committee to meet annually to decide on executive rewards for the forthcoming financial year. In line with best practice, the committee was made up entirely of non-executive directors. When the remuneration committee met, its chairman, Sarah Umm, reminded those present that the committee should comply with the guidance of the relevant code of corporate governance. She read out the section that she believed was most relevant to their discussions. ‘A significant proportion of executive directors’ remuneration should be structured so as to link rewards to corporate and individual performance. The remuneration committee should judge where to position their company relative to other companies. But they should use such comparisons with caution in view of the risk of an upward movement of remuneration levels with no cor

Word Count: 1099
Showing Page: 1/6
Contemporary issues in accountingStudent NameCourseAffiliation NoLecturerSubmission DateIntroductionBoom Company remuneration committee met at the beginning of 2013 to discuss the reward ofits executive committee. The team comprised of non-executive board members. Remunerationcommittee chairlady, Mrs. Umm, read out the relevant sections of the code of corporategovernance that was to be applied. The committee was to determine where their company wouldbe positioned among other enterprises in the industry. The remuneration was to be awarded onlyto the top performing candidates and for the non-executive directors, their award payment shouldnot include performance-related elements. The chairlady further emphasized that markets rates,companies set goals/objectives and link with performance should be considered while setting upreward plans.Task 1The table below outlines the key differences between Social Responsibility Accounting (SRA)and Corporate Governance (CG). These two terms are not completely different words, andneither are their similar phrases.Social Responsibility Accounting (SRA )Corporate Governance (CG)Emphasizes on how the company regulateEmphasizes on internal control and externalits internal factors not including theregulation of the company by legal means.external regulation of the company by legalmeans.Refers to the practice of reporting onRefers to the process in which corporationssocial, environmental and ethical business

Review from student

Studypool Student
" Good stuff. Will use again. "
Ask your homework questions. Receive quality answers!

Type your question here (or upload an image)

1819 tutors are online

Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors