YARDSTICK INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE

Department of Leadership

A desk review on Accountability in Corporate governance

Group Members ID

1. Yohannes Amare……………………………………………….MAL{1}056/015
2. Tofik Kemal…………………………………………………….MAL{1}182/015
3. Niway Mekonnen……………………………………………….MAL/210/015
4. Muluken Demessa………………………………………………MAL{1}082/015
5. Meseret Abera…………………………………………………..MAL/061/015
6. Amelework Asefa……………………………………………….MAL{1}180/2015
7. Abdisa Ayansa…………………………………………………..MAL{1}107/015

Submitted to: Prof. Zigiju Samuel

Submission Date: January 01, 2024

 Abstract
In todays interconnected and complex business landscape, traditional notions of accountability in
corporate governance fall short. This paper argues for a paradigm shift, moving beyond
shareholder primacy to a multifaceted approach that embraces stakeholder inclusivity and
addresses the broader environmental and social implications of corporate actions. Analyzing
emerging challenges and evolving best practices, we propose a framework for enhanced
accountability centered on five key pillars which are expanding the Accountability Lens,
strengthening Mechanisms, embracing Transparency and Disclosure, cultivating a Culture of
Ethical Responsibility and continuous Improvement

By advocating for this holistic and inclusive approach, we aim to provide a practical roadmap for
organizations to navigate the complexities of modern governance and foster responsible
decision-making, stakeholder trust, and sustainable success.

Keywords: Corporate Governance, Accountability, Stakeholder Inclusivity, ESG, Ethical

Culture, Continuous Improvement

i
Table of Contents
Abstract.................................................................................................................................................... i
1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 2
2. Techniques of Data Gathering .......................................................................................................... 4
3. Accountability in Corporate Governance .......................................................................................... 5
3.1. Key Elements of Accountability ............................................................................................... 5
3.2. Specific Mechanisms................................................................................................................ 6
3.3. Comparative Analysis .............................................................................................................. 8
3.4. Challenges and Solutions ....................................................................................................... 11
3.4.1. Information Asymmetry ................................................................................................. 11
3.4.2. Enforcing Accountability ................................................................................................ 13
3.4.3. Balancing Conflicting Interests ....................................................................................... 15
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 17
Recommendations ................................................................................................................................. 18
References............................................................................................................................................. 19

1
 1. Introduction
Accountability refers to the obligation to answer for one's actions and to be held responsible for
the consequences of those actions. In the context of corporate governance, it signifies the
responsibility of corporations to various stakeholders - shareholders, employees, customers,
communities, and the environment - for their decisions, performance, and overall impact.

Corporate governance is a central and dynamic aspect of business. The term ‘governance’
derives from the Latin gubernare, meaning ‘to steer’, usually applying to the steering of a ship,
which implies that corporate governance involves the function of direction rather than control.
There are many ways of defining corporate governance, ranging from narrow definitions that
focus on companies and their shareholders, to broader definitions that incorporate the
accountability of companies to many other groups of people, or ‘stakeholders’.

The concept of governance is very broad. This is because the issue of governance touches many
areas of human operations, including how economies and the entities within a country are
managed, the political and juridical methods of governing a country, and how disputes are
resolved in particular communities. Corporate governance is, however, specific to business
practice in private and public institutions. Oman (2001) defines corporate governance as
referring to the private and public institutions, including laws, regulations and accepted business
practice, which in a market economy govern the relationship between corporate managers and
entrepreneurs (corporate insiders) on the one hand, and those who invest resources in
corporations, on the other hand.

The importance of corporate governance for corporate success as well as for social welfare
cannot be overstated. Corporate governance’ has become one of the most commonly used
phrases in the current global business vocabulary. This raises the question, ‘is corporate
governance a vital component of successful business or is it simply another fad that will fade
away over time?’ The notorious collapse of Enron in 2001, one of America’s largest companies,
has focused international attention on company failures and the role that strong corporate
governance needs to play to prevent them. The UK has responded by producing the Higgs Report
(2003) and the Smith Report (2003), whereas the US produced the Sarbanes–Oxley Act (2002).

2
The concept of accountability in corporate governance has journeyed through centuries, evolving
alongside the very nature of organized business. Tracing the trajectory highlights the continuous
adaptation of mechanisms to ensure those in power act responsibly toward all stakeholders.

Early Foundations (17th-19th Centuries):

Emerging Corporations: Early capitalism lacked formal accountability structures, leading to

instances of exploitation by management and owners, impacting shareholders, employees, and
society.

Monopolies and Abuse: Unchecked power fueled the rise of monopolistic entities that exploited
market dominance and workers, sparking public concern.

Progressive Era Reforms (Early 20th Century):

Public Backlash: Corporate scandals and economic crises triggered public outcry, pushing for
reforms.

Regulatory Framework: Governments introduced regulations and oversight mechanisms,

including antitrust laws, securities regulations, and labor laws, to hold companies accountable.

Shifting Priorities: Stakeholder interests gained importance, shifting the focus from solely
shareholder primacy to considering employees, customers, and communities.

Management Separation: Separation of ownership and control in publicly traded companies

necessitated robust accountability mechanisms for decision-making managers.

20th and 21st Centuries:

Market Volatility: Stock market crashes of 1929 and 2008 emphasized the need for enhanced
transparency and accountability.

Shareholder Activism: Investors increasingly pressure companies to integrate environmental,

social, and governance (ESG) factors into their strategies.

Globalization Challenges: Holding companies accountable across diverse legal landscapes with
varying governance standards poses challenges.

3
 2. Techniques of Data Gathering
Our desk review involves gathering and analyzing existing information without conducting
primary research like surveys or interviews.

Here are some techniques we use for effective data collection in our desk review:

1. Identifying Relevant Sources which are published materials (Academic journals, reports,
news articles, and books) and online resources (websites, databases, blogs, social media,
and online archives).
2. Critically Evaluating the Sources:
Author credentials and expertise: Consider the source's credibility and authority on our
topic.
Publication date and timeliness: Ensure the information is current and relevant to our
research question.
Methodology and data collection: Evaluate the source's research methods and data
collection process for potential biases or limitations.

4
 3. Accountability in Corporate Governance

3.1. Key Elements of Accountability

Effective corporate governance hinges on ensuring accountability at all levels of an organization.
This extends beyond simply adhering to legal and financial regulations, encompassing a broader
sense of responsibility towards all stakeholders.

Here are some key elements of accountability:

A. Transparency and Disclosure:
Clear communication of decision-making processes, financial performance, and potential risks.
Regular reporting and disclosure of material information to stakeholders, including shareholders,
employees, and the public. Accessibility of information and opportunities for engagement with
stakeholders.
B. Board of Directors:
Composition of a diverse and independent board with relevant expertise. Effective oversight of
management and adherence to ethical principles. Robust risk management frameworks and
internal controls. Clear lines of responsibility and authority within the board.
C. Executive Compensation:
Performance-based compensation aligned with long-term company goals and sustainability.
Avoidance of excessive pay packages or guaranteed bonuses, particularly in cases of poor
performance. Transparency in disclosing executive compensation packages.
D. Ethical Conduct and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR):
Embedding ethical principles in all business decisions and operations. Commitment to
responsible social and environmental practices. Respect for human rights and fair treatment of
employees. Active engagement with the community and addressing their concerns.
E. Stakeholder Engagement:
Open and constructive dialogue with shareholders, employees, and other stakeholders.
Mechanisms for stakeholders to raise concerns and express their views. Addressing stakeholder
concerns in a timely and transparent manner.

5
 F. Enforcement and Consequences:
Effective mechanisms for holding individuals and the company accountable for misconduct or
negligence. Clear and proportionate consequences for non-compliance with accountability
standards. Independent third-party oversight and whistleblower protection mechanisms.
Accountability is a continuous process, not a one-time event. Effective corporate governance
requires a strong internal culture that values transparency, ethics, and stakeholder engagement.
Building trust and maintaining legitimacy in the eyes of stakeholders is crucial for long-term
success.

3.2. Specific Mechanisms

A. The Role of the Board

A board of directors is a group of individuals elected by shareholders (in the case of public
companies) or appointed by stakeholders (in the case of non-profits or private companies) to
oversee the management and direction of an organization.

The specific roles and responsibilities of a board of directors can vary depending on the size and
type of organization, but some of the most common include hiring and overseeing senior
management, approving major decisions, monitoring the organization's performance, ensuring
compliance with laws and regulations, managing risk and protecting the interests of stakeholders

Boards of directors are accountable to the organization's shareholders or stakeholders. In the case
of public companies, shareholders can vote to remove board members who are not performing
their duties effectively. In the case of non-profits or private companies, stakeholders may have
other mechanisms for holding the board accountable, such as through voting on changes to the
organization's bylaws or by petitioning the board to take action.

B. Shareholder Activism:

Shareholder activism, sometimes simply called activism, refers to the actions taken by
shareholders with the aim of influencing a company's policies, strategies, or management. It goes
beyond simply casting votes at proxy meetings, involving proactive steps to exert pressure and
drive desired changes.

6
While often associated with large hedge funds, activists can be diverse in their backgrounds and
motivations. They can be individual investors, institutional investors or activist hedge funds.
They pursue a variety of objectives including financial performance, Strategic shift, Governance
improvements and ESG concerns. They employ a diverse arsenal of tactics to achieve their goals
like Public engagement, Proxy contests, Litigation, Shareholder proposals and direct
engagement.

C. Whistleblower Protections:

Whistleblowers play a vital role in exposing wrongdoing and protecting the public interest. They
are individuals who report illegal, unethical, or unsafe activities occurring within an
organization. To encourage whistleblowing and safeguard these brave individuals, various legal
and regulatory frameworks provide whistleblower protections.

Whistleblower protections are essentially laws and regulations that prohibit employers or
organizations from retaliating against employees who report wrongdoing. This retaliation can
take various forms, including termination, demotion, harassment and blacklisting.

Whistleblowing can uncover a wide range of harmful activities, such as fraud and corruption,
discrimination and harassment, safety hazards and accounting irregularities. Without
whistleblower protections, employees may be afraid to speak up for fear of losing their jobs or
facing other repercussions. This can silence valuable information and allow wrongdoing to
continue unchecked. There are numerous laws and regulations offering whistleblower
protections, depending on the jurisdiction and the nature of the reported wrongdoing.

D. Executive Compensation:

Executive compensation, also known as executive pay, refers to the total financial and non-
financial rewards a company provides to its top-level executives, typically CEOs, CFOs, and
other C-suite members.

Executive compensation remains a complex issue with valid arguments on both sides.
Understanding its components, influencing factors and ongoing debates is crucial for informed
discussions about corporate governance, fairness, and sustainable business practices. Ultimately,

7
designing ethical and performance-driven compensation packages that benefit both executives
and shareholders in the long run is key to ensuring responsible and successful organizations.

3.3. Comparative Analysis

A. Cross-cultural Perspectives

Understanding differences in perspectives across cultures is essential for navigating an

increasingly interconnected world. Cross-cultural perspectives offer a framework for examining
how cultural values, beliefs, and practices shape individuals' thoughts, behavior, and interactions.

Benefits of Cross-cultural Perspectives:

 Reduces prejudice and discrimination: Understanding diverse cultures fosters empathy

and respect, promoting peaceful coexistence and collaboration.
 Improves communication and collaboration: Cultural awareness facilitates effective
communication and collaboration in business, diplomacy, and personal interactions.
 Enhances creativity and innovation: Cross-cultural exchange fosters the exchange of
ideas and perspectives, leading to innovative solutions and problem-solving approaches.
 Expands personal and professional development: Engaging with different cultures
broadens your worldview, enriches your understanding of human behavior, and equips
you with valuable life skills.

B. Industry-Specific Accountability:

The concept of "Industry-Specific Accountability" goes beyond general corporate governance

concerns and delves into the unique challenges and responsibilities faced by different sectors.
Each industry operates within its own regulatory framework, ethical considerations, and societal
impact, demanding tailored accountability measures. The Need for Industry-Specific
Accountability is because of Varying Risks and Impact, Regulatory Frameworks, Evolving
Ethical Standards and Stakeholder Interests

Examples of Industry-Specific Accountability:

 Healthcare: Maintaining patient privacy, upholding professional ethics, and ensuring

medication safety are key accountability factors.

8
  Finance: Protecting investor interests, preventing fraud, and ensuring market stability are
critical concerns.
 Technology: Data privacy, cybersecurity, and ethical considerations surrounding
algorithms and AI are significant accountability concerns.
 Extractive Industries: Environmental impact, sustainable resource management, and
community engagement are key accountability dimensions.

C. Public vs. Private Companies:

Choosing between being a public or private company is a critical decision for any business. The
differences go beyond just access to capital, impacting ownership, transparency, regulations, and
even company culture.

i. Ownership and Financial Structure

Public Companies: Publicly traded companies sell shares of their stock to the public on stock
exchanges. Ownership becomes dispersed among various investors, including individuals,
institutions, and mutual funds. Public companies raise capital by issuing new shares or debt
instruments.

Private Companies: Privately held companies have restricted ownership structures. Founders,
families, venture capitalists, or private equity firms typically hold shares. Raising capital often
happens through private investments, loans, or angel investors.

ii. Transparency and Reporting:

Public Companies: Public companies are subject to strict reporting requirements and extensive
SEC regulations. They must regularly disclose financial statements, business plans, and other
critical information to investors and the public. This level of transparency allows for greater
scrutiny and market pressure.

Private Companies: Private companies have significantly less stringent reporting requirements.
They hold more confidential information, often disclosing details only to investors or specific
stakeholders. This lack of public scrutiny can offer greater flexibility but also raises concerns
about accountability.

9
 iii. Regulatory Environment:

Public Companies: Public companies face a significant burden of regulation. They must comply
with various SEC regulations, accounting standards, and industry-specific requirements. This
compliance can be costly and time-consuming but ensures investor protection and market
integrity.

Private Companies: Private companies enjoy more regulatory flexibility. They have fewer
compliance requirements, making them more agile and responsive. However, this flexibility can
also mean less oversight and potential vulnerability to legal challenges.

iv. Governance and Accountability:

Public Companies: Public companies have established structures for governance, including
boards of directors composed primarily of independent members. These boards provide oversight
and hold management accountable to shareholders.

Private Companies: Governance structures in private companies can vary significantly. Boards
may have greater influence from founders or investors, and accountability relationships may be
less formalized. This can lead to faster decision-making but also raises concerns about potential
conflicts of interest or lack of checks and balances.

v. Culture and Growth:

Public Companies: Public companies often operate in a pressure cooker environment, constantly
subject to market scrutiny and shareholder expectations. This pressure can drive performance
and innovation but also lead to short-termism and risk aversion.

Private Companies: Private companies tend to have more focused cultures with greater
alignment between founders, investors, and employees. This can foster longer-term thinking,
entrepreneurial spirit, and higher risk tolerance.

10
 vi. Growth Strategies:

Public Companies: Public companies primarily access capital through public markets, issuing
new shares or debt instruments. They also pursue mergers and acquisitions to expand their reach
and market share.

Private Companies: Private companies rely on private investments, venture capital funding, and
debt financing for growth. They may also pursue but with less pressure from public markets and
shareholders.

D. Global vs. Local Regulation:

The world of regulation faces a fundamental tension: the need for consistency and harmonization
across borders (global) versus the recognition of unique needs and contexts in specific regions
and countries (local). This tension plays out in various fields, from finance and trade to
environmental protection and internet governance.

Global regulation harmonizes standards and rules across multiple jurisdictions, address global
challenges and promote competition and fair trade.

Local regulation address specific needs and contexts protect local interests, promote innovation
and adaptation.

3.4. Challenges and Solutions

3.4.1. Information Asymmetry

Information asymmetry occurs when one party in a transaction or relationship possesses more or
better information than the other party. This imbalance of knowledge can create significant
advantages for the party with more information, while potentially leading to adverse outcomes
for those with less information.

Key Characteristics are listed below:

Hidden Information: One party has access to private or undisclosed information that is not
available to the other party.

11
Unequal Expertise: One party has a deeper understanding or knowledge of a particular subject
matter, giving them an advantage in decision-making.

Difficult Verification: It may be challenging or costly for the less-informed party to verify the
accuracy or completeness of the information provided by the other party.

Common Examples:

Used Car Market: Sellers often have more information about the condition of a car than buyers,
creating the potential for selling "lemons" (faulty vehicles).

Job Market: Employers have more information about job requirements and prospects than
potential employees, who may struggle to assess job fit and future opportunities accurately.

Insurance Markets: Insurance companies have more information about individual risk profiles
than policyholders, leading to potential adverse selection and pricing distortions.

Financial Markets: Insider trading, where individuals with access to non-public information can
make profits at the expense of uninformed investors, is a prime example of information
asymmetry.

Consequences:

Market Inefficiencies: Information asymmetry can lead to suboptimal resource allocation, as

uncertainty and risk premiums increase transaction costs and distort market prices.

Exploitation: The party with more information may exploit their advantage to gain unfair profits,
extract higher prices, or avoid undesirable risks, leading to exploitation of less informed parties.

Loss of Trust: Widespread information asymmetry can erode trust in markets and institutions,
hindering economic activity and cooperation.

Mitigating Strategies:

Signaling: Parties with better information can signal their quality or reliability through
warranties, certifications, or reputation-building mechanisms.

12
Screening: Less-informed parties can use screening mechanisms, such as tests or background
checks, to gather more information and reduce uncertainty.

Regulation: Governments and regulatory bodies often implement policies to address information
asymmetry, such as mandatory disclosures, consumer protection laws, and insider trading
regulations.

Information Sharing: Promoting transparency and information sharing initiatives can reduce
information gaps and create a more level playing field.

Building Reputation: Establishing a track record of trustworthiness and reliability can help
reduce the impact of information asymmetry in future transactions.

Addressing information asymmetry is crucial for creating fair and efficient markets, fostering
trust in economic relationships, and protecting consumers and investors from exploitation.

3.4.2. Enforcing Accountability

Enforcing accountability is the process of ensuring that individuals and organizations are held
responsible for their actions and decisions. It involves establishing clear expectations, monitoring
performance, providing feedback, and taking corrective action when necessary. Accountability is
essential for fostering trust, promoting ethical behavior, and achieving desired outcomes.

Here's a breakdown of key elements and strategies for effective accountability:

i. Establishing Clear Expectations:

Define Roles and Responsibilities: Clearly articulate the duties, tasks, and standards of
performance expected of individuals and teams.

Set Measurable Goals and Objectives: Establish specific, quantifiable targets to track progress
and assess outcomes.

Communicate Expectations Effectively: Ensure all stakeholders understand their roles,

responsibilities, and the consequences of not meeting expectations.

13
 ii. Monitoring Performance:

Implement Performance Tracking Systems: Utilize tools and processes to gather data on
performance metrics, such as progress reports, performance reviews, and audits.

Regularly Review Performance Data: Conduct periodic assessments to identify areas of strength
and improvement.

Provide Timely Feedback: Offer constructive feedback to individuals and teams, allowing for
course correction and continuous improvement.

iii. Addressing Misconduct and Underperformance:

Take Corrective Action: Implement appropriate measures to address issues of misconduct or

underperformance, such as additional training, disciplinary actions, or performance improvement
plans.

Hold Individuals Accountable: Ensure individuals face consequences for their actions, within the
boundaries of ethical and legal guidelines.

Learn from Mistakes: Analyze failures and setbacks to identify root causes and prevent future
occurrences.

iv. Cultivating a Culture of Accountability:

Leadership Commitment: Leaders must model accountability by holding themselves and others
to high standards.

Open Communication: Encourage open and honest dialogue about performance, challenges, and
concerns.

Transparency: Ensure transparency in decision-making and operations, fostering trust and

understanding.

Reward and Recognition: Recognize and reward individuals and teams who demonstrate
accountability and achieve results.

14
Consequences for Misconduct: Establish clear consequences for unethical behavior or violations
of standards.

v. Specific Mechanisms for Accountability:

Performance Reviews: Regular assessments of individual and team performance.

Audits: Independent reviews of financial records, operations, and compliance with regulations.

Whistleblower Protection: Mechanisms for employees to report misconduct without fear of

retaliation.

External Oversight: Regulatory bodies, industry associations, and stakeholder groups can
provide external accountability measures.

Effective accountability requires a comprehensive approach that addresses both individual and
organizational behavior. It is a continuous process that demands ongoing commitment and
attention to ensure ethical conduct, responsible decision-making, and the achievement of desired
outcomes.

3.4.3. Balancing Conflicting Interests

Balancing conflicting interests is a complex and ubiquitous challenge encountered in various
aspects of life, from personal relationships to organizational decision-making. It refers to the
situation where multiple stakeholders or parties hold divergent aspirations, needs, or goals that
cannot be simultaneously fulfilled. Successfully navigating this conflict requires careful
consideration, empathy, and strategic approaches.

Identifying the Conflict:

The first step is recognizing the existence of conflicting interests. This involves understanding
the different stakeholders involved, their perspectives, and the specific areas of disagreement.
Active listening, open communication, and gathering sufficient information are crucial for
accurate identification.

15
Assessing the Stakes:

Once the conflict is identified, it's important to assess the stakes involved for each stakeholder.
This helps prioritize needs and potential consequences of different outcomes. Consider the
immediate and long-term implications, both tangible and intangible, for each party.

Exploring Options:

With a clear understanding of the conflict and its implications, creative exploration of potential
solutions becomes essential. Brainstorming various options requires open-mindedness,
flexibility, and willingness to consider compromise or trade-offs.

Negotiation and Communication:

Effective communication and negotiation skills come into play when discussing and evaluating
the proposed solutions. Active listening, empathy, and clear communication of individual needs
and concerns are critical for reaching a mutually acceptable outcome.

Prioritization and Compromise:

Not all interests can be fully satisfied in every situation. Prioritization and compromise become
necessary to navigate the conflict effectively. Identify the core needs and objectives of each
stakeholder and seek solutions that fulfill these needs to the greatest extent possible, even if it
involves some degree of compromise on non-essential aspects.

Implementing and Monitoring:

Once an agreement is reached, it's crucial to establish a clear plan for implementation. This
includes assigning responsibilities, setting timelines, and establishing methods for monitoring
progress and potential challenges.

16
 Conclusion
Accountability remains a cornerstone of effective corporate governance, ensuring responsible
decision-making, stakeholder trust, and sustainable success. However, the modern business
landscape, with its increasing complexity and interconnectedness, demands a multifaceted
approach to accountability that goes beyond traditional methods.

Key findings from our analysis highlight the need for Expanding beyond shareholder primacy to
encompass broader stakeholder interests, including employees, communities, and the
environment. Implementing a combination of internal (board structure, committees, ethical
codes) and external (regulatory bodies, media scrutiny, investor engagement) mechanisms to
address various aspects of governance. Facilitating transparent communication of financial,
environmental, social, and governance (ESG) information to foster informed stakeholder
engagement and decision-making. Cultivating a strong ethical culture throughout the
organization, with board leadership setting the tone and holding themselves accountable.
Regularly evaluating and adjusting accountability mechanisms to remain relevant and effective
in a dynamic environment.

17
 Recommendations
To strengthen accountability in our organization's corporate governance, we need to consider
these strategies:

 Conduct a comprehensive assessment of current accountability practices, identifying

strengths, weaknesses, and potential gaps.
 Develop an integrated accountability framework aligned with stakeholder expectations
and ESG considerations.
 Strengthen board composition and oversight by increasing independent directors,
empowering committees, and implementing robust risk management practices.
 Enhance transparency and disclosure by actively reporting on sustainability metrics,
ethical policies, and stakeholder engagement efforts.
 Foster a culture of accountability by implementing whistle-blower mechanisms, ethics
training programs, and performance-based incentives.
 Proactively engage with stakeholders through dialogues, feedback channels, and
collaborative initiatives.
 Regularly monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of accountability mechanisms, making
adjustments as needed.
 Remember, accountability is an ongoing journey, not a one-time achievement. By
committing to continuous improvement and embracing a holistic approach, organizations
can cultivate a strong foundation for responsible governance and sustainable success.

18
 References
1. The Government Accountability Office (GAO): (https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-
436)
2. The National Whistleblower Legal Defense Fund: (https://www.whistleblowers.org/)
3. The United States Office of Special Counsel: (https://osc.gov/)
4. Agrawal, A. and Chadha, S. (2005) “Corporate governance and accounting scandals”,
Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 371-406.
5. Beasley, M.S. (1996), “An empirical analysis of the relation between board of director
composition and financial statement fraud”, Accounting Review, Vol. 71, No. 4, pp. 443-
465.
6. Cadbury Code, The (1992), Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of
Corporate Governance: The Code of Best Practice, Gee Professional Publishing,
London.

19