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 2016, 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.

Good governance starts with the right board composition

Home / Hermes EOS Blog / Good governance starts with the right board composition

Nina Rehrbein, Reporting and Communications
15 September 2014


The structure of a board – in other words the mix of skills, expertise and diversity of its members and their independence – is key to defining a company’s risk profile and appetite and therefore its long-term sustainable performance. As part of their oversight function, boards of directors ought to be fully knowledgeable about the company’s strategy and its most important risks and be able to test the executive team’s ability to manage such risks.

It is therefore unsurprising that in our engagement with companies on environmental, social, governance or strategic concerns we often find that those issues could have been avoided or better managed if the board had comprised members with the appropriate skills and experience to oversee the underlying risks.

Companies must be able to demonstrate how each director is a relevant contributor to overseeing the execution of the corporate strategy and how their appointment was the result of a thorough process. As we engage with companies on the composition of their boards, we look for evidence of well-established and ongoing succession planning processes, which clearly articulate the link between the desired skills sought in potential candidates and the companies’ long-term strategic plans.

While independence and relevant industry expertise are the key points in assessing board composition, certain skills continue to grow in importance as businesses evolve. As companies expand into different business areas and markets, for example, specific operational risk management and geo-political risk expertise are becoming increasingly desired board skills. Similarly, as businesses move online and their operations progressively rely on technology, IT expertise has become a highly desired attribute and one which, based on our experience, appears to be in limited supply.

Lastly, a fundamental element in our assessment of a board’s composition is its leadership structure. A structure where the chair of the board is an independent director is at most companies likely to be more effective than combining the roles, as the chair should manage the board and the CEO should manage the business. Combining the roles can confuse these responsibilities and overly concentrate power in one person, creating not only problems with oversight, but also with accountability.

In certain markets, we use shareholder proposals aimed at separating the roles of CEO and chair as an important first step of a broader objective to encourage a structural reform of the board. This was, for example, the case in our engagement with JPMorgan during which we co-filed a resolution at the company’s 2013 shareholder meeting seeking the appointment of an independent chair, and which ultimately resulted in important structural changes to the board, such as the enhancement of the lead director role. We believe that these changes have led to a board that is overall more accountable to shareholders.

Share this post:
Nina Rehrbein Reporting and Communications Nina Röhrbein works in Hermes EOS’ business and client development, focusing on reporting and communications. Before joining Hermes EOS, she was the senior staff writer at Investment & Pensions Europe where she wrote extensively about pension legislation, asset management and environmental, social and governance issues across various jurisdictions. Prior to that, she was a reporter at Argus Media, covering global energy markets. She holds an MA in Newspaper Journalism and a BA Honours degree in English Literature and Linguistics. She is fluent in English and German.
Read all articles by Nina Rehrbein

Find posts by author

  • Bill Mackenzie
  • Bruce Duguid
  • Christine Chow
  • Colin Melvin
  • Darren Brady
  • Dominic Burke
  • Emma Hunt
  • Freddie Woolfe
  • Hans-Christoph Hirt
  • Jaime Gornsztejn
  • Jennifer Walmsley
  • Jon Brager
  • Karin Ri
  • Leon Kamhi
  • Louise Dudley
  • Lui Goldie
  • Mais Hayek
  • Manuel Isaza
  • Mark Sherlock, CFA
  • Martina Macpherson
  • Matthew Doyle
  • Maxine Wille
  • Michael Russell, CFA
  • Michael Viehs
  • Naheeda Rashid
  • Natacha Dimitrijevic
  • Nina Rehrbein
  • Philip Nell
  • Rochelle Giugni
  • Roland Bosch
  • Sachi Suzuki
  • Saker Nusseibeh
  • Tatiana Bosteels
  • Tim Goodman
  • Tommaso Mancuso
  • Victoria Barron

Find posts by category

  • Select category
  • governance