aws全区号（www.2km.me）提供aws账号、aws全区号、aws32v账号、亚马逊云账号出售，提供api ，质量稳定，数量持续。另有售azure oracle linode等账号.
THE renowned Frank Sinatra was both an acclaimed actor and a singer in the 1940s and 1950s – balancing these sides of his career perfectly.
In order to gain more artistic freedom for his work, he attempted to move into the business side of the music industry and founded his own record label company for which he was made the chairman by default.
Given the allure that the chairmanship position carries, he was commonly known as “chairman of the board” thereafter.
The hype surrounding the position of chairman resulted in the moniker being stuck and was used by those in the creative industry for his performative work, until his death in 1998.
At one point, Frank Sinatra was even quoted saying: “I’m trying to figure out, chairman of what board? People come up to me and seriously say ‘well, what are you chairman of?’ and I can’t answer them.”
Whilst the notion of artistic freedom may have since not lasted in the music industry, the allure and attention towards a chairmanship position in the corporate sector continue to hold.
In this regard, it is perhaps not surprising to anecdotally gather that the stipulation in the latest Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance (revised in April 2021 by Securities Commission Malaysia) which generated the highest level of contemplation within the boardrooms of listed companies relates to the position of chairman.
Specifically, Practice 1.4 of the Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance calls for the chairman of the board not to be a member of the audit committee, nomination committee, and remuneration committee.
The introduction of the said practice was considered to be seismic as a review by KPMG Management & Risk Consulting Sdn Bhd in April 2021 showed that nearly 70% of the top 100 listed companies by market capitalisation in Malaysia had their board chairmen double hatting as members of board committees.
In addition, attempting to effect a change amongst board chairmen was always to going to be a delicate proposition given that a sizeable number of listed companies in Malaysia have marquee names or high stature individuals as their chairmen, comprising former top government officials, dignitaries and corporate statesmen.
Against this backdrop, it is worth unravelling the intended outcome envisaged by the regulator through the introduction of this stipulation.
In adding a veneer of clarity on this matter, the Securities Commission vide Guidance to Practice 1.4 of the Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance contended that having the same person assume the positions of the chairman of the board and chairman of the audit committee, nomination committee or remuneration committee gives rise to the risk of self-review and may impair the objectivity of the chairman and the board when deliberating on the recommendations put forth by the board committee.