ASIC shrink says corporate culture is shattered


“How many CEOs know the difference between culture and climate, compared to those who can differentiate depreciation and amortization? »She wrote in a recent Publish.

“If culture is so important, why is it still such a ‘black box’ subject, outside the area of ​​expertise of senior management? Wrote Ms. Arzadon.

She also highlighted an article from last year in The Australian Financial Review where US fund manager WCM Investment Management used culture questions to identify potential business risks.

“It’s a problematic symbol when you see high-level resistance to very public comments regarding the relevance of an institution’s behavior,” she wrote in another recent. Post on LinkedIn entitled “Strong culture: friend or foe”.

“There is no one ‘right’ culture, culture is about more than values, and employee engagement is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the potential value of culture.” , she wrote.

Qantas Managing Director Alan Joyce said they are happy to be working with ASIC. Bloomberg

The Financial analysis has learned that Qantas, Lend Lease, Woolworths and IOOF are among the household names to join AMP and the banks on the list of the top 21 companies facing the radical regulatory experience of the corporate regulator.

Qantas CEO Alan Joyce did not confirm on Wednesday whether ASIC had included a psychologist in its board meetings, but said he was happy to work with the regulator.

“Our general approach has always been to cooperate with regulators, and an open book is good policy,” Joyce said.

“All businesses can hopefully improve themselves by sharing ideas,” he said, highlighting the airline’s approach to safety – which includes a safety conference where the airline invites its competitors – as an example of its “open book” approach.

Sources from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission said board reviews focused on how directors interact with senior management in practice, ensuring there is a flow information and ensuring that boards of directors hold management to account.

ASIC’s Governance Task Force grew out of $ 70 million in additional funding in last year’s budget and will report publicly on board behavior in late August or early September.

ASIC President James Shipton continues to wage culture wars. David Rowe

He follows ASIC’s work to integrate regulatory officers into banks to oversee the violation reporting and internal dispute resolution processes.

But several senior administrators described the regulatory plan as “stupid” with one expert claiming it would backfire because the administrators would simply change their behavior while the psychologist was present.

APRA’s capacity report due to be delivered to Treasurer Josh Frydenberg next week is also supposed to focus on the accountability of director culture, rather than relying on a regulatory solution like a psychologist.

Alessandra Capezio, leading organizational behavior expert, Alessandra Capezio, associate professor at Australian National University, warned that principals who exhibit Machiavellian, narcissistic or subclinical psychopathic tendencies are likely to come under the regulator’s spotlight.

“We need to mitigate the effects of having high levels of these traits in the boardroom,” she said. “You can do this by making sure that the decision-making culture is strong enough to counter group thinking, confirmation bias and overconfidence,” Ms. Capezio said.

However, she warned that there was “no quick fix” and that injecting psychologists into the meeting room could backfire.

“People behave differently when you observe them,” she said.

“How does it work to supervise blackboards like eight-year-olds, how do they behave when the teacher leaves the room?” ” she asked.

with Jemima Whyte


Source link

Previous Failed 'Coup', a False Corporate Story Designed to Deceive Venezuelan Soldiers and the American Public
Next The decline of Australian corporate culture