An effective control system for a healthy business

Regulatory clarity and the durability of rules over time, in fact, far from being a mere petition of principle, respond to an objective need in a context in which, moreover, national regulations intersect with supranational ones in a mix in which even technicians find it difficult to find their way around (just think, most recently, of the eccentricities in the area of ESG).

Clarity' is an element that must be sought not only in the regulations 'external' to the company but, even more so, in the regulations 'internal' to the company (guidelines, directives, procedures, instructions, etc.), so that they can be understood by everyone and direct operations towards the achievement of the set objectives.

All of the above, however, cannot be disassociated from the fact that a suitable governance system is fundamental in companies oriented towards a healthy business, projected over time: it is no coincidence that every business crisis always originates (or, at least, is fostered) by the lack of a 'control system' appropriate to the size of the company itself, effective and effectively implemented.

A control system that cannot be reduced to a mere list of 'norms', as it must contribute to the creation of that compliance culture that is much talked about, but which, in many realities, is still regarded as a parlour ornament rather than an added value to operations.

The construction of a control system appropriate to the size of the company (as well as to the product sectors in which it operates) is not an easy task, as the principle of the 'independence' of the control bodies and functions must always be reconciled with their harmonious participation in the life of the company.

Control and business, in fact, are two levels of a single reality, with their own specificities, but inextricably linked and substantially intertwined: the function of control, in fact, for everyone and in all realities should be to grasp the contradictions of everyday action, precisely to prevent them from deflagrating and producing harmful, if not downright damaging, effects.

Alongside the clarity of the rules and the most correct construction of the organisational design and, in this, of the internal control system, one cannot fail to emphasise - lust but not least - the essential behavioural element of those called upon to carry out control activities.

In this respect, the road ahead is tremendously long: the controller must culturally relate with the world of corporate reality, not in search of empathy with the 'boss', but with a view to autonomous co-participation, which is necessary to guarantee, or at least attempt to guarantee, the achievement of that 'healthy' business I mentioned at the beginning.

Controllers who limit their (in)activity to an uncritical support of what the 'boss' has at his disposal not only fail in their role, but also keep alive those prejudices about control activities that, even today, drive the 'bosses' (especially those of lesser stature) to seek, in controllers, external and internal, loyalty before, much earlier than abilities.