We permit the publication of our auditors’ report, provided the report is published in full only and is accompanied by the full financial statements to which our auditors’ report relates, and is only published on an access-controlled page on your website, to enable users to verify that an auditors’ report by independent accountants has been commissioned by the directors and issued. Such permission to publish is given by us without accepting or assuming any responsibility or liability to any third party users save where we have agreed terms with them in writing.

Our consent is given on condition that before any third party accesses our auditors’ report via the webpage they first document their agreement to the following terms of access to our report via a click-through webpage with an 'I accept' button. The terms to be included on your website are as follows:

I accept and agree for and on behalf of myself and the Trust I represent (each a "recipient") that:

  1. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) accepts no liability (including liability for negligence) to each recipient in relation to PwC’s report. The report is provided to each recipient for information purposes only. If a recipient relies on PwC’s report, it does so entirely at its own risk;
  2. No recipient will bring a claim against PwC which relates to the access to the report by a recipient;
  3. Neither PwC’s report, nor information obtained from it, may be made available to anyone else without PwC’s prior written consent, except where required by law or regulation; and
  4. PwC’s report was prepared with Hermes Property Unit Trust's interests in mind. It was not prepared with any recipient's interests in mind or for its use. PwC’s report is not a substitute for any enquiries that a recipient should make. The financial statements are as at 25 March 2017, and thus PwC’s auditors’ report is based on historical information. Any projection of such information or PwC’s opinion thereon to future periods is subject to the risk that changes may occur after the reports are issued and the description of controls may no longer accurately portray the system of internal control. For these reasons, such projection of information to future periods would be inappropriate.
  5. PwC will be entitled to the benefit of and to enforce these terms.
I accept

1. Select your country

  • United Kingdom
  • Austria
  • Australia
  • Belgium
  • Denmark
  • Finland
  • France
  • Germany
  • Iceland
  • Ireland
  • Italy
  • Luxembourg
  • Netherlands
  • Norway
  • Singapore
  • Spain
  • Sweden
  • Switzerland
  • USA
  • Other

2. Select your investor type

  • Financial Advisor
  • Discretionary Investment Manager
  • Wealth Manager
  • Family Office
  • Institutional Investor
  • Investment Consultant
  • Charity, Foundation & Endowment Investor
  • Retail Investor
  • Press
  • None of the above

3. Accept our terms and conditions

By clicking Proceed I confirm I have read the important information and agree to the terms of use.


The Hermes Investment Management website uses cookies to remember your preferences and help us improve the site.
By proceeding, you agree to cookies being placed on your computer.
Read our privacy and cookie policy.

Samsung Electronics

Board diversity and capital efficiency

Home / EOS Case Studies / Samsung Electronics

Samsung Electronics manufactures a wide range of consumer and industrial electronic equipment and products, such as semiconductors, personal computers, peripherals, monitors, televisions, as well as home appliances, including air conditioners and microwave ovens. The company also produces internet access network systems and telecommunications equipment, including mobile phones.

In 2016, the company’s board consisted of nine directors, four of whom were executive and five independent non-executive directors. All were Korean men, indicating an absence of diversity in gender and international experience, despite the company’s global operations. In addition, three out of five independent directors were university academics, while another was a lawyer and former prosecutor, signalling a lack of relevant industry experience among them.

We were also concerned about the company’s tradition of retaining too high a proportion of cash on its balance sheet, with a low dividend payout.

Our engagement
In a group investor meeting with the combined CEO and chair, together with two independent directors, we raised concerns about the composition and effectiveness of Samsung’s board. We explained that the lack of diversity and relevant skills could limit the board’s ability to oversee the complex and expanding nature of the business, particularly following the diversification into new businesses, including a major acquisition. In our view, the scandal of exploding batteries in its mobile handsets underlined the importance of having the right skill sets on its board. The two independent directors sought to demonstrate their value and expertise. However, in the light of the diversification of the business, they appeared to recognise that more sector experience and a broader international perspective could enhance the board's effectiveness. We also pointed out that capital efficiency and dividend payout policies are a major concern to investors.

In a strategic-update conference call in November 2016, we gained some assurances that the board would consider adding new board directors with international experience to the top executive level. We had another constructive discussion about the role of the existing independent directors and suggested ways in which they could prove that they represent the long-term interests of minority shareholders. We requested more evidence that the independent directors are working to influence the board and hold its executives to account.

Changes at the company
In late 2016, the company revealed the major actions underway to enhance long-term shareholder value through better capital allocation. It described its plan to allocate half of its free cash flow from 2016-17 to shareholder returns, which included cash dividends, share buybacks and the cancellation of all repurchased stock, and followed through on this as promised. We encourage this practice as local regulations do not mandate the cancellation of shares by companies. In late 2017, the company announced its shareholder return programme for 2018-20, including the payout of KRW9.6 trillion ($9 billion) in dividends for every year of the programme.

Ahead of its 2018 AGM, the company announced the appointment of three independent directors, including one woman and two men with relevant industry and international experience. In addition, in a meeting at our offices, we were encouraged to hear about its plans to improve the efficiency and independence of its board further. The company also split the roles of CEO and chair to enhance responsible management by its three CEOs and enable more objective evaluations of management by its board. It made this change based on the feedback of shareholders.

While we firmly welcome the improvement in board diversity, we continue to engage with the company on various other issues about which we have concerns. These include social issues, such as health and safety management and labour standards in its own operations, as well as in its supply chain. We will also continue to seek dialogue with the company’s non-executive directors.

Share this post:
Sachi Suzuki Sachi Suzuki leads company and public policy engagements and voting activities in Japan and South Korea. She is also responsible for the automotives sector. Prior to joining Hermes EOS, she worked as a senior research analyst at EIRIS, where she was responsible for the assessment of the ESG performance of Japanese companies, as well as research on bribery and corruption. Sachi graduated from Keio University in Japan with a degree in Economics and holds an MSc in Development Studies from the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. She holds the CFA UK – Investment Management Certificate.
Read all articles by Sachi Suzuki
Previous article:
Compass Group

Engagement objectives

Governance: Board diversity

Strategy, risk and communication: Capital efficiency

Find posts by author

  • Alex Knox, ACA
  • Andrew Jackson
  • Bill Mackenzie
  • Bruce Duguid
  • Christine Chow
  • Claire Gavini
  • Colin Melvin
  • Darren Brady
  • Dominic Burke
  • Dr Michael Viehs
  • Emeric Chenebaux
  • Emma Hunt
  • Geoffrey Wan, CFA
  • Hans-Christoph Hirt
  • Harriet Steel
  • Ilana Elbim
  • Jaime Gornsztejn
  • Jonathan Pines, CFA
  • Joseph Buckley
  • Justine Lutterodt
  • Leon Kamhi
  • Louise Dudley
  • Mark Sherlock, CFA
  • Maxime Le Floch, CFA
  • Maxine Wille
  • Michael Russell, CFA
  • Michael Vaughan
  • Michael Viehs
  • Natacha Dimitrijevic
  • Nick Spooner
  • Nina Röhrbein
  • Peter Hofbauer
  • Philip Nell
  • Rochelle Giugni
  • Roland Bosch
  • Sachi Suzuki
  • Saker Nusseibeh
  • Silvia Dall’Angelo
  • Tatiana Bosteels
  • Tim Goodman
  • Tommaso Mancuso
  • Yasmin Chowdhury

Find posts by category

  • eos
  • governance
  • strategy