My very first real post on this blog, in April 2010, discussed the importance of data governance to support King III.

The King III report and Code were the South African response to the various corporate governance crises, such as the Enron scandal, that had highlighted the need for more rigorous corporate governance and, in particular, more reliable reporting.

Importance of Accurate Information

King III was the first corporate governance code to recognise the importance of accurate information to support corporate governance.

At the time that King III was developed, information governance was an emerging discipline. The framework requires that companies ensure adequate information governance – although accepting that there can be no “one size fits all” policy. Rather, King III requires that companies “keep abreast of the rapidly expanding regulatory requirements pertaining to information”.

Over the last six years both the importance of data and the maturity of data governance have increased dramatically.

In our new white paper – King III and Information Governance – we take a fresh look at the King III framework and how critical information governance is to enable many of the principles.

We answer questions like:

What is the difference between IT Governance and Information Governance?

Who (on the board) should take responsibility for Information Governance?

How does information governance support King III?

Updated for King IV

King IV replaced King III in 2016. Our new whitepaper, King IV and Information Governance, adds to the original King III whitepaper, which we still recommend, bringing it up to date in respect of King IV.

Information governance is no longer a “nice to have”.