Making way for change at the Bar: The practical implications of the new Bar Standards Board Handbook

The Legal Services Act 2007 caused a need to change professional conduct rules for lawyers in England and Wales. The Bar Standards Board Handbook brings substantial changes to the way barristers are regulated. Changes include litigation rights, reporting of professional misconduct, an increased focus on chambers, and expansion to include employees of chambers and barristers without practicing certificates (unregistered or non-practicing barristers). The approach to enforcement and supervision moves to include elements of outcome focused, principle based and risk based approaches. These changes have the potential to change the practice of different groups of barristers and the dynamics between them.

An assessment of manager/subordinate perceptions of performance appraisal effectiveness

This study postulates that performance appraisal will be effective to the extent that managers and subordinates have a shared perception of its purpose and function and the degree to which it meets the needs of both groups. A two part research project was conducted to: 1) identify manager/subordinate perceptions of the purposes served by the formal performance appraisal process; 2) determine the extent to which these purposes are being satisfied in organizational practice; and 3) assess if managers and subordinates have a shared perception of the effectiveness of the appraisal process. The sample for the study included 36 managers and 143 subordinates from a division of a large Midwest service organization. The results were mixed with regard to the appraisal system effectively accomplishing its diverse goals. However, in general, there was support for the notion that both managers and subordinates find the appraisal process to be a worthwhile organizational practice. Approximately 70% of the respondents indicated that they would participate in the appraisal program whether they were required to do so or not.

Board attributes that increase firm risk - evidence from the UK

Purpose – The aim of the paper is to identify the board attributes that significantly increase firm risk. The study aims to find if board size, percentage of non-executive directors, women on the board, a powerful CEO, equity ownership amongst executive board directors and institutional investor ownership, are associated with firm risk. This is the first study that examines which board attributes increase firm risk using a UK based sample. Design/methodology/approach – This empirical study collected secondary data from Bloomberg and Morningstar databases. The data sample is an unbalanced panel of 260 companies’ secondary data on FTSE 350 index in the UK, from 2005 to 2010. The data was statistically analysed using STATA. Findings – The study establishes the board attributes that were significantly related to firm risk. The results show that a board which can increase firm risk is one that is small in size,has high equity ownership amongst executive board directors and has high institutional investor ownership. Research limitations/implications – The governance culture and regulatory system in the UK is different from other countries. Since the data is a UK based sample, the results can lack generalisability. Practical implications – The results are useful for investors who invest in large firms, to have the knowledge about the board attributes that can increase firm risk. Regulators can also use the results to strengthen regulatory guidelines. Originality/value – This study fills the gap in knowledge in UK governance literature on the board attributes that can increase firm risk.