It may be the exception rather than the rule, but recent developments in the corporate sector show that directors and managers of business enterprises have a heavy duty to uphold when they assume these responsibilities.
There are so many aspirations and hopes of various individuals riding on their decisions that it cannot be an easy thing to be faced with competing considerations all of which have some considerable merit when looked at against their duty to the company, whose fate and fortunes rest in their hands.
It is for this reason that shareholders have an especial duty to make sure they choose intelligent, experienced men and women of integrity and sound judgment to sit on boards and guide the companies in which they have invested through the choppy waters of relevant laws and other regulations which may apply.
It is time too, the general public appreciate the significant role corporate managers and directors play in our societies. The larger metropolitan countries, whose practice of capitalist principles meshes with their democracies, attach much gravitas to these positions, and the successful captains of industry often receive national honours for their contribution.
Equally seriously, those societies punish directors and managers who do not uphold the highest ethical practices in the course of their duties, and sometimes such miscreant directors who have failed to adhere to these high standards are banned from holding the position of manager or director for a specified number of years.
In these parts, we have been lucky to have escaped the ravages of bad management and control of our companies, but it must be clear that as we develop our economy and the notion of making our country a share-owning democracy, that increased scrutiny of our major corporations becomes necessary.
This is especially the case for those companies in which there has been major capital input by members of the public, but the activities of all major companies so seriously affect the lives of employees, shareholders and the society at large that this scrutiny is justified.
The shareholders ought to be among the first line of scrutineers, for their investment is tied up in these enterprises, and so must the trade unions whose members might be employees. But the Press in its traditional watchdog role must of necessity equip its members with the training and skill to challenge practices and actions which do not conform to proper business practices.
It is remarkable how effective these organs of the society can be inhibiting the development of corporate behaviours which might harm the society. They are important cogs in the machinery of a capitalist democracy. We need to see more evidence that these mechanisms are alive and operative in our society for private enterprise might be private property, but it is affected with a public interest.
The public interest exacts scrutiny as the price to be paid for the opportunity to establish and manage these profit-making machines that we call companies.
As our economy grows, more companies will be established.
They and their directors are not the natural antagonists of the Government or the people. Theirs is a symbiotic relationship with the political managers. Companies provide jobs, pay taxes and make money for their shareholders and in a modern democracy such as ours, they wield extraordinary power.
Those who are chosen to manage them must always be aware of the social responsibility of the organization, as well as their own. Equally, the state must always have appropriate regulations and codes of practice to protect the public interest.
And it cannot be business as usual if managerial or directorial misbehaviour is uncovered, for the proper management of companies is too important a component of our modern societies, and the stakes are high when such public institutions fail.