Showing posts with label Governance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Governance. Show all posts

Saturday, January 23, 2021

2021 and Beyond

 


It was the best of times, it was the worst of times; it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness; it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity; it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness; it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair...” This is how Charles Dickens begins his novel, A Tale of Two Cities.

Bottom of Form

Vision and Strategies Change

 This is an apt description of this age. We are at a maddening speed in technologies. Industry 4.0 has entered. Artificial intelligence, block chain technologies, man machine learning, robotics are the decisive forces of change in most organisations. Digital applications are replacing the traditional gurus (teachers). Tick boxes define the success of persons, whether in schools or office selections. People would like to travel, if possible, at the speed of light. Several corporates are rewriting their vision and strategy documents.   

 Conflicting Contours

 If those characteristics define the age of wisdom, street fights, large family divorces, abandoned children in larger numbers than before, failures in inter-country relationships redefining trade rules, ignoring climate warnings, several persons yearning to cross the boundaries aiming high only to know that ‘distant hills look green’, reflect the age of foolishness. 

 Mobocracy Vs Democracy

 With Joe Biden taking over the reins of the largest democracy, democracy would appear to be on the path of restoration. But, on the other hand, in India, with the unrelenting farmers’ agitation, mobocracy seem to be asserting itself, mainly because of the failure in following the Constitutional process for a well-thought-out reform in the sector. With 123 amendments, Indian Constitution seems to be under attack off and on and begs for a comprehensive overhaul, so as to keep the Fundamental Rights enshrined there intact.

 Financial Sector 

 In the financial sector, Covid-19 shook the world while in India, the scenario is much worse as frauds and cybercrimes are surging, threatening financial stability. Reforms in this sector should move strategies ahead of structures. Two World Bank economists in a recent blog commenting on asset purchases in emerging markets and developing economies, say that unconventional policies and unconventional times had set in. “History is a reminder to central bank’s credibility if asset purchase programs are used for prolonged monetary financing of fiscal deficits.”

 Investments in water, environment, natural resources, education, health and hygiene, and emerging technologies would be the defining features of sustainability.

 Ethics in Governance and Yoga

 Ethics in governance and transformation processes seem to be of criticality. Albert Einstein had said, “We should be men of values rather than men of success, ” Winston Churchill had said “We should extend values beyond our homes.” The corporate executives are selling their professional skills and not their conscience. It is the attitude to life and the value system one has to cherish and live with. Values are not like a sensex graph varying every day or with every person. Values are universal in character. It is the application of values that has been undergoing a change. Clean minds are as important as clean physics and dharmic yoga makes more sense than mere physical yoga embraced by people in different parts of the world, with PM Modi’s clarion call to the nation since 2014. 

 Post Covid, the stars surface

 During this third millennium, with sputnik science reaching for livable space even on Jupiter and the moon, India would be moving ahead of other nations and prove its leadership in space technologies. She has already proved herself as a leader in pharmaceuticals and software and would move its best foot forward in the transformational world. No wonder McKinsey in its most recent article has put Asia as the leader of the future and generations will define the future in terms of pre-Covid and post Covid. 

 The year 2021 and beyond will see the world transiting to a different horizon. The wisdom of the aged will fall behind the expectations of youth and it is this youth that are going to redefine the age ahead. I am not a soothsayer but the writings on the wall are clear.

 (The writer, an economist and risk management specialist, is author of “Roots to Fruits – The Journey of A Development Banker.” The views are personal.) 

   https://www.moneylife.in/article/2021-and-beyond/62745.html

 

 

 

Wednesday, July 1, 2020

Cooperative Banks move to a single regulator


Cooperative Banks move to a single regulator - RBI

PMC Bank failure triggered the action on the part of Union Government to amend Banking Regulation Act 1949 bringing the Cooperative Banks in the direct regulatory ambit of the RBI, putting a full stop for dual regulation of the Cooperative Banking sector. The ordinance does not include Primary Cooperative Societies, the principal constituents of the State Cooperative Banks (StCB) District Cooperative Central Banks DCCBs). Urban Cooperative Banks and Multi State Cooperative Banks and the rest of Rural Cooperative Credit structure falling in the ambit of NABARD supervision will all be subject to such amended regulation.
The preamble of the Ordinance on Banking Regulation Act 1949 Amendment makes us understand that the cooperative banks are not well managed; not properly regulated; and the affairs conducted are detrimental to the interests of the depositors. They also lack professionalism, good governance and sound banking practices. The objective of the amendment is to correct all of them. It is important to view this ordinance in the backdrop of the latest Report on UCBs chaired by R.Gandhi, when he was Dy.Governor.
R.Gandhi (2015) Report says: “As UCBs form an important vehicle for financial inclusion and facilitate payment and settlement, it may be appropriate to support their growth and proliferation further in the background of the differentiated bank model. However, the question remains whether unrestrained growth can be allowed, keeping in view the restricted ability of UCBs to raise capital, lack of level playing field in regulation and supervision and absence of a resolution mechanism at par with commercial banks.” UCBs now have high aspirations of competing with commercial banks and they expect RBI to provide relaxations in various regulatory restrictions.
In countries like Canada, Cooperative Banks pose a formidable challenge to commercial banks and the former follow the capital regulations of Basel, conduct elections regularly, Associations of Cooperatives conduct induction courses and retreats for Board members on governance. Without harming the principles of cooperatives the Cooperative Banks pose a stiff competition to the commercial banks.
A study was conducted on behalf of Gandhi committee to ascertain the range of loans granted by scheduled and non-scheduled UCBs. The study shows diametrically opposite trends in the range of loans granted by the two types of co-operative banks. While the scheduled banks granted 59.6% of the total loans in the largest loan size ranges of Rs.1-5 crore and above Rs. 5 crore, non-scheduled banks catered to the small loan segments up to Rs.10 lakh in a substantial way as this segment constituted 59.5% of the loans granted by this component of UCBs. The study further supports the premise that large MS-UCBs have aligned their business models and goals with those of commercial banks while availing of the concessions granted to the sector. Even this study could not bring out the frauds and maleficence of Bank like PMC because the fraud has been traced to even earlier period.
“The Report says; major considerations to be kept in mind are the aspirations of large UCBs, conflicts of interest, decline in cooperativeness, regulatory arbitrage, limitations on raising capital, limited resolution powers of RBI, the capital structure of UCBs and opportunities for growth that will accrue after such conversions.” The UCBs are subject to annual inspections by the RBI. Yet it could not hold accountable for the large scale frauds in UCBs.
In so far as StCBs and DCCBs are concerned, they are under the supervision of NABARD and the Board appointments are supposed to be done as per the ‘fit and proper’ criteria fixed by RBI. Elections to the Cooperative Societies are conducted by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies. Cooperative Societies as per cooperative statute are member-driven, member-controlled and member-protected. If members who are large in numbers choose to abdicate their responsibilities or do not take enough interest in their activities, jeopardising the interests of other stakeholders and particularly the non-member depositors, the remedy rests only with the Registrar.  In so far as banking is concerned, it is only RBI that regulates all and all UCBs are subject to inspections by the RBI annually or whenever any aberration comes to their notice even during a year. Depositors’ constituency for long has been asking for a representation on the Board and this can be done only by amendment to the Cooperative Act.
The latest report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India from RBI (December 2019) has highlighted the importance of cooperative banks in India lies in their grassroots’ integration into the life and ethos of the widest sections of society and effective instruments of financial inclusion. They account for about near 10 percent of total assets of scheduled commercial banks in 2017-18. It also clarified that the combined balance sheet of UCBs witnessed robust expansion underscoring the effectiveness of measures taken to strengthen their financials.
Although 89.5% of the UCBs’ resource base happens to be Deposits, their growth is muted and remains well-below the average of 13.9 per cent achieved during 2007-08 to 2016-17.” A CAMELS (capital  adequacy;  asset quality; management; earnings; liquidity; and systems and control) rating model is used to classify UCBs for regulatory and supervisory purposes. UCBs in the top-ranking categories— with ratings A and B—accounted for 78 per cent of the sector. Only 4to 5 percent are in D category for the last five years. And yet, the well-rated UCBs have defalcated with immunity for years. Will this ordinance rectify this malady?
UCBs are under the regulation of RBI and Registrar of Cooperatives of the State Government where they were situated. The regulatory conflicts were being resolved through TAFCUB during the last ten years to the satisfaction of both banks and the regulators at the altar of RBI.
During the last two decades, Marathe Committee, Madhava Rao Committee, Malegam Committee, Gandhi Committee and RBI’ Vision of UCBs have gone on record on the measures to be taken for strengthening them in the face of a series of frauds and maleficence and even closure of several UCBs in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh etc.
GoI even brought out a comprehensive 97th Amendment to the Constitution of India in 2011 as a Model Cooperative Act to be enacted by the State Governments. None except the Government of Orissa showed interest. Had this Act been passed and implemented in letter and spirit there would have been no need for the Ordinance now.
No State is keen on legal reforms to cooperatives. Cooperatives are the seedbed of politics and every prominent politician of the country, barring some Rajya Sabha or Legislative Council Members, everyone started his/her political career with Cooperative Society as the base. To borrow an acronym, cooperatives without politics is lame and politics without cooperatives is blind. Viewed from this perspective, this ordinance makes a great difference. It sets at naught all political interferences beyond the primary cooperative societies.
Several Commercial Banks, fully under the regulation of the RBI since 1949 have also been victims of frauds and maleficence. Several Banks, both in the public and private sector like SBI, ICICI, PNB etc continue to hit the headlines on such count.
The difference is that in all such cases, the interests of depositors have been protected. There were mergers or amalgamations but there were very few occasions where the affected Banks were closed or deposits barred from withdrawal. It should be worthy to recall that even in case of commercial banks the deposits are secured to the same extent as UCBs/MSCBs, viz., Rs.1lakh earlier and recently enhanced to the extent of Rs.5lakhs per depositor. 
Several UCBs are already part of the National Payments System. Financial inclusion demands customer centricity and smart technology applications apart from financial learning at the institutional and client level.

Rural Credit Cooperatives have been in the throes of change: accounting practices,  (from single entry book keeping to double entry book keeping), technology change; regulatory changes and structural changes. They have come into the mainstream of financial inclusion agenda of the country.
When NABARD has a new guard, it would have allowed scope to the new management to carry out the required improvements to the Short Term Cooperative Credit Structure instead of clubbing them with the UCBs. All the DCCBs have already been brought under the regulation of RBI notwithstanding the ordinance. Further, RBI invested in computerization of both the UCBs and Rural Coop Societies and banks with the allocation of Rs.4lakhs per UCB and maintenance cost of Rs.15000 per month for a period of 3 years post implementation. Government of India in their 2017-18 Budget allocated Rs.1900cr towards computerization of PACS. This initiative should have been properly monitored to ensure transparency, better accounting practices and better customer service on par with commercial banks. To search for a solution of lost opportunity in the ordinance does not reflect a good governance practice.
Though the organization may introduce appropriate strategies, it is the culture of the organization and governance that would require to be looked at in cooperatives. They can improve the bottom lines through reduced costs; enhance the customer experience; and strengthen security and compliance through state-of-the art encryption practices, audit trails and security certifications. Customers always need their data to be safe and secure.

When the problem rests with regulator – lax inspections, lack of transparency in dealing with the Banks and improving governance, the remedy is sought through a legislative amendment!!     This may perhaps provide a better lever to the RBI to  merge weak UCBs with strong ones and disable closures as a  solution to protect the interests of depositors. Will the PMC depositors now get fully all their deposits and interest?  We should wait and see.

Development of cooperatives is no longer an option, but a compelling necessity to achieve financial inclusion. Implementation of the Ordinance should only strengthen the cooperative system and not eliminate them in the guise of regulation.

https://www.moneylife.in/article/cooperative-banks-move-to-a-single-regulator-rbi-and-not-a-day-too-soon/60767.html 



Wednesday, June 17, 2020

Governance back on RBI Drawing Board

Governance in Banks back on the Drawing Board of RBI




India’s emergence as a global player is imminent and so would be a strong financial sector. RBI’s very comprehensive Discussion Paper on Governance in Banks comes as a formidable effort to set the house in order and bring about the much needed reforms in Banks. Large Balance Sheets do not add so much strength as it is just a reflection of one day in a year not so much as good governance.
There is a broad realization that change in the mindset among bankers would not come about by either the dictates of the RBI or its owner but internalizing the best governance factors. In evidence is the excess liquidity pumped into the Banks during the last six months and yet credit to the needy does not flow. Risk aversion needs reversal and this can happen with good, responsible and accountable governance.

Increasing Bank frauds, cyber crimes, arrest of some top executives and Chairpersons of reputed Banks like the ICICI, failures of PMC Bank, Times Bank, Yes Bank and several in hiding have obviously triggered the RBI getting to the drawing Board on Governance. The Paper has heavy referencing to the BCBS, OECD and Ashok Ganguly Report, bringing back to the drawing board of RBI its seriousness in action and not just intention.
Contextually, it is heartening to see that what I have been articulating since 1999: Corporate Governance in Banking & Finance (Tata-McGraw Hill, 2000 with YRK Reddy) and ‘A Saint in the Board Room’ (Konark Publishers: 2011) with R. Durgadoss, finds echo in the Paper. Two decades of wait is worth it.

The Government, going by the experience so far, considers that institutions created under its fold are sacred cows and should therefore be protected at the cost of the exchequer. Hopefully, the GoI would embrace these governance reforms in PSBs and hasten corrections with a sense of urgency.
There is enough proof in India that regulation and bank supervision are interdependent and not of independent of governance in banks. Both have limitations with effective interplay among them. Viewing from this angle, the discussion now unfolded specifies the key stakeholders’ role; distinguishes the role of non-executive director from independent director and workmanship Director.  
A foundation is built for the whole house; there are not separate silos for the kitchen and bedrooms. In the same way, audit, compliance and risk management should maintain their necessary independence — but not operate in three different silos. Governance is the binding force/material and it rests on the Board. It helps all the three groups speak the same language and connect with business processes and products.

The Discussion surrounds the audit and risk processes as more proactive than reactive unlike now. Once the house is built, no one would like to go to foundation to make changes. Therefore, change management is extremely crucial. Board cannot be expected to do the change management function. Change management requires federated ownership to cite a GRC framework study.
There are two aspects needed for the actions mentioned in the discussion paper to trigger, although experts in various fields alone are taken on bank boards. Knowledge cannot be taken as something given and permanent and it requires frequent updation.

1.    Board of Directors should themselves be prepared for new responsibilities and new roles. In the first meeting of the Board, the first item of the agenda should be the series of actions ordained in the Discussion Paper of RBI and their understanding in the present and emerging context. Each Director may be asked to furnish upfront what he or she would like to contribute to the Board and the objectives of the Bank. This would be the Board’s review point half-yearly and annually. Qualitative change will become possible through this measure.

2.    Half-yearly retreats for self-renewal of Board Directors away from the traditional Board meetings has potential for a free and open discussion on the issues - both internal and external to the organization. It is not common practice to have separate budget for Board management. It is good to have Board approved budget for its own functioning and knowledge upgradation. Usually good directors will be on the learning curve and hence, wisdom lies in taking advantage of it. ‘Fresh thinking’ that the RBI advocated would be possible with such measure.

Even mega Banks, measured by their Balance Sheets, suffer from issues that they would prefer to hide, wherein lies the danger. One of the leading large PSBs in its latest balance sheet has very low net interest earnings – not just due to low credit outflow but more due to gains in the reduction in the interest rate on deposits, for 9 times in a year! Depositors are minority stakeholders. It’s profit is made up out of sale of its stake in a subsidiary and not due to core banking business where credit sale is poor and deposits rose despite and not because of its efforts.

RBI cannot be a gatekeeper of the Banks. It can only direct the Banks to take care of the interests with due concern for the economy and the various other constituents. It is here that whistle blower policy implementation becomes crucial. We have seen lackadaisical responses even on RTI questions and references to the Courts for seeking responses. Such approach will not hold validity if transparency in dealing with issues that affect the persons in responsibility.

The Paper has fully accommodated the recent statement of the FM that the Banks need not be afraid of the three ‘C’s – CVC, CBI, CAG by such references being made only on Board decision  after fully exhausting internal examination and action.

While minority shareholders’ interest may be taken care of, depositors turning a minority stakeholder, would harm the interests of banks in the long run. The correction can come from governance and the RBI’s latest approach makes adequate mention of it in its paper.

It is also interesting to find that the RBI as regulator would divest its participatory role in the Board. Hope Government of India would not raise any objection on this issue. It has been noticed thus far that the value RBI Director imparted in the Board disclosures has not been significant.

There is a thin line between the non-Executive Directors and Independent Directors and this subtlety has been well addressed in specifying their roles in the NRC Committee and Audit Committee. Risk management Committee Chair to be directly responsible to the Chairman is worthy to note. It has rightly identified Risk Appetite framework as crucial for the eventual risk measurement and management. Those who cannot risk prudently cannot get reward. It could have specified that non-performers, because of their clean slate, cannot be elevated to key management positions in the organisation and the Board should ensure this through its effective oversight.

While it has kept its banner line on culture and values, it could have also constituted Ethics Committee with an outside expert nominee of the RBI to chair it and make it responsible to the Chairman directly. Business Ethics is an oxymoron and therefore, defining it is crucial in financial institutions. Measuring Ethics has been templated by the writer in the book A Saint in the Board Room. Corporate Executives can be subjected to this test while the Board Directors are supposed to be ethical, having right values to uphold the organisational culture. The future tells it all.
*The author is an economist and risk management specialist. The views expressed are personal.



 https://www.moneylife.in/article/governance-in-banks-back-on-the-drawing-board-of-rbi/60655.html

Tuesday, July 30, 2019

Crisis in PSBs - II: Ethics Must Be Made Integral to Governance


Crisis in PSBs - II: Ethics Must Be Made Integral to Governance
Moneylife Digital Team
30.7.2019
If we want to improve the governance process, we have to make ethics at the centre. Ethics and values should be the basis on which all corporates and more particularly, banks dealing with public resources shall function, as trustees. It is the attitude to life and the value system one has to cherish and live with.

Values are universal in character whereas their application changes. Business executives apply various ethical tests as a guide. There is variation among them on what test they apply on different occasions.  These tests, developed by Fr K Cyric include:
Corporate Executive Ethics Tests[i]

Ethics Test
Focus Question by the Executive
Relevant Information Test
“Have I obtained as much information as possible to make a decision?”
Involvement Test
“Have I involved all who have a right to have input?”
Test of Common Sense
“Does the action I am getting ready to take really make sense?”
Consequential Test
Have I anticipated and attempted to accommodate the consequences of this decision on any, who are affected by it?”
Mirror Test
“What does the man in the glass really say?”
Conventionalist Ethics Test
“Does this fall within the legal framework?”
Hedonistic Ethics Test
“Does it feel good to make such decision?”
Intuition Ethics Test
“Does my gut feeling approve of this decision?”
Revelation Ethics Test
“Does the decision cause greatest good for greatest number?”
Professional Ethics Test
“Will the decision be approved by the professional peers?”
Organizational Ethics Test
“Is the decision consistent with organizational goals?”
Test on one’s best self
“Is this action or decision I am getting ready to make, compatible with my concept of myself at my best?”
Fairness Test
“Would I consider this decision fair from the point of view of stakeholders?”
Enduring Values Test
“Does this decision uphold the enduring values?”
Universality Test
“Would I apply this decision to all similar situations, even to myself?”
Test of making public
“How do I feel if others knew I was doing this?”
Test of ventilation
“How would others view my decision?”
Test of Purified ideas
“Am I thinking that the decision I am making is right because some authority says, it is right?”


[i] R. Durgadoss & B. Yerram Raju (2011), ‘A Saint in the Board Room’, Konark Publishers (P) Ltd., New Delhi


Ethical Decisions Vary with Executive Profiles

A survey conducted in 1992 in Malaysia on 252 executives from different countries revealed that there were differences in ethical decisions, which varied with job position, job specialization, ethnic group, age and salary. There were differences in attitude between the USA and Hong Kong personnel. 77% of USA personnel said that they would report a defective or unsafe product, compared to 50% of Hong Kong respondents.

Three women, Sherron Watkins (ENRON), Coleen Rowley (FBI agent on clues to September 11) and Cynthia Cooper (World Com), all whistle blowers were named as the persons of the year 2002 by Time magazine.
Cuoto, an employee of Bayer Corporation who knew how Bayer was making wrong claims on the USA government, fought a hard battle to have his testimony recorded and videotaped in August 2002, even though he was struggling with terminal illness. Bayer pleaded guilty and paid fines under False Claim Act.

Such a strong level of conviction and whistle blowing attitude is not prevalent in many countries, where people do not come forward, even when they see wrong-doing happening in front of their eyes; thus, the behavior of executives differ from region to region. Moneylife in India has been acting as a whistle blower in many breaches to the legitimate claims of various stakeholders of the banks and FIs. Much ahead of the unfolding of the IL&FS collapse, it has warned that this monolithic institution has made many compromises of the rules and regulations of SEBI and RBI, though it took quite some time for the regulators to take note of them.  It is therefore important that each bank board should approve a Whistle Blower Policy and prominently display it on its website.

Facing Ethical Dilemmas

In business, not only are executives faced with questions between right and wrong, but also between right and right. We have experienced situations in which the professional responsibilities unexpectedly come into conflict with deepest values. Executives are caught in a conflict between right and right. And no matter which option they choose, they feel like they have come up short.

Research on moral standards and business ethics is sparse. Martin Weber in 1998 found that 85.9% of managers claim drawing their moral standards at work from the expectations perceived in the work environment. Organizational norms embodied by the corporation’s culture are strong determinants of individual thought and behavior in the workplace, whereas corporate culture establishes and maintains norms.

When employees have no clear picture of the moral or ethical stance of the organization, they tend to operate at the lowest perceived level. Going by the increasing frauds, the alleged corruption in banks at various levels where they interface with the customers on loans and the way persons in top positions compromised the principles and statutes leads us to conclude that the ethics committees of bank boards, even where they are in place, have not functioned effectively.

A quote from a Raghuram, Rajan’s speech of May 2014, would be an apt conclusion of this paper: ‘The banking sector is on the cusp of revolutionary change. . .  Let us remember that what is at stake is not just the tremendous amount of national value that is represented by public sector banks but future financing and investment in our economy. A healthy public sector banking system should be distant from government influence but not from public purpose.’ https://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/BS_SpeechesView.aspx?Id=893

  


PSB Goverance


Crisis in PSBs - I: What is the Responsibility of the Government as the Owner?

The government-owned, or public sector banks (PSBs), which are under severe stress, require an urgent surgical strike. Bulging non-performing assets (NPAs), increasing frauds, and declining credit to the key sectors is worrying. Moneylifehas laid bare many of the frauds and misdemeanours of the commercial banks that included Syndicate Bank (2014), Bank of Baroda (2015), Punjab National Bank (2017), to mention a key few. The free ride of businessmen started eroding confidence in banks due to questionable lending practices in PSBs.

 The rot goes deep. For example, what are the answers to these questions?

1. All limits above Rs5bn should be sanctioned by the board duly overseen by the risk management committee. Banks also have internal audits, statutory audits and financial inspection of banks by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) annually. Then how were such limits sanctioned without due diligence of directors on the boards of top-12 defaulting companies referred to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) in 2017? What role did various committees play during the currency of the loan?

2. Even after the roles of managing director (MD) and chairman are separated, why couldn’t the non-executive chairman provide the required guidance to the board in enforcing accountability and transparency?

3. Why did the banks fail in due diligence of directors of the companies to which they sanctioned loans? It was noticed in several cases that the directors held suspicious transactions with other boards or companies but did not go on record as such. Integrity of the borrowers was taken for granted, going by the way banks nurtured the accounts.

4. Why and how were the banks allowed to hold the accounts with recovery actions far beyond 90 days in regard to all the major corporate advances?

5. When the RBI is represented on the board and with data on non-performing assets (NPAs) and corporate advances and the analytics of the financial stability reports coming out every quarter, why could it not contain the contagion of NPAs?


6. Why couldn’t the RBI director on the board insist on the audit committee to steer clear of acts that led to prompt corrective action (PCA)?

7. All the banks are subject to risk based supervision by the RBI. Then how could the banks manage such supervision and yet hide the processes that led to the frauds that surfaced later?

8. What is the role played by the nominee director of government of India in the board approvals and the NPA status of the bank concerned? 

9. Did the board of any bank give a strategic direction to the MD and monitor such direction subsequently?

10. When government of India (GoI) directed merger of associate banks with State Bank of India (SBI) or later the merger of two other PSBs with Bank of Baroda, fait accompli, the boards passed a resolution favoring the mergers and the consequences and the impacts on customers and other stakeholders were hardly discussed and there were also no voices of either concern or dissent. The role played by independent directors becomes significant in such situations. 

Clearly PSBs are facing a huge goverance deficit. Year after year, volumes involved in frauds have only increased, notwithstanding the existence of internal chief vigilance officer, external vigilance commission, system audit, risk audit, stock audit, concurrent audit, and annual internal inspections by the banks’ own audit team, external statutory audit, forensic audit and the annual audit of the bank by the RBI approved chartered accountant firm. PNB fraudsters successfully hoodwinked all of them. 

The question is: What is the role of the owner, regulator and controller of PSBs? The government has announced recapitalisation to the extent of Rs211,000 crore to meet the regulatory capital requirement once Basel III becomes operational (Basel III implementation date has since been extended to April 2019 from April 2018).

The present finance minister, sailing with the wind, again provided another Rs70,000 crore capitalisation in the next nine months.

Many experts feel that good (taxpayers’) money is flowing to the bad (crooks) with no accountability.

Although the government seemed to recognise the need for reforms, it fell short of introducing the structural changes suggested in the report. At the root of the rot lies poor governance and the absence of ethics. Ethics took a hard beating and governance is in utter disarray against the backdrop of unlearnt lessons of similar past offences, both within the bank and outside. Bad banking has now become a major concern of the body politic. 

It is the boards that should make the difference between the most successful and the unsuccessful corporate, whether in banking or elsewhere. Managerial efficiency, risk management systems and efficient governance require urgent attention. 

The Financial Times had held a series of debates in 2013 on better boards and corporate governance. The strong message that emanates from the debates is that fewer rules and more significant consequences for breaking them would make a lot of sense. Further, it is not good to have one-size-fits-all approach to corporate governance and the organisations should be empowered to craft their own systems of governance.

Narasimham Committee-1 made some significant recommendations regarding governance that would require a re-visit.

Ownership Issues

SBI has its chairman, MDs and deputy MDs (DMDs) as members of its board. PSB boards have been reconstituted in line with the recommendation of PJ Nayak committee with MD and non-executive chairman as two separate positions with both of them requiring the approval of the RBI. 

MD of PSBs are selected by banks board bureau (BBB) since 2015. BBB proved not so effective with long delays in filling the top positions of several banks and overbearing influence of ministry of finance (MoF) in the selection process. SBI post-merger and PSBs have individual shareholders who include even employees and retired employees of the banks as minority shareholders. This status involves the issue of protecting the interests of minority shareholders as well.  

Ownership, governance and regulation have created inconvenient compromises in the PSBs. The roles of owner and regulator combined in GoI have a built-in conflict. The presence of RBI in banks’ boards is further conflict of interest. The Narasimham Committee -1 recommended 25 years ago that RBI should dissociate itself from bank boards. This obvious step has still not been taken.

The role and functions of the ethics committee have not been well defined. The board should have full authority for appointment of statutory auditors with no role for the RBI. But going by the experience of the failures of banks such as the Global Trust Bank Ltd, RBI decided that the auditor firm should be from its approved list. 

The GoI has a strong lock on the banking sector but talks of competition in banks, independence and autonomy. It plants its officials from the finance ministry as directors on PSB boards. At best, these nominated directors carry the proceedings with their own interpretation to the ministry, and such interpretation may cause some unintended consequences to the banks they serve. 

How Do We Avoid Conflict of Interest?

A governance code could have guidelines for the management on its behaviour patterns because it is they who are running the institution and making the day-to-day decisions and their behaviour will be of greater consequence to the functioning of the bank than that of the board that meets at pre-determined intervals. The ‘comply and explain’ requirements should be very clear and unambiguous. Non-negotiable rules would lessen the complexity of corporate governance from the investors’ perspective. 

In India, unlike in some European two-tier boards and unlike in UK, the boards of PSBs, provide for employee representatives too on boards from the workers and officers.

Although several PSBs in the wake of financial sector reforms allotted shares to their employees it is not necessary that the workmen directors need be shareholders. Systems of governance should be focused on empowering front-line staff—rather than trying to keep them in check, even the  debates in Financial Times concluded.

Though stakeholders’ interests should weigh more than those of the shareholders, it is the lack of ownership culture among this set of non-executive directors (NEDs) that results in their performance below the expectations of the group they represent and that should cause worry. This constituency of stakeholder on the board needs careful treatment and nurturing. Employees and pensioners would be a growing constituency and they should have a place in the board as part of minority interests’ protection. 

Audits and Audit Committees

Banks that complain of multiple audits interfering with their business could not justify the concern due to the alarming rise in financial irregularities and poor credit risk management. Systems have become vulnerable to intrusions putting the banks to losses not seen before. Therefore, system audits have assumed critical importance. 

The complexities of the systems are on the increase with increasing role for them—both in operational and instructional matters. There is a growing trend of addressing any customer grievance only through an instruction embedded in the system. Almost all banks have been generating only e-circulars. The employees and managers hardly go through them save exceptions – those in the regional/zonal/head/central offices. The ability of the banks to put them to institutional learning periodically is also dwindling. Learning mechanisms seem to have been severely impaired. This leads to unnerving top management not generally admitted in public but discussed internally. The board has a responsibility through the HR (human resource) committee to resolve such a dilemma. 

Need for an Independent Director with knowledge of Technology 

The world over, technology risks and cyber risks are overcrowding the banks and financial institutions. Michael Bloch et al of McKinsey in their "Elevating Technology to the Boardroom Agenda Report (2012)" insists that the boards call for periodic reviews of technology’s long-term role in the industry by pushing the IT jargon the background and bringing in the right people to the board meetings for discussions on technology adoption. 

Leveraging technology savvy board members and strengthening technology governance structure by delegating the related risk issues to the board committee that oversees the risk management portfolio are some of the key suggestions worthy of consideration.

Good Governance Requires More Than Rule Fixes

Universal banking that permitted the banks to take to finance housing, real estate, retail loans, and sell third-party products, like insurance, mutual funds, pension funds etc, followed by digital banking, has made banking a non-core activity with overwhelming incentives for performing non-banking functions. 

Banks insure their own assets with the general insurance companies. Bank employees are expected to handle the banking products of deposit, credit and investments and not insurance and mutual fund products. 

Boards were silent spectators when the banks were measuring executive and employee performance based on the earnings on third-party products. 

During 2018, MoF directed the banks not to pass on any incentive for selling third-party products to any employee or executive and the benefit of such business should be accounted for in the profit of banks. Thereafter, PSBs started refocusing on banking business. Performance evaluation criteria should be overseen by the board. Boards, therefore, have a serious challenge in HR management oversight.

RBI should approve those directors on bank boards who are of impeccable integrity and unquestionable character, with no role conflict at any point of time.

The ‘fit and proper’ criteria prescribed by the RBI need revision. It is desirable that the selected person should be asked to give a two-page write up on his knowledge of the board functioning; his intended contribution, and his relationships with the other directors on the board and of his views on the present management, as a third eye from the published data and information, as obtaining with the Netherland banks. 

This statement can be reviewed by the regulators who may even seek clarifications where necessary before confirming the appointment. Knowledge and culture are two different aspects though synchronisation would enhance the value of the person. Such a write-up from the prospective director, therefore, can help in self-assessment of the director and performance assessment of the board itself eventually.

The annual general meetings (AGM) should not end up as the presentation of the audited statement of accounts to the general body; it should have group discussions of the shareholders on wide ranging issues like the strategies, risk appetite and risk culture in the organisation. In the alternative, it is also worthwhile to have board retreats for two days annually for self-evaluation and the way forward prior to the AGM and have at the AGM a synopsis of the discussions in the retreats,  as a guide for future.

It is the banks that could alone answer these questions as board documents are confidential. The best way to prevent such transactions is to strengthen corporate governance by the regulators/supervisors at once disassociating themselves from being on the boards of all categories of banks.

*The Author is an economist and Risk Management specialist. These series of articles are the abridged version of the NIBM Conference (July5-6, 2019) Paper on “Good Corporate Governance – the Best way for resolving the Indian Banking Crisis”. The views are personal.