Abstract:
The corporate governance failures of the 1980s, 1990s and 2000 are a harsh reminder of the importance of codes of practices, ethical conduct and a balance between the profit motive and sustainability that should underpin corporate decisions and conduct. The introduction in 1994 of King I, South Africa’s first corporate governance code, was not only a new milestone in business practice but a recognition of the need to establish and support new practices that were a reflection of the new democracy. Since then, three subsequent King Codes have appeared: King II, IIII and very recently King IV. This dissertation which was based on the findings of a study by Jansen van Vuuren and Schulschenk (2013), and reported that King II was perceived to have added greater value than King III, was undertaken to in more detail investigate factors or circumstances that might explain the perceived decrease in the value of King III compared with that of King II. The study also aimed to explore the participants’ perception of the value of corporate governance. The study employed an exploratory, qualitative, interpretive method using probability sampling and semi-structured interviews. The participants were articulate and knowledgeable non-executive directors of companies with a close working experience of the King Codes. The findings were wide ranging. Participants overwhelmingly endorsed the value of the King Codes to corporate governance in South Africa and elsewhere. There was, however, broad agreement with the findings of the Jansen van Vuuren and Schulschenk (2013) study, which reported that King II was perceived to have added greater value than King III, mainly on the grounds that King II was ground-breaking and game changing, while King III was more of a refinement. Participants furthermore warned against the danger of compliance with future codes becoming onerous, or too much of a tick-box exercise.
