Evaluating the Performance of Your Company Secretary - Part 1
Evaluating the Performance of Your Company Secretary - Part 1
David Cantrick-Brooks | 19/07/2025

The company secretary plays a critical role in ensuring that the organisation complies with its various legal and other regulatory obligations, the board and management is well advised and properly supported in corporate governance processes, etc. (including decision-making), and the organisation is generally well governed (in terms of policies, procedures, etc.).

A company secretary’s performance can be evaluated by reference to a wide range of aspects and contributions.

For example, is your company secretary:

1 Familiarity with the organisation’s corporate structure and principal activities are essential in being effective.

2 If and when required.

3 Being a company secretary can be a very tough gig, often sandwiched between the board and management, especially where reporting lines make it difficult to serve two masters.

Governance in Action Pty Ltd can assist with designing and (if requested) conducting balanced scorecard-based performance and/or efficiency reviews of company secretaries and company secretarial functions.

General Disclaimer:

The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice on any matter.

No person(s) should act, or refrain from acting, solely on the basis of the material contained on this website. Your access of this website, and any use that you may make of the information on it, is not intended to create, and your use does not constitute, a contractual relationship of any kind.

All material published by Governance in Action Pty Ltd on its website remains its property, with copyright attached, and all rights are reserved.

PreviousNext

Related Articles

Governance Audits in Australia: What Boards Can Learn from the Public Sector

Governance frameworks can look impressive on paper. The more important question is whether they work in practice. This article examines governance audits as evidence-based assessments of the design, operation and outcomes of an organisation’s governance arrangements. It considers why governance assurance is more formalised and visible in the Australian public sector, why private-sector organisations often perform equivalent work under different labels, and what boards can learn from each approach. It also explores appropriate audit scope, culture and behavioural evidence, review frequency, the role of internal and external reviewers, and the opportunities and risks associated with using AI. The central message is simple: good governance assurance should go beyond confirming that policies, charters and controls exist. It should test whether they are understood, used, effective and capable of identifying and correcting governance weaknesses before they become larger problems.

08/18/2026

Lead and Lag Indicators in Corporate Governance: From Rear-View Reporting to Early Warning

Boards need more than a rear-view mirror. Lagging indicators such as breaches, losses, incidents and missed targets remain essential for accountability, but well-designed leading indicators can provide earlier warning of changing risk, culture, capability and control conditions. This article examines what lead and lag indicators actually mean in corporate governance, why the same measure can sometimes be both, and why “leading” should not automatically be equated with “predictive”. It proposes a practical indicator framework across strategy, risk and compliance, culture, WHS, board effectiveness, internal audit, technology, data, customers and third parties. It also considers how big data, analytics and AI can strengthen governance – provided boards first address data quality, privacy, context and assurance. The objective is not perfect prediction, but earlier recognition, better questions and better-informed board decisions.

08/13/2026