CSR and Corporate Governance

This Danish foundation gives away $1.3 billion annually – and their secret isn't efficiency ratios, it's something far more radical: They implement nothing. Behind this Danish foundation's rapid rise is Ozempic – the blockbuster diabetes and weight-loss drug that's generated unprecedented profits for Novo Nordisk. The Novo Nordisk Foundation, which owns about a quarter of the pharmaceutical giant, has become one of the world's wealthiest charitable foundations with assets around $167 billion. Yet rather than hiring armies of staff like other major philanthropies, they've gone the opposite direction. In a recent interview, their Chief Scientific Officer for Health Flemming Konradsen revealed their secret to me: They don't implement – they only work through partners. Zero programs. Zero direct service delivery. The model: ➡️ Find what already works  ➡️ Partner with governments who own the strategy ➡️ Create sustainable markets, not dependency  ➡️ Stay for 15+ years, not 3-year cycles Example: Their school feeding programs create permanent markets for local farmers while training health workers and scaling AI solutions across continents. The hard part? Saying no to putting your name on things. Letting partners get the credit. Trusting that influence matters more than control. For development professionals: This approach creates new opportunities. These ultra-efficient funders skip the usual suspects and source partners who can be trusted with strategy, not just execution. They're looking for implementers who think like owners. If you can demonstrate government relationships, long-term thinking, and the ability to build sustainable systems (not just deliver projects), you become invaluable to this new breed of funders. What could your organization accomplish if it stopped trying to do everything itself? Disclaimer: I’ve edited this post as it’s been flagged that Novo Nordisk Foundation has 250 employees. #Philanthropy #Partnership #Foundation 📷 Novo Nordisk Foundation

Your team thinks you’re clueless. Your approach screams "American". And they're unconvinced. Kara Williams, an engineer from Boston, learned that the hard way. She flew to Munich to pitch carbon reduction strategies to a room full of German executives. She was confident. Prepared. Right to the point. She opened her presentation with a bold statement and recommendations for how to take action. But she barely made it through her first slide before the questions started flying: ➡️ “Please tell us more about the research you conducted." ➡️ “How many people did you interview?" ➡️ “What methodology did you use for analyzing the data?" Kara felt the group was attacking her credibility and became defensive. But what she saw as aggression… was actually a cultural difference in approach to reasoning. In Germany, where deductive thinking is built into the fabric of the education system, building your argument by first proving the principle before moving to application reigns. Introduction, thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis. In the US, where inductive reasoning prevails, getting to the point and sticking to it is more desirable and often more persuasive. Her next trip, Kara tried a different approach: “I began with the concept— this is the problem. Here are the details about the research done. I left time for debate and discussion before moving to recommendations... I focused first on WHY, then on HOW... I got the funding". Here’s the bigger truth: though most are unaware, the ways you seek to persuade others and the kinds of arguments you find convincing are often deeply rooted in your culture’s philosophical, religious, and educational assumptions and attitudes. Far from being universal, the art of persuasion is one that is profoundly culture-based. Another truth: No matter where in the world you're working, if you're not informed and adaptable, they may think you're clueless too. #TheCultureMap #ErinMeyer #CrossCulturalCommunication #CulturalFluency #GlobalTeams #BusinessAcrossBorders #EQatWork #WorkAcrossCultures

“A brilliant VP offended a Japanese client without realizing it.” The meeting room in Tokyo was a masterpiece of minimalism—soft tatami mats, the faint scent of green tea, walls so silent you could hear the gentle hum of the air conditioner. The Vice President, sharp suit, confident smile, walked in ready to impress. His presentation was flawless, numbers airtight, strategy compelling. But then came the smallest of gestures—the moment that shifted everything. He pulled out his business card… and handed it to the Japanese client with one hand. The client froze. His lips curved into a polite smile, but his eyes flickered. He accepted the card quickly, almost stiffly. A silence, subtle but heavy, filled the room. The VP thought nothing of it. But what he didn’t know was this: in Japanese culture, a business card isn’t just paper. It’s an extension of the person. Offering it casually, with one hand, is seen as careless—even disrespectful. By the end of the meeting, the energy had shifted. The strategy was strong, but the connection was fractured. Later, over coffee, the VP turned to me and said quietly: “I don’t get it. The meeting started well… why did it feel like I lost them halfway?” That was his vulnerability—brilliance in business, but blind spots in culture. So, I stepped in. I trained him and his leadership team on cross-cultural etiquette—the invisible codes that make or break global deals. • In Japan: exchange business cards with both hands, take a moment to read the card, and treat it with respect. • In the Middle East: never use your left hand for greetings. • In Europe: being two minutes late might be forgiven in Paris, but never in Zurich. These aren’t trivial details. They are currencies of respect. The next time he met the client, he bowed slightly, held the business card with both hands, and said: “It’s an honor to work with you.” The client’s smile was different this time—warm, genuine, approving. The deal, once slipping away, was back on track. 🌟 Lesson: In a global world, etiquette is not optional—it’s currency. You can have the best strategy, the sharpest numbers, the brightest slides—but if you don’t understand the human and cultural nuances, you’ll lose the room before you know it. Great leaders don’t just speak the language of business. They speak the language of respect. #CrossCulturalCommunication #ExecutivePresence #SoftSkills #GlobalLeadership #Fortune500 #CulturalIntelligence #Boardroom #BusinessEtiquette #LeadershipDevelopment #Respect

A bold move to outsmart fraudsters. Australia's new Scams Prevention Framework Bill is set to redefine consumer protection. The Australian Parliament today (13 Feb 2025) passed The Scams Prevention Framework Bill 2025. It establishes a comprehensive legislative framework to safeguard Australian consumers and small business operators against scams. This modernises and amends existing laws, such as the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, to ensure that designated sectors (including banking, insurance, and communications) implement robust measures to prevent, detect, report, disrupt, and respond to scams. Key points include: - The introduction of stringent governance requirements, obliging regulated entities to develop, document, and annually certify policies, procedures, metrics, and targets specifically for scam prevention and response. - A multifaceted approach that covers every stage of a scam – from early detection of actionable intelligence to the timely disruption of fraudulent activities – with clearly defined civil penalty provisions for non‐compliance. - Designation of regulated sectors and to establishing sector‐specific codes (SPF codes) that set tailored standards for service providers, ensuring that consumer protection measures are fit for purpose. - Extended protection for natural persons and small business operators both within Australia and, in some cases, overseas, ensuring comprehensive coverage regardless of geographical location. - Provisions for safe harbour, which shield organisations from liability when taking proportionate, good-faith actions to disrupt suspected scams, provided they act promptly and in line with the legislative guidelines. Thoughts? How will your organisation update its risk management to meet new obligations and protect consumers against evolving scams? ____ 📥 Save for later ✍️ Add your comments below ♻️ Reshare if this was helpful

When I took on my role as Chief Corporate Citizenship Officer at PMI, I set a handful of parameters for myself and my team: 1. Don’t fall into the trap of arm’s-length checkbook philanthropy: One-off cash infusions can help nonprofits in the immediate term, but they don’t get at the issue of sustainable growth. 2. Focus, focus, focus: Diffusion is the enemy of progress. There are an endless number of worthy causes and charitable organizations, but our greatest impact will come from identifying a small number of causes that are intrinsically tied to our values and vision and making those causes priorities. (In our case, this is U.S. military veterans, women’s equity and empowerment, and hyperlocal activations.) 3. Empower—and learn from—those already in the trenches: We’re not going to dictate what happens at the community level. We’re here to listen and learn and find ways to support and expand the good works already underway. 4. Give a “hand up” instead of a handout: Band-Aid solutions may make us feel good in the short term, but they don’t get to the root problem. The cash infusions we give our community-based partners are meaningful, but their value grows exponentially when paired with our business expertise and insights. 5. Offer employees a chance to contribute to change: We polled PMI’s U.S. workforce earlier this year about our plans to support military veterans. An astonishing 97 percent of employees raised their hands to get involved. There’s a hunger out there for making a positive difference in local communities and the broader world. Find ways to connect your people to the issues that matter most to them. It turns out that this is the way the next generation of philanthropists is thinking about their impact as well. A recent article (I’ll share the link in comments) shares interesting insights into how our younger generations—millennials and Gen Z—are embracing a more comprehensive approach to philanthropy focused on measurable impact and deeper connections. They’re also showing a greater tolerance for the “long game,” willing to take risks in the short term to lay the groundwork for greater gains down the road. As the next generation of philanthropists takes the reins and starts investing more than money in the causes they care about, let’s make sure our organizations are prepared to do the same.

ESG Criteria Framework 🌍 Using ESG as a lens for decision making helps companies structure how sustainability considerations are integrated into strategy and operations. It connects environmental, social, and governance priorities with the way risks and opportunities are managed. The Environmental dimension focuses on how organizations manage their interaction with natural systems. It looks at efficiency, emissions reduction, and minimizing ecological impacts across the value chain. Metrics such as greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy share, water recycling rates, waste diversion, and biodiversity indicators provide measurable insights into environmental performance. Decision makers can ask whether targets are aligned with science based approaches, whether energy sourcing is low carbon, and whether biodiversity impacts are assessed and managed. These questions link sustainability to business planning. Actions such as upgrading facilities for energy efficiency, adopting circular product design, and collaborating on ecosystem restoration make environmental priorities operational. The Social dimension evaluates how companies manage relationships with employees, customers, suppliers, and communities. It emphasizes fairness, safety, inclusion, and wider societal contribution. Metrics including diversity ratios, pay equity, training hours, safety records, and customer trust scores give visibility into how people are impacted by corporate activity. Questions include whether hiring and promotion practices are equitable, whether safety systems are effective, and how the company contributes to community well being. These guide decisions with a social perspective. Actions range from structured DEI initiatives and expanded safety programs to leadership training and measurable community investment plans. The Governance dimension covers the structures and practices that ensure accountability, transparency, and ethical decision making. It provides the foundation for integrating sustainability into oversight and risk management. Metrics such as board diversity, ESG risk integration, disclosure assurance, and shareholder participation help assess governance alignment with long term objectives. Actions include embedding ESG oversight at board level, conducting independent ethics audits, integrating ESG into enterprise risk management, and strengthening shareholder engagement. By combining metrics, guiding questions, and concrete actions, this framework illustrates how companies can apply ESG as a decision making tool to advance sustainability in a structured and practical way. #sustainability #business #sustainable #esg

The recent story of the Newell family returning Native American artifacts to the descendants of Chief Spotted Tail after five generations highlights a growing trend in cultural repatriation. This act of reconciliation offers valuable insights for professionals across industries: 1. Ethical Leadership: The decision to return family heirlooms demonstrates how ethical considerations can drive meaningful change, even in personal matters. 2. Cross-Cultural Understanding: The story emphasizes the importance of recognizing and respecting cultural heritage, a crucial skill in our globalized business world. 3. Generational Shifts: Younger generations are increasingly aware of historical injustices and are taking action to address them, reflecting changing societal values. 4. Institutional Responsibility: Museums and organizations are reassessing their roles in preserving and displaying cultural artifacts, prompting discussions about transparency and ethical practices. 5. Legal and Ethical Complexities: The repatriation process involves navigating complex legal and ethical landscapes, offering lessons in problem-solving and diplomacy. As professionals, how can we apply these principles of cultural sensitivity and ethical decision-making in our fields? Let's discuss the potential impact of building trust and fostering international cooperation in business. #CulturalHeritage #EthicalLeadership #GlobalBusiness #Sustainability #ChangeManagement https://lnkd.in/dsCNQ8Fz

On Monday European Commission adopted the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) for use by all companies subject to the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). This marks another step forward in the transition to a sustainable EU economy. Mairead McGuinness, Commissioner for Financial Services, Financial Stability and Capital Markets Union, said: “The standards we have adopted today are ambitious and are an important tool underpinning the EU’s sustainable finance agenda. They strike the right balance between limiting the burden on reporting companies while at the same time enabling companies to show the efforts they are making to meet the #greendeal agenda, and accordingly have access to #sustainable finance.” The standards cover the full range of environmental, social, and governance issues, including #climatechange, #biodiversity and #humanrights. They provide information for investors to understand the sustainability impact of the companies in which they invest. They also take account of discussions with the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) in order to ensure a very high degree of interoperability between EU and global standards and to prevent unnecessary double reporting by companies.

✅ 𝗘𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗰 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗲 & 𝗖𝗼𝗿𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗔𝗰𝘁: 𝗟𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗨𝗽𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗡𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗞𝗻𝗼𝘄 The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act (ECCTA) 2023 continues to reshape the UK’s corporate landscape. The Department for Business & Trade has recently released its second progress report on rolling out Parts 1–3 of the Act. 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗸𝗲𝘆 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀: 🔹 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗛𝗼𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗣𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗱 Since the Act became law in October 2023, over 20 new statutory instruments have been passed, giving Companies House broader powers. And enforcement is already underway, for example, tackling the use of PO boxes as registered offices and increasing financial penalties for serious non-compliance, such as persistent late filing of confirmation statements. 🔹 𝗜𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗩𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 Identity checks will soon become mandatory for directors, PSCs (persons with significant control), and anyone filing documents at Companies House. The timeline looks like this: • By Autumn 2025: ID verification required for new directors, PSCs, and those incorporating companies. A 12-month window will open for existing directors and PSCs to verify as part of their annual confirmation statements. • By Spring 2026: All filers at Companies House must complete ID checks, and agents acting on behalf of others must be registered as Authorised Corporate Service Providers (ACSPs). • By end of 2026: Compliance checks on ID verification will begin. Greater transparency rules for limited partnerships should also come into force. Any changes to these dates will be reflected in Companies House’s ECCTA Transition Plan. 🔹 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗙𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗔𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗱 New rules for filing annual accounts will come into effect on 1 April 2027: • All accounts must be filed using commercial software; paper and web filing options will be phased out. • Small companies will no longer be able to file abridged accounts. Instead, they’ll need to submit a profit and loss account and directors’ report. • Small companies claiming audit exemptions must confirm eligibility via a formal statement. • Micro-entities must file a profit and loss account, though the directors’ report remains optional. Interestingly, there’s growing speculation that ministers might rethink some of these filing reforms, given concerns about increased regulatory burdens clashing with the Government’s broader deregulatory agenda. See FT article in the comments 📌 𝗧𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗮𝘄𝗮𝘆: 𝘉𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘧𝘵𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘷𝘰𝘪𝘥 𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘵-𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘳𝘶𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. If your company needs support with these changes, please message me or leave a comment. Photo by Anh Tuan To on Unsplash

Link Between Local Culture and Corporate Governance Corporate governance is often viewed through a standardized lens of best practices, but the local culture plays a critical role in shaping how these practices are implemented. A prime example of this is Japan’s approach to corporate governance, where the blend of traditional business culture and modern governance reforms offers key insights. Case Study: Japan’s Corporate Governance Code Reform In Japan, corporate governance has historically been influenced by the country’s cultural emphasis on consensus, loyalty, and long-term relationships. This led to a system where boards were often comprised of insiders, and decision-making was driven by harmony rather than challenging the status quo. However, in 2015, Japan introduced its Corporate Governance Code to promote more transparency, independent oversight, and shareholder rights. These reforms were designed to align Japanese companies with global standards while respecting the cultural nuances of Japanese business practices. Key Changes: Introduction of Independent Directors: Companies were encouraged to appoint independent directors to bring fresh perspectives and foster accountability. However, the challenge was integrating these directors into a culture that values consensus and group decision-making. Shareholder Empowerment: Japanese firms are now required to disclose more information and engage with shareholders more proactively. This shift helped balance the traditional loyalty to internal stakeholders with the need for external oversight. The Cultural Balance What makes Japan’s case unique is the blend of global corporate governance principles with local cultural values. For example, while independent directors were introduced, many companies still place high importance on relationships and long-term commitments. The reforms pushed for transparency and accountability without completely dismantling the trust-based, collective decision-making approach that defines Japanese corporate culture. Closing Thoughts The intersection of local culture and corporate governance is a crucial consideration for any organization operating in or expanding into foreign markets. Leaders must understand how cultural values influence governance practices and adapt accordingly. Japan’s experience shows that governance reforms can succeed when they are tailored to fit local business customs, rather than forcing a one-size-fits-all model. #CorporateGovernance #GlobalBusiness #Leadership #CultureAndGovernance #JapanCaseStudy #Sustainability Image Source : Pixabay