Abstract
Corporate governance has been heavily criticised, because of governance failures in companies across the globe. In response to these failures, legislative and regulatory changes have been introduced. However, skeptics argue that compliance with these legislative and regulatory acts is costly and time consuming, causing overregulation. Furthermore, many regulatory measures lack business value and there is no guarantee that adherence to these measures can be enforced. This article presents an argument for better utilisation of electronic means and specifically, business process management systems (BPMS), in support of good corporate governance. Through the application of Orlikowski's theory of "technologies-in-practice" as the theoretical underpinning of the study and collection of data from a BPMS vendor company and seven BPMS user companies in South Africa, an electronic monitoring, observation and compliance framework for corporate governance is proposed.
Highlights
Corporate governance is described as the system by which companies are directed and controlled (IODSA, 2002)
The authors were interested in investigating how the King principles of good governance could be inscribed into a technological artifact such as a business process management systems (BPMS) and its components, and in the possible impact and change that such an intervention would have on the social behaviour and action in the organisation to support good corporate governance
At the BPMS vendor company, data was collected from 12 managers (24%), 14 business analysts (29%), 12 developers (24%), eight trainers (16%) and three other positions (7%)
Summary
Corporate governance is described as the system by which companies are directed and controlled (IODSA, 2002). In 10 years of existence of SITA (2002-2012), it spent approximately ZAR10 billion on ICT (Mtimunye, 2009) This sum of money is very attractive to parties who want to share in the stake. Many skeptics argue that compliance with legislative and regulatory acts are time consuming, costly and cause overregulation (Cangemi, 2007; Kaplan & Holmstrom, 2003; IODSA, 2009; King, 2006; Sewchurran, 2007; Velichety et al, 2007). King’s work includes three groundbreaking reports: “The King Reports” (King I Report, 1994; King II Report, 2002; King III Report, 2009) These guidelines strive to improve the quality of governance in South African and international firms operating in South Africa (Hough et al, 2009; King, 2006). The foundation of these concepts is intellectual honesty, acting in good faith and acting in the best interests of the company
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
