Last month, Exxon Mobil Corp. appointed a leading climate scientist to its board. Exxon’s move underscores the growing pressure shareholders are exerting on the issue of climate-competent boards.
Climate competency of boards—and broader corporate attention to escalating climate change risks—isn’t just a hot topic for one set of shareholders and one oil company. It is a key investor imperative for all sectors of the economy.
Look no further than the new guidelines from the G20’s Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure to understand how profoundly expectations are shifting. The task force, chaired by Michael R. Bloomberg, was created by the Financial Stability Board at the request of the G20 ministers to help companies identify and disclose which climate risks have a financially relevant impact on their business. The task force’s very first recommendation focuses on the governance practices of companies for climate change, including deeper board engagement on the topic.
So what does it mean for boards to be climate competent? Climate competency means much more than just getting one person with expertise on a corporate board. So while we applaud the important step that Exxon has taken, it’s only a first step.
At the end of the day, a climate-competent board is one that can make thoughtful decisions on climate risks and opportunities that a company is facing. When trying to set up a climate-competent board, companies should think holistically about what needs to be done for boards to achieve competent, informed decision-making on this issue.
1.) Put board systems in place for climate change oversight. Boards need to have a committee that is assigned formal responsibility to oversee climate change. By doing so, companies can ensure that boards oversee how climate risks are integrated into operations and decision-making on an ongoing basis. Numerous companies have dedicated board sustainability or environment committees that can be leveraged for this purpose. Companies like Citigroup, Ford, and PG&E have specifically identified climate change as a key focus area in the charters of their board public affairs or sustainability committees. Having the issue identified in such an explicit manner ensures it will be discussed systematically in committee meetings.
2.) Include directors with expertise in climate change on boards. When climate change is a material risk to a company, boards should recruit directors with expertise on that material issue. Such companies should also explicitly identify climate change expertise as a board qualification. This means making it a part of board skill matrices. It’s worth noting that two of the country’s largest pension funds, CalPERS and CalSTRS, recently amended their global governance guidelines to ask portfolio companies to recruit directors with climate change expertise.
3.) Train the full board on climate change. Boards and management should provide climate-related training opportunities to all board members, or, at a minimum, to relevant committee members. Organizations like The Co-operators have detailed systems in place to train its board on sustainability issues that are crucial to their businesses, including leveraging external experts for this purpose. Certain groups offer education curriculums where issues like climate and sustainability are addressed.
4.) Consult stakeholders and shareholders to inform directors’ understanding of climate change. Internal training sessions are key, but it’s just as important that directors reach out to external stakeholders, including investors, to share firsthand the company’s different approaches to climate change learn from voices outside of management. Investors in particular are critical groups to engage. Having this broader multi-stakeholder perspective can help directors make better-informed decisions. In 2016, shareholders filed a record 172 shareholder resolutions on climate change and sustainability. Given that directors are fiduciaries to investors, director-investor dialogues on climate trends will provide an important context to board discussions on this issue.
5.) Be more transparent. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we need more transparency on climate-related board decisions. We need to know whether boards are prioritizing climate change as a material issue. Companies have to do a better job of disclosing how climate trends are affecting corporate strategies and risks that are relevant to investors.
Market and shareholder scrutiny of board engagement on climate issues is only going to grow sharper with time. While companies will be impacted differently by these risks, few industries are immune. Climate change affects 72 out of 79 industries and 93 percent of the capital markets, according to SASB’s Technical Bulletin on Climate Risk.
The key for board members now is to ensure that they’re well positioned to exercise informed oversight so that they can make thoughtful decisions on this escalating issue.
Veena Ramani is program director, Capital Market Systems, at Ceres.
It is clearer than ever before that sustainability practices can affect corporate value. That was the main thread of a panel that I led at the National Association of Corporate Directors’ 2016 Global Board Leaders’ Summit in Washington, D.C. My co-panelists Christianna Wood, director at H&R Block, and Seth Goldman, founder of Honest Tea, and I discussed the potential risks and opportunities that environmental and social issues pose to companies.
Sustainability is a broad term, and not every environmental or social issue belongs on the board agenda. But when an environmental or social issue has the potential to affect corporate revenue and earnings in the short and long term, sustainability absolutely should be on the table.
At the end of the day, it all comes down to materiality, and this is where corporate directors have a critical role to play.
Materiality is about determining a company’s priorities. As fiduciaries responsible for overseeing a company so that it not only survives but also thrives in the long term, directors have a responsibility to assess whether a company is making the right choices.
But the much harder question is: When does an environmental or social issue rise to the level of being material?
Here are some steps directors can take to drive discussions about whether sustainability issues are material to the companies that they oversee.
1.) Understand how sustainability is being integrated into your company’s efforts as a way to identify material issues.
There are a few ways to do this. Directors could point management towards the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board’s Company Implementation Guide, which provides a great starting point for companies to assess whether certain sustainability factors could be considered material for the purposes of the company’s financial filings. Directors could also integrate themselves more meaningfully into corporate efforts aimed at identifying material sustainability issues. They could provide perspectives on the connections between sustainability factors, corporate strategy, risk, and revenue.
2.) Include key issues being raised by critical stakeholders in the materiality exercise.
While a broader range of stakeholders is raising a variety of issues these days, the financial community is a particularly critical constituency to direct attention towards. As we discussed in our panel, the U.S. investor community is starting to make the connections between sustainability and the financial value of companies in their portfolios. During the 2016 proxy season, close to 400 shareholder resolutions on climate change and other sustainability issues were filed. Large investors including CalPERS, CalSTRS and State Street Global Advisors are asking their portfolio companies to put directors with climate expertise on their boards.
In addition to tracking broad sustainability trends that investors are paying attention to, prudent directors could consider opportunities to engage directly with key shareholders to get a sense of issues specific to the company and the industry. Directors could also track and engage with the broader activist and advocacy community as a risk management exercise.
3.) Weigh in on the time frame over which issues are considered to be material.
Since the board in particular is responsible for long-term corporate performance, directors play an important role in examining whether their company’s materiality process focuses on considering issues over the long or short term.
Overall, momentum is building to adopt a more long-term view to encourage companies and boards to think more broadly about sustainability and materiality. The recently released Commonsense Corporate Governance Principles, which are backed by major U.S. companies including JPMorgan Chase & Co., Berkshire Hathaway, and Blackrock, support the move to long-term thinking. And more companies including Unilever, Coca Cola, and National Grid are moving away from the practice of issuing quarterly guidance specifically to encourage investors and other stakeholders to adopt long-term thinking.
4.) Disclose details on what you consider to be your company’s material priorities.
Noting that determinations of materiality depend on whom the company considers to be its most significant stakeholders, governance experts are starting to call on corporate boards to release a statement noting critical audiences that the company is oriented towards and issues that the corporation is prioritizing. Companies like the Dutch insurance company Aegon have started to issue such statements.
The process of helping to identify the right issues is just a first step in a director’s responsibility on materiality. Directors have an important role to play in ensuring that material issues, when identified are integrated into board deliberations on strategy, risk, revenue and accountability systems. However, getting to the right issues lays an important foundation for the company and its key stakeholders to build on.
“Society needs financial wealth … but it matters how you make the money,” said Rajendra Sisodia, co-founder and co-chair of Conscious Capitalism Inc., and director of the Container Store Group. “Businesses not only create, they can destroy financial wealth, as well.”
Sisodia, a marketing professor at Babson University whose published books include Conscious Capitalism and Firms of Endearment, delivered a keynote address on capitalism’s transformative power Tuesday at NACD’s Global Board Leaders’ Summit. The four-day summit convened more than 1,300 attendees—the world’s largest gathering of corporate directors—in Washington, D.C. from Sept. 17-20.
Roots of Capitalism
One of the most significant conclusions of Scottish moral philosopher Adam Smith’s seminal 1776 book, An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (often referred to as The Wealth of Nations), was that places rooted in freedom tend to be more prosperous. Smith’s work became a foundational text on how capitalist markets work.
“That same year—an extraordinary historic coincident in some ways—the United States was born as a country, but more importantly, an idea. [It was] the only country born out of a set of ideas,” Sisodia said. “The ideas all revolved around liberty and freedom.” Entire segments of the American population, however, were not initially given access to that freedom—including African-Americans, native populations, and women—but the nation has extended freedoms steadily over the course of its nearly 250-year history.
“What is capitalism? Political and economic freedom,” Sisodia proclaimed. It’s rooted in the idea that free markets—or economic growth driven by individuals, rather than a centrally planned economy directed by the government or a political system—help people collectively elevate their material living conditions and boost prosperity, he said.
Poverty and Capitalism
A misperception about capitalism, Sisodia said, is that it exploits people of lower income brackets, locking them into poverty. Research, though, suggests that as capitalist markets have expanded, poverty rates have declined.
Data from the World Bank show that rates of extreme poverty have decreased considerably over the past three decades. More than half of people in the developing world lived on less than $1.25 per day in 1981, compared with 21 percent living on that amount per day in 2010.
Sisodia credited that decrease to prosperity derived from capitalism, saying that the key challenge for lifting the rest of the world out of poverty is not the unequal distribution of income, but the unequal distribution of freedom.
How the World Is Changing
“What will it take for companies to flourish in the future—and not just flourish for the purpose of making a lot of money, but actually be agents of flourishing in society?” Sisodia asked. The simple answer, he continued, is that you must be in harmony with the fact that people have changed over time to become, among other things, more:
The rate of serious violent crimes in U.S. public schools has dropped significantly to about one-third of what it was in 1994. Europe, Sisodia said, had experienced 1,200 wars in 600 years, but since 1945, inter-state wars on the continent have disappeared.
Sisodia described the so-called Flynn Effect, which suggests that there has been a consistent increase in IQ scores from 1930 to the present.
Embracing of “feminine” values. “I think the great story of this century is … the end of the suppression of the feminine [side of humanity],” Sisodia said. Women now earn more college degrees than men in the United States, and as a result, the expectation is that women will rise in positions of leadership—particularly in white-collar work settings. That will naturally mean that so-called feminine values, which he described as including cooperation, empathy, and compassion, will gain more traction in society.
Tenets of Conscious Capitalism
Accepting that the world is changing, Sisodia advised that businesses embrace the four tenets of conscious capitalism. That means to act with:
A higher purpose, or more specifically, a purpose beyond generating profits. Sisodia’s website provides a further explanation by quoting University of Virginia Darden School of Business professor and Conscious Capitalism, Inc. trustee, Ed Freeman: “We need red blood cells to live (the same way a business needs profits to live), but the purpose of life is more than to make red blood cells (the same way the purpose of business is more than simply to generate profits).”
A stakeholder orientation. Conscious businesses exist not only to maximize ROI for shareholders, but also seek to enhance value for all stakeholders, leading to a more resilient business.
Conscious leadership that demonstrates care for purpose and people; and
Conscious culture built on trust, care, and transparency—not rooted in fear and stress (the risk of having a heart attack is 20% higher on Mondays for men, 15% for women, and most research blames the stress of returning to work for these statistics).
Boards: Stewards of Well-Being
Sisodia offered several considerations aimed at helping boards—and companies—become more conscious overseers:
The primary duty of the board is to the corporation—which has its own significant role in society—rather than shareholders.
Understand and shape the company’s higher purpose. Ask your board to reflect on why the company would be missed if it were to disappear tomorrow.
Consciously seek to create value for all stakeholders.
Appoint strong leaders with a capacity for love and care. It is not healthy to appoint leaders who are analytically smart but lack empathy and other forms of emotional intelligence.
Build a culture of “full-spectrum” consciousness, meaning that you are not only concerned with service to people and a higher purpose, but also efficiency, effectiveness, and success.
Ensure youth and feminine perspectives are heeded when making business decisions.
Humanity is more aware of its challenges and problems than ever before, Sisodia said in closing, and the individual and collective capacity to respond to those challenges has never been higher. “We have to create the organizational forms and philosophies and build business on [the ideals of] purpose and caring. … [A]ll of those answers that we need to our crises are out there inside somebody. We just have to figure out how to liberate that.”