Your Business Sustainability Partner

A good Corporate Governance Policy Principles and norms document will cover: 

The board of Directors 

Board Size 

Major Voting in Director Elections 

Director independence 

Board Composition – Qualification and Considerations 

Director Education 

Other Directorship 

Change in Director’s Principal Occupation 

Eligibility of Employee Directors 

Board and Director’s Effectiveness Attendance at meetings 

Non-executive chairman 

Board Committees 

Access to Management and Subsidiary Directors 

Director Compensation 

Director share ownership 

Executive Management 

Review Executive performance 

Review Compensation 

Say on pay 

Establish and monitor standards of business conduct and ethical behavior 

Whistle blower policy 

Oversee strategic management 

Oversee risk management and risk management function 

Oversee liquidity and funding management 

Oversee capital management 

Oversee internal audit functions 

Oversee finance functions 

Oversee compliance functions 

Oversee anti-money laundering function 

Confirm adequacy of control environment 

Issue escalation 

Disclosure and communication

Corporate Governance

 
 

Escalation Procedure

 

Escalation processes may result from 

(1) a red traffic light status in the overall audit statement, 

(2) the fact that recommendations have not been implemented, or 

(3) from a disagreement about some of the audit findings or recommendations.

During escalation, all responsible parties, including the Board, are informed directly. 

The overall audit statement for a basic audit is primarily intended to assess the quality of the findings, but the overall follow-up rating looks mainly at the effectiveness of the implementation process. 

If there is any disagreement, the audit team, the audit lead, and/or the Audit Manager should attempt to de-escalate the situation or reach a consensus with the auditee without varying the original audit finding. 

However, if the disagreement persists, a “management disagreed” classification is added to the audit report and the Board summary

 

Audit Procedure

 
Internal Audit should ensure that the actual execution of audits is done in a manner that is agreeable to everyone involved. To ensure such agreement, audit results should never be used for anything other than the intended purpose, as required by the standards and codes of conduct of the international audit institutes. Relations between Internal Audit and auditees should always be based on a transparent and professional audit, rather than on possible consequences of an audit, because this could have a negative impact on long-term cooperation and trust
 

Need for Escalation

Audit work may sometimes give rise to situations that require special notification of all those responsible, including the Board. This form of reporting exists outside the normal reporting system and depends on the particular situation. It is known as escalation, because it is used to make those responsible aware of problem situations in a clear and unmistakable manner. The objective is to identify problem focused solutions quickly and to implement them effectively. Escalation should not be interpreted as a penalty, but as a way of getting to the necessary solutions quickly and securely in order to ensure a smooth audit and to maintain the interests of the auditees and their organizations.
 

Escalation According to Classification

During the escalation process, the classification of audit findings into locally, regionally, or Board-relevant has to be observed in all instances. If audit findings classified as local are escalated, the auditors must decide whether such findings should be reported directly to the Board. The auditors should first attempt to resolve the matter with regional management, but if agreement cannot be reached, the auditors should change the classification and report the case to the Board. For significant audit findings, the classification is immediately set to “Board-relevant.”
 

Escalation Hierarchy

If a finding is serious and Board-relevant, the auditors can also inform the Board immediately through a priority Board issue, asking the Board to take a decision or to intervene. Escalation should always take the issue to the next higher level of the hierarchy, the audit lead escalating to the Audit Manager, who in turn escalates to the Chairman - Audit Committee, who ultimately informs the Board.
 

Scenarios for an Escalation Process

In general, Internal Audit distinguishes between three different scenarios that can trigger an escalation process: 
  • escalation due to an inadequate overall audit statement (red traffic light; ), 
  • escalation because recommendations have not been implemented (follow-up), and 
  • escalation because management does not agree with certain findings 
If an audit is escalated, the sub-phases of the follow-up phase must be executed in a shorter time frame.
 

Escalation Stages

 
The escalation procedure for audits identifies two escalation stages. The chart below shows when escalation stages I or/and II are initiated. The actions that are performed during an escalation process are explained in more detail in the following
 
Report Type     Status Escalation
Stage I		 Escalation Stage II
  Over all audit statement / Score
Red		 Management Disagreed CEO (Alert from Chairman - Audit Committee) Escalation Process
Basic X     N/A X N/A
  N/A X X N/A
  X X X X
Followup I X N/A X X(a)
  N/A X X(1) X(2)
  X X X X
Followup II X N/A X X
  N/A X X(1) X(2)
  X X X X

X(a) - Applicable; In case of Basic Audit Overall audit statement/score is rated RED
X(1) - Applicable; For new findings
X(2) - Applicale; For findings from previous audits
N/A - Not applicable

 

 

 

Example : Board Assurance And Escalation Framework

Disclosure requirements

 
Regulatory Disclosures
 
Regulation 5 (iv) read with Schedule I to these regulations and Section 68(3) of the Companies Act 2013 – Companies are required to disclose all material facts and details relating to buy-back in the explanatory statement to be annexed with Notice for General Meeting
 
 
BRR - Business responsibility Report
 
Voluntery Disclosures
 
UNGC Indicates explicit reference to/ use of the United Nations Global Compact and its principles in the report.
ISO  Indicates explicit reference to/ use of the ISO 26000 clauses in the report.
OECD Indicates explicit reference to/ use of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises in the report.
IFC Indicates explicit reference to/ use of the IFC Performance Standards in the report.
CDP Indicates explicit reference to the organization responding to one of the annual Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) questionnaires, or participating in an associated CDP project. 
SDGs Indicates explicit reference to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the report. Tracks whether the reporting organization has indicated that the report addresses any of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
GRI Reporting
 

Search site

E-Qual receives appreciation from TI Group

-------------------------------------------------
 

E-Qual receives appreciation from  Mahindra & Mahindra

for knowledge support in implementing Energy Management System to ISO 50001: 2018 

-------------------------------------------------

"We are extremely delighted to have your consultancy for the successful completion of the process

 

Thank You for all your support and guidance"

 

Regards,

 

MRV Infra Management

E-Qual receives appreciation from Salcomp

We are extremely appreciative of the efforts of Management Consultants  E-Qual. 
 
As implementing partner of Assist, they developed skills,  20 QEHS Champions (Quality, Environmental, Health and Safety ) in our supply chain and bringingout  an excellent QEHS implementation handbook for continued guidance in their day to day implimentation
 
Managing Director

Log-in : "My E-Qual"  Gateway


 

Sustainable Practices...... Sustainable future.......

Make a free websiteWebnode