Corporate governance is a broad subject matter and as it suggests, it is the

system of rules, practices and processes by which business corporations are directed
and controlled. Good corporate governance has been the bedrock of the current trends
of the corporations. It is a system comprises of internal and external rules that as much
as possible must be attained by every business. Hence, it is the framework that every
corporation should ought to comply. The reason for this particular circumstance is that it
would not just solely benefit the corporation because it would also uphold the business
position in the community in terms of its roles played as a catalyst for environmental and
social upliftment. This subject matter points to various areas such as the Market CG’s
scores, measuring of governance, corporate social responsibility (CSR), and corporate
standards. The corporate governance gave been cultivating over the decades but its full
implementation seemed to be far from the best practice, meaning, even up to this day,
corporate governance as a framework is yet to be fully executed. Perhaps, there are
stagnation elsewhere that probably halted its mobility. This synthesis attempts to
investigate and unravel the significance and impacts of good corporate governance.
And, the reason why underperformed countries especially Philippines have been
stagnated to its mobility.

In the international context, corporate governance has been the common drive of
every country in Asia. According to Allen et. al. (2010) Asia Special Report, Market
scores have changed and some of the Asian countries are high performing and
improved on top such as Thailand, Japan, Indonesia, China and Malaysia while
Singapore and Hong Kong regained their spot. And, some others were tagged as worst
performer such as India, Korea and Philippines which had a disappointing survey
results specially in most CG categories. These findings were found to be pleasing to
high-performing countries but a challenge to the others. These somehow lead us to the
question of what executions had done by those countries on the spot list? On the other
hand, what are the causes of the stagnation or lack of execution which had brought
those underperformed countries on the least spot? Hong Kong and Singapore were
prosperously regained their spot and based on the CG report these countries had
outstandingly re-claimed different market category scores such CG rules and practices,
enforcement, political and regulatory, IGAAP, and CG Culture (Powell et. al., 2010). As
these indications are tested to different countries in Asia, there were clear evidences
that Philippines and other Asian countries floundered in those categories. Philippines
was evidently underperformance due to its consistent decline to different CG categories
(Gill et. al., 2010).

All governments and regulators face the same challenge: persuading their private
sectors to pursue governance improvements willingly and in their own self-interest. It is
necessary to bridge the gap between the political and regulatory environment and the
CG culture. Markets that perform well in this area are more likely to maintain regulatory
reforms more effectively and efficiently, as well as develop meaningful corporate
governance structures. This can only be beneficial to the development of capital
markets (Allen et. al., 2010).