Last week, we talked about two keys to minimizing your exposure to undue risk in your stock selections. The first is to resist being seduced into overpaying for high growth. The second is to avoid companies with lame governance. A strong board helps you get good sleep at night, and all other things being equal, the academic evidence is pilling up that strong governance leads to excess returns.

We discussed how impossible it is-from a distance, as individual investors-to spot weak/strong boards by direct observation. However, we can spot clues and behavioral patterns that tend to reveal a strong/weak board. To recap the first three questions about governance: One, who sits on the board, where are they from, do they have more than a few full-time jobs?

Two, does the executive compensation program have "teeth?" (We don't really care how much they get paid. We want to see if the board is pushing a shareholder agenda with these programs). Three, does the board actively manage stock dilution, or do they passively allow dilution to leak value without any cost/benefit analysis? Let's add three more.

Good transparency is when the board and its committees are candid and frank in their reports. You can easily recognize boilerplate statements after a while, and the mere existence of a "good governance charter" or board mission statement is meaningless. A board concerned with transparency explains its role in concrete, company-specific language.

For example, they ought to explain how they evaluate the CEO and the status of the succession plan (which should always be in place).

We want to see clues that the board is actively involved in major transactions like acquisitions. Admittedly, active involvement here is difficult to spot, but it is not hard to tell when a board passively "rubber-stamps" acquisition after acquisition. It's a lesson that just keeps on teaching: serial acquirers are a huge risk. If management has cash to spare, they should buyback shares or pay a dividend.

Minority voice
: this is often neglected but it is an important signal about board's priorities. Does the board care about individual shareholders? Do they preannounce meetings with sufficient information? Are they accessible and do they really want shareholders to be able to bring proposals to a vote?

You will note that I did not include items that sometimes figure into corporate governance calculations. For example, are the chairman and CEO roles separate? It is probably easier to argue that they should be separate, but there are advantages to a fused role and certainly a fused role does not need to inhibit an independent and well-functioning board (or an independent lead director, if you like). Also, the number of meetings held doesn't concern us greatly. If the meetings are really dinner-socials where tough questions are not going to be asked, and sleeves aren't rolled up, does it matter how many they hold?

Siebel Systems (SEBL) is a company that illustrates weak governance. A brief tangent: we would already avoid this stock for its lack of a long-term economic moat. Sure, there is formidable competition from big ERP players like SAP and Oracle (ORCL). But what really concerns us is competition from disruptive innovators. (CRM) has a very attractive "no software" (application service provider) approach.

And if that weren't enough, in the long run, this space is looking at dramatic price deflation with the entry of companies like sugarCRM (privately funded), which delivers really affordable customer relationship management applications via cheap open-source code. The new CEO, who led the online grocer Webvan before its spectacular flameout is no stranger to big capital outlays, apparently relishes a challenge.

Siebel has excessively diluted shareholders with their egregious option grant practices. Siebel's most recent proxy claims an option overhang of 26% because they define overhang as the options already held by executives and employees, but they do not include options available for future grant. This is an absolutely, unequivocally incorrect definition. Overhang is potential dilution (i.e., what is the going-forward exposure?) and always includes the options available for future grant. It looks to me like there might be an additional 38% available for future option grants – a number I hesitate to claim, even after re-checking it, simply because a 60+% overhang defies credibility. Let me just say for the record, I am pretty sure it's high.

In an effort to demonstrate they care about performance, the Compensation Committee granted restricted stock units that only vest if certain aggressive revenue growth targets are met. So far, so good-right? One glitch: if the targets are not met, the units vest anyway "on the fourth anniversary of the grant date." These units have guaranteed value in four years. In fact, they are actually sweeter than standard-issue stock options because while they typically vest in four years, options might end up underwater but these units will have certain value.

I hope that helps explain our view of governance. We think it is critical but it is only one piece of the picture. We won't eliminate a company just because it doesn't have great governance all the way around (e.g., a few of our recommendations elect staggered boards – a common but unfortunate practice with few redeeming features except to ensure board seat continuity), but weak governance does warrant a big red flag on our red flag checklist.

Related Articles
  1. Mutual Funds & ETFs

    ETF Analysis: PowerShares S&P 500 Downside Hedged

    Find out about the PowerShares S&P 500 Downside Hedged ETF, and learn detailed information about characteristics, suitability and recommendations of it.
  2. Mutual Funds & ETFs

    ETF Analysis: ProShares Large Cap Core Plus

    Learn information about the ProShares Large Cap Core Plus ETF, and explore detailed analysis of its characteristics, suitability and recommendations.
  3. Mutual Funds & ETFs

    ETF Analysis: iShares Core Growth Allocation

    Find out about the iShares Core Growth Allocation Fund, and learn detailed information about its characteristics, suitability and recommendations.
  4. Mutual Funds & ETFs

    ETF Analysis: iShares MSCI USA Minimum Volatility

    Learn about the iShares MSCI USA Minimum Volatility exchange-traded fund, which invests in low-volatility equities traded on the U.S. stock market.
  5. Stock Analysis

    Should You Follow Millionaires into This Sector?

    Millionaire investors—and those who follow them—should take another look at the current economic situation before making any more investment decisions.
  6. Professionals

    What to do During a Market Correction

    The market has what? Here's what you should consider rather than panicking.
  7. Mutual Funds & ETFs

    ETF Analysis: Vanguard Mid-Cap Value

    Take an in-depth look at the Vanguard Mid-Cap Value ETF, one of the largest and most popular mid-cap funds in the U.S. equity space.
  8. Mutual Funds & ETFs

    ETF Analysis: Schwab US Broad Market

    Take an in-depth look at the Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF, an incredibly low-cost fund based on a wide selection of the U.S. equity market.
  9. Professionals

    Tips for Helping Clients Though Market Corrections

    When the stock market sees a steep drop, clients are bound to get anxious. Here are some tips for talking them off the ledge.
  10. Stock Analysis

    The Safest Stocks You Can Invest in Right Now

    These stocks are likely to hold up better than others in a bear market, but there's a twist.
  1. Equity

    The value of an asset less the value of all liabilities on that ...
  2. Derivative

    A security with a price that is dependent upon or derived from ...
  3. Security

    A financial instrument that represents an ownership position ...
  4. Series 6

    A securities license entitling the holder to register as a limited ...
  5. Internal Rate Of Return - IRR

    A metric used in capital budgeting measuring the profitability ...
  6. Board Of Directors - B Of D

    A group of individuals that are elected as, or elected to act ...
  1. What is the difference between called-up share capital and paid-up share capital?

    The difference between called-up share capital and paid-up share capital is investors have already paid in full for paid-up ... Read Full Answer >>
  2. Why would a corporation issue convertible bonds?

    A convertible bond represents a hybrid security that has bond and equity features; this type of bond allows the conversion ... Read Full Answer >>
  3. How does additional paid in capital affect retained earnings?

    Both additional paid-in capital and retained earnings are entries under the shareholders' equity section of a company's balance ... Read Full Answer >>
  4. How does a forward contract differ from a call option?

    Forward contracts and call options are different financial instruments that allow two parties to purchase or sell assets ... Read Full Answer >>
  5. What types of capital are not considered share capital?

    The money a business uses to fund operations or growth is called capital, and there are a number of capital sources available. ... Read Full Answer >>
  6. What is the difference between issued share capital and subscribed share capital?

    The difference between subscribed share capital and issued share capital is the former relates to the amount of stock for ... Read Full Answer >>

You May Also Like

Trading Center

You are using adblocking software

Want access to all of Investopedia? Add us to your “whitelist”
so you'll never miss a feature!