The Better Boards Podcast Series

Send us a text The ESG narrative has become familiar but does not yet confront the challenges of a world where interest in sustainability is waning in some regions, political and economic divides are widening, and technology is reshaping the rules of the game. How can boards maintain momentum on climate and social issues when governments are focused on regulation and public interest is fractured? In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses whether corporate governance can survive sustainability with Frederik Otto, Director of Advisory and Head of Europe at global consulting and standards firm AccountAbility. Previously, he founded and led The Sustainability Board, a globally recognised think tank for sustainable leadership and corporate governance. “The purpose of the company is not just to provide profits to shareholders, but to serve all of their stakeholders.” Frederik starts by explaining that sustainability is intricately tied to governance through stakeholder management and engagement. He recalls how the topic gained traction from 2017 to 2019, with influential figures such as Larry Fink of BlackRock and the US Business Roundtable emphasising that a company’s purpose extends beyond delivering profits to shareholders. That narrative led to a push for better oversight of sustainability issues. “The last five years have been quite the journey for sustainability.” Frederik acknowledges that there is a sense of ideological fatigue around terms such as ESG and sustainability, and these words may even have become divisive, but the underlying issues remain critical. He stresses that a board’s fiduciary duty includes ensuring sustainability matters are given due consideration. “We were seeing all these shiny sustainability reports and board disclosures… …that were very explicit in how the corporation is providing value to all sorts of stakeholders.” Frederik explains how the drivers of sustainability have shifted. While employee activism and stakeholder pressure were dominant five years ago, economic challenges such as inflation and layoffs have reduced their influence. Particularly in Europe, regulators have stepped in to fill this gap with legislation. Frederik highlights three key sustainability trends emerging for the future: “Do more scenario planning, do it more provocatively, and look as far as possible.” Frederik stresses that boards must prioritise long-term sustainability goals alongside immediate operational challenges. He identifies three core responsibilities for boards: routine governance, crisis management, and future planning. He emphasises that robust scenario planning is vital for proactive governance, urging boards to explore even unlikely but plausible future scenarios. The three top takeaways for effective boards from our conversation are: 1. Align the strategic, strategic intent between organisation management and the board, removing terminology 2. Remove the words sustainability and ESG and consider these as global issues, systemic risks, and opportunities. 3. Try to forecast better and spend more time on talking and thinking about the future.

Send us a text The board is responsible for appointing the CEO, and the relationship between the Chair and the CEO is crucial - but often not easy. So what matters when selecting a CEO, and how can we establish and develop a good relationship between the Chair and the CEO? In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses the crucial relationship between the Chair and the CEO with Sir David Norgrove, currently a Governor at the University of the Arts and Chair of the aBDRN Financial Fairness Trust. Sir David has held a number of chairing roles in leading public sector organisations. His early career was at the Treasury, at First National Bank of Chicago, and as Private Secretary to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. This was followed by Marks & Spencer from 1988 to 2004, including as a member of its Board. “It's important to be on the shop floor and to see what's going on.” Sir David relates that during his 16 years at M&S, he worked under three chairmen, all of whom held the dual role of Chair and Chief Executive - an approach less common today. While the third eventually separated these roles, the first two were dominant and highly authoritative figures. Their leadership styles had significant drawbacks, particularly a reluctance to encourage challenge or dissent. Too often, the board acted as a rubber stamp for their decisions. Despite these challenges, Sir David learned valuable lessons. “The dictatorial approach is subtle, but it's still there.” Sir David reflects on past experiences in the boardroom, acknowledging that standards were quite different decades ago. He recalls unacceptable behaviour, with a culture of bullying and a dictatorial approach that at times crossed the line. He believes this leadership style was deeply damaging to the business and carried that lesson with him into his later roles. “Having the right CEO is the number one, two and three most important things for a chair.” Sir David emphasises that selecting the right CEO is the most critical responsibility for a chair, ranking it as priorities one, two, and three. He believes that the wrong appointment can strain the chair/CEO relationship and lead to organisational unhappiness and failure to meet objectives. While acknowledging the difficulty of defining the perfect CEO, he recognises the need for trade-offs. He focuses on core qualities. A CEO must be direct, transparent and willing to speak openly about issues. “All you can do is trust your instinct - and that can be wrong.” Sir David acknowledges the inherent challenges of assessing candidates, especially in determining whether they meet the criteria and trust can be established. However, he believes no process can guarantee absolute certainty, as ultimately, decisions rely on instinct, which is not infallible. “The person you're talking to is the Chief Executive. He's not your underling.” Sir David believes building and maintaining a strong relationship with a CEO requires adapting to the individual's character. He emphasises the importance of regular, consistent communication, which often takes the form of a weekly meeting or phone call to discuss what’s happening in the business, address mutual concerns, and ensure an open line of dialogue. The two top takeaways for effective boards from our conversation are: 1. Have the right CEO. If the CEO isn't right, then the CEO should go. 2. Ask questions. Get out and about, go and visit places and sit down with people, get them to tell you what they're doing. There's no substitute for it.

Send us a text Amid global uncertainty, are boardrooms needlessly complex? Is It possible to thrive in the boardroom by keeping things simple? In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Director of Better Boards www.better-boards.com, discusses being on the board with Sir John Tusa. Sir John has been known to the public as the main presenter of BBC2's Newsnight and the Managing Director of some of the most iconic media and cultural centres in the United Kingdom. “The things that really make a difference are what I call the simple ones” Sir John suggests that although being on a board involves significant challenges in an increasingly complex world, it is not necessarily complicated. He explains that the complicated aspects of board service involve fundamental duties: understanding the organisation’s legal basis, following regulatory expectations, and recognising responsibilities toward shareholders or stakeholders. These regulatory and procedural tasks are necessary, but are only part of the board’s work. Simple, straightforward actions and values can truly make a difference. They hold substantial value in shaping the organisation’s success and fulfilling the board’s deeper purpose. “The more generous you can be with your time, the better it is for the organisation, and the better it is for you as a board member” Regarding time, Sir John also points out that when he was first invited to join the board of the English National Opera around 25 years ago, the chair reassured him that annual board commitments would be minimal. Since then, expectations have evolved significantly, and today board roles can easily demand 30 to 40 days or more per year. “When I hear the word board pack, I almost want to reach for my bonfire” He describes a frustration he has with the common organisational tactic where executives overload non-executive directors with extensive paperwork. In some organisations, this may be deliberate, to overwhelm non-executive board members with so much information that it becomes virtually impossible for them to thoroughly review or question it. This tactic, he argues, is a way for executives to discourage meaningful input from non-execs by drowning them in details. To counteract this, he advocates a slim board pack approach. “If you don't know your fellow board members, you probably don't know the executive well enough either” Sir John emphasises the critical importance of knowing fellow board members and even the executive team well, viewing this familiarity as vital to effective board service. A disconnect among directors and executives stems largely from the overwhelming focus on paperwork and procedural accountability, which, in his view, can impede meaningful connections and decision-making. “There are no stupid questions, and there are no stupid opinions” Sir John offers direct advice to board members who feel overwhelmed by excessive paperwork and information overload and stresses the importance of voicing concerns and setting boundaries if the volume of information prevents them from making informed contributions. The three top takeaways from our conversation are: 1. You have the right to ask questions and to offer opinions about any subject before the board. 2. Identify concealment or evasion, and always remember that a hidden problem can lead to a much worse crisis later on. 3. You can't do your job if covered with paper and sometimes deliberate you're covered with paper and sometimes deliberate evasion, and you may have to say, "There’s no point in sitting on this board because I'm unable to do my job."

Send us a text Most Directors serve on boards in one or two countries. The argument often is that one Most Directors serve on boards in one or two countries. The argument often is that one has to understand the legal requirements and the cultural context. Is this the only way in our connected world? In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, reflects with Christof Kutscher about his experience serving on boards in 20 countries on five continents. Christof holds multiple key positions in the financial industry. He is Chair of the Board of Directors at Bergos Private Bank and a board member of Carmignac Gestion, Indeez, and Gnothis Holding SA. He was CEO and Chair of Climate Asset Management. Christof has also held leadership roles at prominent firms such as UBS Global Asset Management and AXA Investment Managers. “Well, I didn't start on five continents…” Christof’s board career began in Switzerland and expanded across multiple continents over time. While his experience of serving on boards in different countries and cultures has been intellectually stimulating, he emphasises that the real differences in board dynamics often stem from the type of company rather than geography. His extensive international experience has enabled him to navigate these complexities and add value to companies around the world. “I said, ‘No, I'm not looking for a job’” Christof explains how his global board career started with some ex officio roles. As a senior manager in a large global bank, his work naturally extended across many countries. Initially, he served on country boards in Europe, but as the bank expanded, he joined boards in Asia Pacific and joint ventures around the world. He says this was invaluable training, offering deep cultural insights and a firsthand understanding of how different countries approach board governance. This varied exposure shaped his ability to adapt and thrive in various cultural settings. “I typically don't steal the money, and I'm culturally adaptable” When asked how he initiated and developed his global network, Christof emphasises that it’s all about trust and delivering more than expected. He explains that board roles are heavily trust-driven, and having a solid reputation without any risky experiences in your background is key to gaining and maintaining that trust. While he continues to receive invitations to join boards from headhunters, he feels that his reputation for integrity and cultural adaptability often opens the door. “I love the deep dive to understand the company, the industry, the strategy” Christof applies strict criteria when evaluating board roles, often recognising whether a position will be a good fit early. He emphasises assessing whether the role aligns with his values before committing. Christof explains that he has never wanted to be a decoration rather than a real contributor. The three top takeaways from our conversation for effective directors and boards are: 1. Avoid boards with people with egos so high that the board cannot operate. Individuals may be influential, incredibly smart, and experienced, but they must ensure their ego does not get in their way to help the company. 2. Make sure that the board is doing what it's supposed to do. It's about strategy, setting, compensation of senior management, risk management and liabilities, so all the regulatory stuff. You can have the best director insurance on the planet, but you will run into trouble if you don't do that properly. 3. After you are on the board for six months or so, decide if you can really contribute to the board or whether to get out early rather than wasting your time but move quickly.

Send us a text In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses tech boards with Irene Arias Hofman, CEO of IDB Lab, the innovation and venture laboratory of the Inter-American Development Bank Group. “We do care a lot about the principles, the values, the incentives” Irene begins by outlining that when evaluating tech boards, especially in startups, investors focus on several key elements. Using her organisation’s portfolio as an example (which includes startups typically at Series A or B stages), she explains that they pay close attention to the governance of both the startups and the venture capital (VC) funds they often invest alongside. They believe that the governance of portfolio companies and VC funds is crucial, although the governance of each differs significantly. “They need to a bring in a whole set of other aspects…. that they didn't have to worry about when they were just a two people team” From an investor’s perspective, Irene describes how a good board in a startup balances technical expertise with broader strategic and corporate skills. As the company grows and becomes more institutionalised, the board needs to expand its skill set to include governance, organisational management, social skills and strategic foresight. “They have more control… or more choice than maybe they think in terms of who's on the board” Irene then outlines how successful boards differ from struggling ones in several key ways. First, they ensure the right fit of board members rather than simply accepting any investor who offers capital. She notes that startups often feel they have limited control over their board composition, especially when large investors demand board seats. However, successful startups are, in fact, deliberate about selecting board members who bring real value. “Only 6.2% of board seats in unicorn companies are held by women” Board diversity is also a distinguishing factor. Data shows that companies with women on their boards perform significantly better, yet Irene notes that women still hold only a small fraction of board seats in unicorn companies. “It's become trendy, and it can be good to say you are on the board of a high-growth tech startup” A good board member in the startup context needs to be highly available and committed. Irene points out that while it has become ‘trendy’ to be on the board of a high-growth tech company, the real value comes from being genuinely invested in the company’s success. “You really want to know: are you gonna build a sustainable business” When it comes to tracking a startup's progress, Irene relies on a few key KPIs that provide a solid understanding of the company’s health and sustainability - the burn rate, the lifetime value (LTV) of a customer, and the churn rate. The three top takeaways for effective Tech boards are: 1. As a startup, you may be able to pick your board members more than you think, so do not feel pressure to give up board seats to investors to get investment. It has to be a good match to build the right skill mix. 2. That skill mix will evolve rapidly, just as the startup does. You will have to pivot your strategy. For example, if you become very successful, then very quickly, you need to become much more sophisticated in how you are run. So be ready to evolve, including evolving the composition of your board. 3. Be mindful of bringing in board members who believe in your vision for the company and can contribute diverse views.

Send us a text Every country has its fair share of corporate failures. Afterwards, It is easy to point towards governance. Reflection and learning are essential. In this podcast, you hear from someone who has a critical governance role In Germany. You gain insights into the issues discussed and the perspectives of someone who hears daily from all players in the market - regulators, state officials, top managers, board members, the media and the general public. Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses current trends in German Corporate Governance with Dr. Cordula Heldt, Head of Corporate Governance and Company Law at the German Share Institute (Deutsches Aktieninstitut). She is also Head of the Secretariat to the Commission on the German Corporate Governance Code (Regierungskommission Deutscher Corporate Governance Kodex). “Every declaration that you have to do is actually about nudging boards to do the work” Cordula opens with Germany’s recent significant corporate failures, notably the Wirecard scandal, which led to new regulations concerning corporate governance. Following the Wirecard case, German lawmakers introduced stricter requirements for risk management, internal control systems, and auditor regulations. “Every declaration that you have to do is actually about nudging boards to do the work” However, despite the complaints about the administrative burden, Cordula believes the value of these declarations lies in their ability to nudge boards into taking their responsibilities seriously. By requiring formal declarations, boards are compelled to examine their risk management and internal control systems closely – and this scrutiny is not only limited to financial reporting but extends to the entire governance framework. The intent is to ensure that supervisory board members ask the right questions and engage more deeply with these systems. “As a board chair, you're looking for people that you can propose to the board and the general meeting that can fill the whole seat” One effective approach some companies adopt, which Cordula notes, is reporting on the different levels of expertise within the board. This means acknowledging that not every board member starts with the same level of knowledge, especially in specialised areas. She believes this trend toward acknowledging and communicating different expertise levels supports more effective board development and governance. “Of course, they think it's burdensome, but everybody knows the alternative is regulation” Cordula advises bringing directors and policymakers closer together to create better boards. She also understands that while directors generally support the code, they often find it burdensome, although they recognise that the more stringent regulation alternative could be worse. She explains that one approach that has been effective (at least in Germany) is the practice of direct engagement, as Clara Christina Streit, the new chair of the German Code Commission, has implemented. She started her tenure with a "listening tour." The three top takeaways from our conversation for effective boards are: 1. Familiarise yourself with the ongoing governance debates, focusing on principle-based and effective governance. This will help you better navigate and meet reporting expectations. 2. Be aware of the potential expectation gaps in corporate reporting. Understanding these gaps can help you align reporting practices with expectations of stakeholders and regulators. 3. Consider the board a cohesive team that must work together to ask the right questions and prevent governance failures.

Send us a text Recently, there has been a surge on social media stating that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are bad for business. Some of the world’s largest firms have also significantly reduced their investment in diversity and inclusion. But what does this mean for boards that do believe DEI are good for business? Should they change how they approach this agenda, and if so, how? In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses whether DEI is bad for business with Prof Grace Lordan from the London School of Economics, Founding Director of The Inclusion Initiative, economist, and labour market skills expert. “What boards need to think about is how inclusive are their teams at the micro level, so that when they aggregate, we get those productivity gains” Grace opens by considering an example – an imaginary scenario where DEI might negatively impact business. Imagine starting a new job and meeting your team for the first time, being different in some way – perhaps gender, ethnicity, or language. You have valuable knowledge and are excited to contribute, but you're repeatedly interrupted or ignored when you speak up. In this situation, you could respond in one of four ways: silence, dissent, quitting and conformity. These responses show how poor inclusion can make DEI detrimental to business. “The biggest thing we can do is say this board doesn't engage in consensus-based decision making” Grace notes that boards must consider what's happening in the room and any member’s desire to “fit in.” She attributes many big behavioural risk scandals to groupthink at the team level and board members who are aware of a potential issue but fail to speak up because they don't want to upset the apple cart. “These good habits, unfortunately, haven't necessarily infiltrated boards yet” Behavioural changes are vital to advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in organisations, not only at the board level. Grace outlines how to promote inclusive behaviours, starting with establishing clear rules for meeting hygiene. These guidelines will ensure everyone has an opportunity to speak. “If you invest in an inclusive culture, you should see gains in the fundamentals. You definitely won't see losses” Grace’s research explores the broader implications of inclusion on fundamental business metrics such as growth, innovation, patent filings, stock returns, return on equity, and return on assets. She established a clear, positive relationship between inclusion and long-term business outcomes. Diversity alone showed gains only after reaching critical mass. However, when inclusion is paired with diversity, the need for a high critical mass diminishes. “Millions and millions of pounds are wasted each year on diversity equity and inclusion initiatives” Grace notes that to realise productivity gains, board members must prioritise fostering a culture of inclusion, where diversity is genuinely valued and diverse talents are not pressured into conformity. The three top takeaways for effective boards from our conversation are: Integrate inclusion with diversity: Ensure that diversity and inclusion strategies are embedded within the business, not confined to HR or external consultants.Audit and enhance boardroom voice: Boards must pay attention to who has a voice in discussions, ensuring that there is sufficient cognitive diversity. Treat DEI as a long-term investment, particularly valuable for companies focused on growth and innovation. Prioritise creating a culture where team members feel comfortable challenging each other, driving real business gains.

Send us a text Corporate Governance Codes worldwide state that an internal board evaluation shall be conducted in years one and two after a fully facilitated external evaluation. It is one of those tasks on a Company Secretariat's calendar that has to be done. But how? In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses mastering internal board evaluation with Chloe Barry. Chloe is Group Company Secretary at Kingfisher, an FTSE100 organisation. “I'm fortunate to have moved from one engaged chair to another” Chloe starts by explaining her board evaluation process, with the next one planned for the autumn, which will be conducted internally. She outlined how this is notable for two reasons: it is the first led by the new board chair. Chloe is excited to work with them on what she is certain is a robust process. Secondly, they will use most of last year's question set, allowing them to measure progress. “We want the directors to leave the process feeling assured that they have identified the appropriate actions” Chloe admits that board evaluations can be seen as unnecessary and time-consuming. However, her experience with engaged boards and directors shows that they often appreciate the outcome. Despite the time it takes, directors recognise that meaningful participation enhances the quality of subsequent reporting and discussions, and by engaging honestly and sharing views on potential obstacles, board effectiveness can significantly improve. In her opinion, a good evaluation process is measured by the practical actions it identifies for improvement. “Perhaps counterintuitively, my starting point is always to look back and reflect on the previous few years' reviews” To prepare for an internal evaluation, Chloe explains that she starts by reflecting on past reviews, considering the format, tone, actions set in the previous years, and feedback from directors. This helps her decide on the type of review to propose, whether internal or external and if it aligns with their three-year cycle. If changing the mechanism or provider, she will always create a shortlist, benchmark with peers, and possibly conduct a full tender. She explains that while board evaluations, particularly internal ones, can take almost any form – verbal, paper or online - the most important thing is to ensure that you are evolving and improving in all respects. “You need to be honest with your chair” Chloe emphasises that honesty with your chair about past successes and areas for improvement is essential when making proposals. She relates that she introduced Better Boards for their interim evaluation last year to focus on peer reviews. Considerations included various factors such as the new platform, question set, reporting format, timetable, and communication plan. The most positive feedback from last year's review was about the display of the results and the insightful peer review section. The three top takeaways from our conversation are: 1. Learn from past evaluations by reviewing agreed actions, feedback, and the process. Show directors you are improving the experience to maintain their engagement. 2. Inform and engage individual directors early about the process and any new provider, and ensure they complete the evaluation. 3. Test the survey, whether homegrown or external and ask others to do the same. Check for clarity, insightfulness, and practical usability. A thoughtful process leads to more engaged directors and valuable insights.

Send us a text Many Directors have positive intentions, want to leverage their experiences, support executives, and discuss the big picture in the boardroom. But many quickly become disillusioned, stuck in detail, ticking off boxes and agenda items rather than supporting executives and helping the organisation make a real mark. In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards www.better-boards.com, talks with Sir John Tusa. He is known as the main past presenter of BBC2's Newsnight programme. He was Managing Director of some of the most iconic media and cultural centres in the United Kingdom, such as the BBC World Service and the City of London's Barbican Arts Centre and chaired the boards of the European Union Youth Orchestra, University of the Arts London and Wigmore Hall. “We are here to help to make the organisation a better, more creative place" Sir John began by observing that a board that is too formal and strictly adheres to rules can stifle creativity. While it is important to follow regulations, boards that only focus on minutes and compliance miss the mark. “The practice of constant accountability prevents people from having ideas” Sir John explains that it presents a missed opportunity if a board does not make time for innovation. To avoid this, boards should ask if they focus more on responsibility or accountability. He believes accountability often means constantly proving compliance to external parties, while responsibility involves making decisions and owning the outcomes, good or bad. Boards should prioritise responsibility, embrace new ideas, and be willing to accept the consequences of their decisions. “Give yourself permission on a board not to be tied down by rule” Sir John wishes boardrooms would handle routine business swiftly and then dedicate the rest/bulk of the time to discussing big ideas. These discussions do not always need conclusions but require an open-minded approach, and the chair and chief executive must foster this creative environment. Board members are not there just for their specific skills; they are there as whole individuals. “It's vital that boards spend time together” Spending time together outside formal meetings, as Sir John experienced on an American board, can significantly improve board dynamics because boards need to be enjoyable spaces. So, as chair, focus on creating an open, fun, and collaborative environment while ensuring that the board members feel valued and heard. This will foster an atmosphere where innovative ideas can thrive. “You won't do it just by being stuck in the mud and saying, ‘We're observing the rules’” Sir John concludes by pointing out that as an individual non-executive director or trustee, you can influence and contribute to creating a vibrant board atmosphere, even if the chair is not taking the lead. He suggests that boards thrive when members feel valued, heard, and motivated to contribute their best. The three top takeaways for effective boards from our conversation are: 1. Remember that a board is there to help create and sustain a vision. The vision comes from the chief executive, but the board can contribute to that and needs to be forward-looking. 2. Consider whether everybody contributes equally and is allowed to contribute. 3. Be very careful how you deal with objectives. People think something has been done just because they've achieved the objective, but this might not mean value is added.

Send us a text As board members gain awareness of the possibilities and power of AI and analytics, an almost unlimited array of potential projects, questions, or scenarios where analytics could improve outcomes arises. The challenge is how to prioritise the various opportunities. In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses using AI and advanced analytics to deliver value in the boardroom with Professor Bernardo Almada-Lobo, co-author of The Analytics Sandwich: Bringing People and Artificial Intelligence Together to Unlock Business Value. “If you really want advanced analytics and AI to deliver game-changing value, the secret sauce is to approach it with short, laser-focused projects” Bernardo explains that organisations often take two ineffective approaches to AI and analytics, leading to disappointing outcomes. They either embark on a massive analytics project, or different teams initiate numerous mini-projects driven by personal curiosity or bias. He underscores the need for a strategic, business-led approach, focusing on short, laser-focused, collectively agreed-upon projects that are directly tied to strategy. “This technology has the potential to affect every industry and every function of a company” Bernardo believes that boards must understand the opportunities and disruptions generative AI, and advanced analytics present. This awareness helps avoid two common pitfalls. The first is that boards may demand AI projects using a push analytics approach without organisational alignment, focusing on available data rather than the problems. Second, management teams may move faster on opportunities than their boards are prepared for. “By integrating AI and advanced analytics, boards can enhance their effectiveness, make more informed decisions, and drive organisational success” Bernardo explains that integrating AI and advanced analytics can significantly enhance the effectiveness and inform decision-making of any board when considering its responsibilities. “Any director who fails to integrate AI into their work and decision-making process in the near future will not be allowed to serve on the board” Bernardo warns that boards need to address know-how gaps to effectively apply AI. Board members should possess basic AI literacy, which will become a standard requirement. “Analytics is not a substitute for people. It's a support, a way that we have to harness their knowledge and combine that knowledge with state-of-the-art AI and machine capability to augment, instead of replacing” Bernardo gives a list of tips for the C-Suite on AI Integration. 1. Walk the Talk. 2. Align AI and Advanced Analytics with Business Objectives and Culture. 3. Combine People and Analytics. The three top takeaways for effective boards from our conversation are: 1. Any director who fails to integrate AI into their work and decision-making process in the near future will not be allowed to serve on the board. Minimum literacy on AI will be mandatory. 2. AI will not entirely replace human decision-makers in complex decisions. Instead, it will complement human experience and judgement. 3. AI and advanced analytics only deliver value when problem-centric. If you want to do pull analytics, you need high C-suite maturity and sophistication.

Send us a text Climate change is not just a distant threat, but an urgent and immediate reality that is forcing fundamental change for organisations, often transforming their business models. The role of governance in enabling and guiding the urgent transition to the net zero economy has never been more crucial. In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards) discusses how Chairs can structure their committees, why climate change is central to business resilience and growth, and the role of the board with Vicky Moffatt. Vicky is CEO of Chapter Zero, the Director’s Climate Forum, a global membership organisation for Non-Executive Directors and Chairs. "Every director needs to understand that over the longer term, there are only two scenarios for the transition and our global economies” Vicky sees boards at every stage of the climate journey. Her work is about educating members to be effective climate leaders from the boardroom. To her, climate is not just a governance issue but a call to action that should be addressed at every level of the organisational structure. Segregating climate issues into an ESG committee is an ineffective approach. Instead, it is the directors' responsibility to take the lead in designing and executing the clean energy transition, thereby making a significant impact on the future of our planet. “I think the longer-term nature of the net zero transition makes it fall in perfect alignment with the very role of the board itself” To Vicky, the corporate governance code promotes the long-term, sustainable success of the company, generates value for shareholders, and contributes to wider society. Leaning on that definition makes board work and net zero perfect bedfellows. So, it's not about the individual director at all; it's about shifting the very culture of the boardroom itself. “The further you go, the more you realise climate and sustainability are issues for every board committee and indeed for the whole board” ESG committees can be hugely important in driving change around business models and strategies, but the issues of climate and sustainability impact so much that the whole board needs to be involved. “There is a sense that this work is too difficult” Vicky points out that when it comes to climate and climate transition, fundamental, systemic change is needed. It can feel overwhelming and intimidating, and there’s a lot of unfamiliar territory. So, everyone needs to be comfortable with being in a mode and mindset of learning rather than giving in to the overwhelming aspects. “Great work is happening out there” Vicky shares some concrete examples of great work in the podcast episode. “The chair is crucial. But in some of the more progressive boards that I've seen, the chair is sort of like the goat herder, leading from behind” Vicky feels that when it comes to climate, it really is conventional change work, even though the Net Zero agenda is the most extraordinary change programme ever written. With all excellent change work, it is about having a powerful guiding coalition with a clear vision. Chairs lead this, sponsor this, and enable this, but the best chairs create the space for their teams to carry the work forward. The three top takeaways for effective boards are: 1. There are only two scenarios – invest in the clean economy or experience runaway climate change. 2. A good transition plan is linked to good governance and must be led by the board. 3. Climate change is an issue for the FULL board.

Send us a text Managing an ever-growing agenda, Company Secretaries today face a plethora of issues that can pull their focus in countless directions. It's truly challenging to work effectively with the board and keep on top of the ever-changing economic, technological, and regulatory landscape. So, how can Company Secretaries maintain clarity and focus amidst their expanding responsibilities? In this podcast, Dr. Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses mastering the company secretariat with Jason Wright, Society Secretary at Nationwide. “If you do the small things perfectly, you'll be trusted to do the big things” Jason, a self-proclaimed perfectionist, believes in the power of attention to detail. He likes to have plenty of reassurance that anything he or his team is responsible for will be done and delivered as expected. To prevent surprises, especially around board meeting days, annual events, and the annual reporting, he carefully monitors moving parts and what’s going on with various projects, checking and re-checking. This meticulous approach helps him feel on top of things, and crosschecking to ensure he’s prepared helps build trust in his position. Jason believes getting the small stuff right wins trust for involvement in bigger tasks. “You have to give the impression of being the calm, serene swan on the river paddling upstream. But, below the surface, your legs are going like crazy, just to stay still sometimes" The sheer volume of materials and regulations that board secretaries manage is incredible and growing more extensive and complex. Jason likes to look ahead to the next year as he plans to help manage agendas for each board session and event. “It's a lot, a lot of preparation” Jason is very keen for his team to sit down with the agenda for each board cycle. They look for items appearing in multiple committees or multiple meeting plans to remove duplication and place things in the most effective spot for resolution. He also looks at the structure of the agenda. His current Chair wants each board meeting to have a strategic, operational, and socially minded agenda item, which gives Jason a structure and framework to work around as he builds agendas. “You need to understand the Directors, to help the Chairman help them bring the best of themselves to the meetings” To help his board work effectively, he connects with each Director, checking on their needs, seeking feedback, and listening before and after each board cycle. This creates a positive relationship and gives him a better sense of what each Director likes, dislikes, prefers and needs for the meetings. In meetings, Jason sits next to his Chair, helping flex the agenda as it flows to allow for extended discussions, faster resolutions, or other day-of changes. He keeps team members just outside the meeting to help manage board guests. “What you have to do, first of all, is prove to them that you've got something to add” Jason has worked to achieve his relationships and influence by showing that he could make a positive difference in the board's effectiveness and accomplishments. He actively looks for places where he can anticipate a need or remove a burdensome task for a Director or his Chair. The three top takeaways for effective boards are: 1. It's essential that you enjoy the role. It's a privilege to be at the table where the big calls get made, so you need to enjoy it. 2. You need to know your place. You're there to serve and support the board. Focus on that with laser vision. 3. Nail the smaller details, and you'll be invited to the big stuff.

Send us a text Managing an ever-growing agenda, boards today face a plethora of issues that can pull their focus in countless directions. How can boards maintain clarity and focus amidst their expanding scope of responsibilities, especially when it comes to the critical area of sustainability? In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner, discusses this issue with Andrew Hobbs from EY’s Center for Board Matters. Andrew is also EMEIA Public Policy leader and Chair of the Corporate Governance Working Group of the European Contact Group, Vice-Chair of the Corporate Governance Policy Group of Accountancy Europe, and the author of the annual EY EMEIA Board Priorities report. “I can confidently say GenAI is redefining business efficiencies and innovation” Andrew feels boards need to infuse their organisations with the right tech skills and foster a culture that's eager to leverage AI's full potential. Turning AI chatter into meaningful outcomes is challenging. Ensuring GenAI tools are applied within the right contexts and properly integrated with existing systems is key to adding actual value. “Boards have been spending more time on workforce-related topics for the last couple of years than they have in a long time, and they don't expect that to change anytime soon" Andrew hears fresh urgency about human capital, skill gaps, and the employee value proposition in his conversations with boards. The present situation with AI, DEI, and the global economic climate means boards are under renewed pressure to provide governance and guidance. Andrew stresses that boards must be proactive in facing the skills shortage while still emphasising DEI. “The ability to predict the future is not as good as it used to be, or at least that's the perception" While boards are used to managing risks for their organisations, Andrew feels there is more to manage – and more in flux – than in the recent past. As a result, he recommends boards lean more heavily on scenario planning and increase their monitoring of disparate world events. In this way, boards can help chart a strategic and flexible course. “Make sure you don't have all your eggs in one basket" To Andrew, it’s about boards making sure their companies have the agility and resilience to withstand economic or geopolitical shocks. He feels boards should elevate supply chain strategy to reinforce agility and resilience by embracing technology—such as AI and automation—that refines supply chain performance and drives cost efficiency. “The problem some companies have is a lack of confidence in the likely return on investment of allocating capital towards sustainable sources" Transitioning to a low-carbon economy is non-negotiable, with significant net-zero commitments from nations and corporations. Despite the inclination to prioritise short-term earnings, boards must confidently champion sustainability as a value-creating strategy, not a cost centre. The three top takeaways for effective boards are: 1. Boards need to recognise the power of generative AI in driving innovation and improving efficiencies within their organisations and establish robust governance around its use. 2. Human capital, especially concerning DEI, is a critical strategic priority as technological advancements reshape the workforce. 3. Board members must act as catalysts for embedding long-term sustainability into their company's DNA.

Send us a text Diversity and inclusion are not evenly distributed throughout an organisation, and the view at the board level may not correspond with reality further down. This creates missed opportunities and prevents companies from unlocking the true potential of their talent and their organisations. Often, firms can increase productivity by doing more to be truly inclusive. In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Director of Better Boards, discusses increasing productivity through inclusion with Belton Flournoy, Managing Director of the Technology Consulting practice at Protiviti. "When I was young, I looked up and didn't see many people like me” Belton is passionate about inclusion for two reasons. First, he feels that when you don’t see anyone like yourself, you fear society won’t allow you in certain circles. Second, he continues to see people limiting which parts of their identity they show or hide, and this holds people back from expressing their true potential. “We don't just need to focus on diversity initiatives and how they make people feel. We need to link them to the increased productivity” Belton sees an incredible opportunity to translate the existing dialogues about diversity into more meaningful conversations linked to productivity outcomes and business results. “If you haven't driven the true inclusion values through that middle layer, it won't permeate your organisation, and you might think your organisation is much more inclusion-oriented than it really is…” Many boards have done serious work on inclusion, building it into the mission, governance, and operations. Yet when you drop into the middle management layer, there’s a sharp drop-off in belief, behaviour, and execution. “The goal is to create research that helps organisations drive inclusion through evidence-based research” Belton sees many organisations dealing with inclusion and diversity by conducting surveys and reporting their interpretation of the survey results. This approach lacks rigour. This is part of why he devotes so much time to research partnerships, to help create strictly measured and robust studies that can drive change with hard evidence about what’s happening and what works. “What you need to do is realise your voice is valid from day one” Belton rejects a fixed mindset and focuses on cultivating a growth mindset. Secondly, he cultivates an internal locus of control. Rather than assigning control of his life to others or believing that an externally controlled system is responsible for his life outcomes, he frames situations in terms of what he can control and take action on. The three top takeaways from our conversation for effective boards are: 1. Create a personal board. As a senior leader, it is hard to get good feedback. So, identify three to six people to talk to about your career in a professional context between one and four times a year. This will transform how you get feedback on challenging issues and help you have a priceless sounding board. 2. Realise the voice in your head is just a voice. You don’t have to listen to it. You can ignore or challenge it, which is especially useful for overcoming negative internal narratives. 3. Contribute to the productivity research of the future. Complete the ongoing survey on generational productivity from the London School of Economics and Protiviti. You can complete it here: https://www.protiviti.com/us-en/survey/lse-generations-survey

Send us a text Boards are complex structures, and it can be overwhelming for a first-time CEO to navigate them successfully. In this episode, we dive into the experiences of a first-time CEO, discussing the challenges she encountered and the strategies she used to handle the intricacies of board dynamics. In this episode, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, speaks with Daphne Mavroudi-Chocholi about her experience working on a board for the first time. Daphne, the Managing Director of RNIB Enterprises, brings a wealth of experience to the table but is, for the first time, a CEO. “What has surprised me the most, coming from the start-up world, is the governance” Daphne’s previous experience was in the start-up world. There is an established background in that world, and investors invest in the person and the idea. Now, she is the Managing Director operating within a highly regulated environment. She finds it constantly necessary to consider the right balance between governance, agility, nimbleness, and the ability to make decisions. “There are two places I really see value coming through. One is honesty, and the other is the idea of working with a board rather than sitting on a board” Daphne feels very lucky in her board relationships. She sees two areas where the board provides and creates particular value. First, life as a CEO can be a lonely existence. With your board, on the other hand, there’s the opportunity for honest, no-holds-barred conversations, and that space for transparency creates immense value. Secondly, by viewing the board as a partnership relationship, you gain the benefit of a critical friend. “The most challenging part of working with a board is striking that balance between managing the board, engaging with board members, ensuring alignment, and then actually doing the day-to-day job” To Daphne, one can be pulled into board work and move away from the business. Or, one can go so deeply into the business that one forgets to update the board. “What is the shining city on the hill we’re all marching toward?” Along with an ally in the Chair, Daphne finds storytelling extremely helpful. Storytelling helps create narrative fluency in the common culture and goals that drive the business. It can bring everyone together on the same page, build clarity on why things are being done, and drive everyone forward in the same direction. “In God we trust; all others bring data” A second thing immensely helpful to Daphne is an insistence on data. It builds credibility and helps move conversations from opinions and emotions to facts. “You might as well be honest and transparent at the beginning.” The final element for Daphne is transparency. She mentions it often because it matters on multiple levels. It builds trust. It helps us understand each other and the business. Above all, transparency helps extract maximum value from the board because when the members understand the story, data, and balance, they can understand how to bring their full range of skills and abilities forward, exponentially magnifying their impact. The three top takeaways for effective boards from our conversation are: 1. It is imperative to create narrative fluency with your board. Clearly describe the proverbial “Shining City on a Hill” as the whole organisation and the Board marching toward it. 2. Build diversity around the Board table, especially diversity of thought and working style, to challenge the status quo in a good way. 3. Truth will come out – it is best to be honest and transparent.

Send us a text When companies face increasing uncertainty, they need to lean in and embolden management to do what is right for the business's long-term health. Nowhere is this more pertinent than on the topic of sustainability. In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses how board members can help make a difference with Andrew Hobbs from EY's Center for Board Matters across Europe, the Middle East, India, and Africa (EMEIA). "There's a significant strategic data and information gap at the board level" One of the big discoveries from the recent EY survey of 200 C-suite or Non-Executive Directors was the data gap. Less than 25% of the total have been identified as leaders on the sustainability and governance front. Leaders were working from a much stronger set of metrics that helped them establish links between ESG decisions and other value-creating objectives. "Metrics are key for good decision-making" Effective decision-making on capital allocations for ESG and quantifying returns on investments is impossible without good metrics. Both leaders and followers reported challenges around getting good metrics that allowed them to capture the financial implications of their decisions. It's an area of opportunity. "It isn't about creating a board full of sustainability experts. It's about encouraging boards, or giving boards enough training to ask the right questions." Andrew says many boards are seeking members with sustainability skills, but that may not be the right solution to the problem. Instead, boards need training to ask better questions of themselves and management – questions that challenge short-term thinking, probe for a deeper analysis of financial impacts, and encompass more of a holistic, long-term view of what sustainability choices are going to do. "We're not saying that boards need to do the job of management" Boards need to be ready to challenge and question decisions to find meaningful solutions. If a target has been set, due to regulations or internal goals, but things are behind, how can boards create accountability and pave the way for a real change in business practices? How can boards create deeper conversations about costs, benefits, and resource allocations? "All that gathering of data and setting up the systems and controls to report is giving boards and companies insights they didn't previously have" There is a huge slew of regulations out there, which some companies view as a nuisance. However, Andrew believes that looking at this regulation as a compliance exercise is the wrong mindset and approach. Instead, boards need to look at these and say, "How can we turn this to our advantage?" "Businesses need to walk the tightrope between growth and governance" Andrew feels businesses need a balanced approach to governance and growth. One example is the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to advance or monitor sustainability efforts. Boards need to look at the business opportunities it presents and the environmental impacts surrounding the use of AI. The three top takeaways for effective boards are: 1. Boards are the long-term stewards of an organisation. Boards need to be mindful of what's happening now and deal with that but also need to encourage a focus on the future. 2. Boards need to ask better questions to get better answers and not shy away from the challenges presented. 3. Boards play a key role in linking reporting to a stronger long-term value narrative for investors.

Send us a text What are the key differences between the U.S. and the U.K. in their approaches to corporate governance? How do these differences impact an independent/Non-Executive Director in their duties? In this podcast, with Susan Skerritt, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses corporate governance practices in the U.S. and U.K.. Susan was the CEO of Deutsche Bank Trust Company, Deutsche’s US commercial bank. Since 2018, she has served on the board of financial services organisations in the US and UK. "I've been lucky to find boards that want my experience, perspective, and where I think I can add value" To Susan, the most important thing when looking at board opportunities is whether you see yourself bringing value to the organisation. She pursues global board opportunities because she's always operated in and enjoyed the global business world. Susan notes that while boards in the U.S. and the U.K. have their differences, there are also many similarities. Both operate on the Anglo-U.S. model, which differs from the German, Continental, and Japanese models. "The most important differences are the philosophical differences" For Susan, the most important difference is philosophical. U.K. corporate governance is principles-based. There is a corporate governance code that's updated regularly, and it's applicable to companies with a premium listing on the London Stock Exchange. The code operates on a "comply or explain" basis, and that really recognises that one approach may not be appropriate for all companies. The U.S. approach is more prescriptive. There is no corporate governance code per se. Rather, publicly listed companies are subject to four areas of law and regulation: state corporate law, federal securities law, Stock Exchange listing rules, and federal and state laws related to specific industries, such as financial services. The second philosophical difference relates to whom the board is ultimately responsible. In the U.K., the duty of Directors is to shareholders and stakeholders. In the U.S., shareholders' interests tend to be the primary concern. The Business Roundtable and Association of Chief Executive Officers recommended in 2019 that the U.S. shift toward stakeholder focus, but that's still evolving. "Beside philosophical differences, there are structural differences" Susan sees several structural differences between U.S. and U.K. boards. For example, in the U.K., the Chair and CEO are more likely to be separate, with fewer than 10% of FTSE companies having a combined role. In the U.S., over 50% of S&P 500 companies have a combined CEO and Chair role. Susan finds this can lead to conflicts of interest, and prefers the U.K. model. "There are also differences that impact the Directors themselves" There are also key differences beyond operational structures that impact Directors themselves. These anchor on board refreshment, compensation structures, and education for board members. The three top takeaways for effective boards from our conversation are: 1. If you have global experience that you want to deploy in your board work, consider a board in another jurisdiction. Your experience is precious if the company operates globally and most of its existing board members are from one country. 2. Corporate governance continues to evolve in every country. By having experience in multiple jurisdictions, you bring different perspectives to the table. 3. Even if you don't join a board in another jurisdiction, keep updated about how corporate governance is evolving outside your country. There are best practices you observe in other jurisdictions that could be deployed no matter where you serve.

Send us a text Climate change has transitioned from a distant environmental concern to a pressing business issue. The rhetoric between business and climate activists has hardened. Friends of the Earth in the Netherlands have sued Shell and are now in the process of suing ING. What should boards do? In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses the thinking behind the move to sue ING Bank and learnings for boards with Donald Pols. Donald is the Director of Friends of the Earth in the Netherlands. “We can and will manage to address dangerous climate change if all relevant actors contribute, including the financial sector.” Donald is bringing the climate fight to boardrooms. He cites the reality of the regulatory gap as a key factor- He explains that while governments sign agreements and individual countries make pledges, large multinationals often have no one person or entity truly holding them accountable. Often, the financial sector operates in this regulatory gap, which is why he is using a lawsuit against ING to make an example as ING is one of the largest financiers of fossil fuels in the world, which gives it a unique opportunity to shape climate change impacts. “It's time to start acting on all these initiatives instead of only talking.” The first step in a democratic society is always a dialogue and a conversation, but Donald notes that conversations have happening for decades with no real progress. So, taking things to court is an intentional escalation. Donald sees going to court as part of the democratic process, which allows parties with a difference of opinion to get a judgment on those opinions. It also creates a way to close the regulatory gap. “If there's only one message I can give to your listeners, it is that climate change is not an ESG issue. It's a material issue.” Donald feels that for boards to truly take climate change seriously, they must stop treating it as a side issue. It is a material issue that is crucial for the financial continuity of a company. “What we notice in our engagement with companies on a C-level is that climate change knowledge is lacking in general.” In Donald’s view, acting on climate change starts with leadership from the top. Boards must make climate change a company-wide priority. Ideally, this will result in climate change being a fixed issue on the board agenda, whose importance influences policies not just for the firm, but also for suppliers and clients. “The boards of multinationals that I visit are concerned with achieving and measuring impact. However, the way we measure impact is fundamentally different.” As Donald sees it, most boards measure shareholder value. Firms in the activism and non-profit space, measure stakeholder value. For them, it is less about how much money is made and more about what noticeable changes are achieved and what societal support is won. The three top takeaways for effective boards from our conversation are: 1. There's a need to act to prevent dangerous climate change, and this need has become a new societal norm applicable to all corporate and financial institutions. 2. Climate change is a material issue with fiduciary implications. Not acting in accordance with this responsibility already has and will have legal implications in the future. 3. On a more personal note, you're a CEO, but you're also a parent and a grandparent. You're a board member, but you're also responsible for life on Earth, especially for your family. The discussions you have and the decisions you make daily will have an impact on the future of our shared planet. There's no pr

Send us a text The board is a powerful asset for tech start-ups. Yet, since the interaction takes place behind closed doors, there is a lot of uncertainty about how the CEO and director dynamics play out. How open is the communication between both sides? In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards, discusses tech start-up boards with Yael Benjamin, Founder/CEO of research firm start-up Snapshot, and Tzahi (Zack) Weisfeld, Vice-President and General Manager of Intel Ignite, Intel's accelerator program. "One of the main conclusions of the research is the focus on communication, or we'll call it the lack of communication, and transparency between tech CEOs and their directors" Yael research finds one of the biggest issues is communication. Some 61% of the CEOs say they're not fully transparent with their board. "The lack of transparency is leading to a situation where CEOs do not utilise the value of the board" Yael's research finds the lack of transparency and trust leads to extra challenges and diminishes the value board members can bring. "There's a difference between first-time founders and people trying to manage or work with a board for the first time versus the more experienced founders that have a better handle on the governance of their start-up" Zack feels the experience is a large and underappreciated factor here, both on the side of CEOs and founders and also on the side of board members. "CEOs that are young and inexperienced need to get the right kind of mentorship" Zack feels it is important for young and inexperienced CEOs and founders to find advisors who can be great sounding boards and resources for managing board situations. He feels consultants are not a good choice. "A great way to help first-time or younger founders is to have an independent board member" As founders seek advisors, Yael's research shows that 60% of start-ups do not have an independent board member. "Investors overestimated the value they're providing versus what those CEOs said they're receiving" As an additional consideration when looking at investors as board members, Yael's research finds there's a large imbalance in the perceptions of the value of advice and guidance. "The reality is that VC partners are often on too many boards" Considering Yael's data and his own experience, Zack feels an issue not often talked about is that VCs and investors are on too many boards. "When we talked about selecting your advisor, your mentor, you need to select a partner that's going to invest in you" At times, the only thing a VC has to offer is their cash. This means start-ups need to look for someone else to serve in that mentoring or advising capacity very intentionally. The top takeaways from our conversation are: 1. Yael notes that a lack of transparency is going to prevent getting value from the board. 2. Zack wants to remind everyone to choose your mentors, VCs, and board members as carefully as possible – with at least as much care as you would a co-founder or spouse. 3. Zack would also like to remind CEOs and founders that they are in control of their companies, not the boards. While boards play advisory roles, the ultimate responsibility for managing the firm lies with the CEO. 4. Finally, Zack notes when it comes to boards, mentors, and advisors, adopt a "help them help you" approach. The more friction you can take out of the process, the more likely you are to get the help you need from busy people.

Send us a text Environmental risks make up half the Top 10 risks over the next ten years. Climate change remains one of the most urgent challenges confronting boards in their oversight capacity. How can boards improve their oversight of climate-related risks? And what does accounting have to do with it? In this podcast, Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Director of Better Boards, discusses how boards can improve their oversight of climate-related risks with Mike Mahoney. Mike is the CEO of the E-liability Institute, a global non-profit organisation advancing accounting upgrades to drive green innovation and reduce carbon emissions. In November 2021, Professor Bob Kaplan of Harvard Business School and Professor Karthik Ramanna from the University of Oxford published a prize-winning paper, Accounting for Climate Change, which is the foundation of the E-liability concept. "Let's focus on the fact that investors say climate change poses one of the largest sources of financial risk to companies and their asset owners" Climate change has been discussed for years in the context of ESG and sustainability, but Mike says it remains a top risk for boards. Of course, risk is often the flip side of opportunity. Mike feels companies can develop and sustain advantages in how they effectively mitigate these risks or in how they help customers mitigate these risks. These are important strategic issues for management and boards alike. "As emissions continue to grow around the world, the current system simply isn't working" Mostcompanies use approaches to carbon accounting based on carbon disclosure requirements that aren't fit for purpose. To appropriately analyse and mitigate climate risk, companies need to precisely understand the carbon intensity of their operations and that of their suppliers. Instead, firms are leaning on estimates and industry averages, which can be highly inaccurate and introduce so much distortion as to render carbon disclosures useless. "There are six questions to answer about how the company and management are thinking about measurement and accounting of climate-related and emissions data" Listen to the podcast and add the questions to your repertoire. "With e-liability, instead of accounting for costs, we're accounting for carbon" E-liability is an accounting algorithm that allows organisations to produce real-time accurate and auditable data on their total direct and supplier emissions and those of any of its products and services. It is a simple, open-source, free-to-use set of principles that can create an accurate and auditable total "cradle to grave" carbon footprint number. The three top takeaways from our conversation are: 1. Climate risk is financial risk, and companies and their boards should manage it as such. Climate risk can be quantified, measured, and mitigated. It can represent a strategic opportunity for competitive differentiation as long as the company's claims for differentiation can be audited and are meaningful to its customers. 2. It matters how a company does its carbon accounting. Management and the board need rigorous emissions accounting to understand and mitigate risks and seize opportunities. 3. Everyone should learn more about how companies can improve their carbon accounting by visiting the E-Liability Institute (https://e-liability.institute/). The site has a wealth of information, including the original papers published Bob Kaplan and Karthik Ramana, and a chance to connect with the company to learn more and explore pilot adoption of this approach.