Corporate policies and authority matrices: governance that protects the business and disciplines decisions

Illustrative image

The legal and commercial perspective

Policies organise work and the matrix identifies who makes the decision

Companies need clear rules that organise their activities and define employees' responsibilities. Policies explain how work should be performed and the controls that apply, while the authority matrix identifies who requests an action, who reviews it, who approves the decision and who signs the commitment. Responsibility becomes clearer and conflicting directions are reduced.

These tools deliver value when they are integrated with operating procedures, contracts and documentation processes. Employees should know what is required before they begin, what they can carry out themselves and what needs referral, with a clear substitute when the authorised person is absent. Work should not depend on personal interpretation or changing verbal instructions.

Preparing policies requires professionals who understand the business

Preparing policies and an authority matrix requires professional management capabilities, practical experience, an understanding of the nature of the business and the ability to analyse procedures and assess risks. Copying a template from a different company may produce controls unsuited to the scale of the business, its resources or its obligations and allocate powers that do not reflect reality.

The quality of preparation improves through the participation of the legal, finance and operations departments and by listening to those who perform the procedures every day. The legal, contractual and financial implications of decisions are reviewed, and teams' ability to implement them is tested. Overlapping responsibilities are addressed, and each department's responsibility for review, recommendation and approval is defined.

Risks extend beyond the financial value of a decision

Financial thresholds help control spending, but the cost of a decision cannot be reduced to a purchase amount or contract value. It may create a long-term obligation, waive a right, settle a dispute or expose safety, operations and reputation to risk. These effects deserve a separate assessment.

Authority is therefore designed according to the type of decision and the level of risk as well as its financial value. A low-value contract may require specialist legal review because of its liability, data or exclusivity terms, while an urgent operational decision may require the involvement of a safety specialist even when no direct expenditure is involved.

Delegation must rest on an existing power

The limits of delegation are based on the powers of the body granting it and must be consistent with the company's incorporation document or articles of association and the decisions governing its remit, according to its legal form and the nature of its activities. The scope of delegation must be checked before commitments are made. A matrix alone does not create a power that the granting body does not possess.

Delegation is clearly defined by subject matter, limits, duration and the arrangements for substitution. Requesting, reviewing, approving and signing are appropriately separated according to resources and risks, and approvals are documented in a retrievable record. This makes it possible to identify responsibility for the decision, its basis and the information presented when it was taken.

Controlled exceptions and workable procedures

Business needs may create urgent situations. Handling them requires a defined exception process that explains the reason for urgency, the limits of the action, who approves it and how it will be documented and reviewed afterwards. Exceptions are restricted to the particular situation and period, and their recurrence is monitored so that they do not become an open-ended delegation that bypasses ordinary controls.

Governance aims to improve the quality of decisions while allowing business to continue. Approval stages that add no value are shortened, appropriate documentation methods are used, response times and escalation routes are defined, and repeated paperwork requirements that delay implementation without reducing risks or improving oversight are reviewed.

Effectiveness is measured and reviewed periodically

Employees need to be familiarised with the policies and authority matrix. Approval times, the proportion of exceptions, errors and repeated breaches of authority should be measured, with these indicators considered in the context of workload and resources. This reveals whether the controls protect the company and support implementation or require adjustment.

These tools are reviewed periodically and when the business, structure or risks change. Amendments are approved by the authorised body and communicated to those concerned. Successful governance is reflected in clear responsibilities, workable procedures and sound decisions, and in the presence of professionals able to develop controls in line with the company's actual needs.

Practical steps

• Identify decisions and procedures and determine who requests, reviews, approves and signs, assessing financial, contractual and operational risks.
• Prepare the policies and matrix with the participation of qualified legal, finance and operations professionals and verify the source of authority and the limits of delegation.
• Define the process for urgent exceptions, response times and monitoring indicators, and arrange periodic review of the controls by the authorised body.

General educational content, not a substitute for advice on your facts and documents, and not a guarantee of any outcome.

Translations refer to Saudi law, consult the official legal text when applying it.