Delivering good performance

  • The board is responsible for ensuring good performance, and as such, has a clear strategy to achieve this. The board meets annually with the executive team in November to review the group’s specific strategic priorities. In April, the board reviews the group’s three-year strategic plans and budgets, and approves the key performance measures and targets of all executives. The board oversees the implementation of the strategic plans throughout the year.


On appointment, all directors participate in a formal and comprehensive induction programme. Director training is held to refresh their skills and knowledge. Furthermore, directors are required to attend professional development training and briefings to keep abreast of legal and regulatory risks, developments and changes that could impact the environment in which the group and its subsidiaries operate.

This past year, we published MultiChoice eLearning modules aimed at our directors and senior management. These modules, which were tailored to our internal policies and processes, cover topics such as the JSE Listings Requirements, corporate governance, King IV, trading in securities and the specific duties of our directors.


The board and all board committees’ charters include the onus of annual assessments. Assessments of the performance by the board, individual directors and its subcommittees are conducted every second year. However, performance in general is considered every year as part of the review of the board’s composition and its committees. The lead independent director leads the evaluation of the chair.

A peer review was conducted by our directors in March 2020, which concluded that the board comprises a balance of skills with sufficient learning opportunities to aid the development of new directors. This year, we also evaluated the board’s subcommittees against their charters, who were found to have materially fulfilled their duties. An online board evaluation concluded in May 2020 considered the board’s performance as a whole, and the performance of the chair and CEO. The evaluation did not identify any significant areas of improvement and the board’s performance was considered to be satisfactory. Going forward, the board will continue focusing on improving and refining its processes and the nomination committee will review and refine its evaluation practices.