CSR Leadership Skills

This year, my carbon footprint tallies up to 6.8 tonnes—a light reduction from the previous 8 tonnes. Despite this progress, it’s a stark reminder that I am still a distance away from the sustainable benchmark of 2 tonnes, essential for keeping global temperature rise under 1.5°C. My journey’s ecological imprint was shaped by travels to the Himalayas ✈️, the Alps ✈️ and the Pyrenees 🚗 ✈️. Here’s the breakdown: • Home: 5.03%; • Mobility: 64.11% (the lion’s share, influenced by flights and car travel); • Gear: 4.97%; • Food & Others: 9.73%; • Public Service Share: 16.16%. In response, I’ve adopted a threefold strategy: Avoid, Reduce, and Compensate. On Avoiding and Reducing: • I’ve shifted to virtual for all meetings, cutting and conferences, rejecting the ones that involved travel. • I participate in local events and train nearby to limit transportation. • Travel is now reserved for primary races and key projects. • I’ve increased train travel to cut down on flights. • Last year I discontinued my car sponsorship to discourage fossil fuel use and shifted to a second-hand electric vehicle. On Gear and Consumption: • I’ve continued to wear last year’s gear, stepping away from promoting new styles. • Gear not in use has found new homes, promoting a second-hand market or given. On Food: • My diet has been vegetarian for long, and we try to supplement a max by our own garden and seasonal produce from a local farm. On Compensation: • To address my carbon output, I’ve engaged with Climeworks to offset my annual emissions through their carbon capture initiative. While I’ve made strides in reducing my carbon footprint this year, there’s a considerable journey ahead. I’m not yet the exemplar of living and sportsmanship I aim to be. I am dedicated to evolving my lifestyle and career to fully embody the values I stand. Would love to read about how are you reducing your carbon footprint? Let's learn from each other.

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.

94% of major U.S. corporations say they’ll maintain or increase philanthropy in 2025. But here’s the catch: Most nonprofits will still miss out. Why? Because they’re fishing in the wrong waters. They pitch donations when companies are really looking for partnerships. Here’s what no one tells you: 1. Companies don’t care about your gala. They care about aligning philanthropy with brand visibility, employee engagement, and ESG metrics. Show them how you help them measure impact, not just feel it. 2. Your pitch deck is upside down. Most nonprofits start with “Here’s who we are.” Flip it. Start with: “Here’s the business risk you’re already facing, and how partnering with us helps solve it.” 3. Employee participation is your hidden superpower. Companies want employees involved, not just checks written. Invite their teams to volunteer, co-create campaigns, or tell impact stories on LinkedIn. That’s internal buy-in = budget unlocked. 4. Philanthropy budgets are shrinking relative to ESG/CSR budgets. Translation: Stop chasing “charity dollars.” Go after strategy dollars. You’ll instantly play in a bigger league. Corporations are raising the bar. If you want their funding, you need to stop acting like a charity and start showing up like a business partner. What’s one thing you’ve done differently in a corporate pitch that actually worked? (I’ll share the best answers in a follow-up post.) With purpose and impact, Mario

I am pleased to share Standard Chartered Foundation’s new briefing, Adapting to the Changing Aid Landscape. The findings highlight a stark reality; the world faces a US$4.3 trillion annual financing gap to meet the Sustainable Development Goals and potential aid cuts risk jeopardising access to education for roughly 68 million children worldwide. At the same time the landscape is shifting in ways that open up new possibilities, with remittances now exceeding both FDI and ODA combined, reaching US$685 billion- a reminder that the most powerful flows shaping development are not the ones traditionally labelled “aid.” This is where corporate philanthropy sits at the intersection of purpose, capital and capability. The document highlights three opportunities for businesses to play a leadership role in this space: 1️⃣ Collaborate and co-invest: Work with development banks, philanthropies and governments to unlock blended finance, de-risk innovation and draw in private capital. 2️⃣ Apply core business strengths: Use corporate expertise, not just grant budgets, to build inclusive, market-linked models that can scale sustainably. 3️⃣ Shift power locally: Back locally led organisations and flexible funding models that respond to rapidly changing realities on the ground. As a Trustee of the Standard Chartered Foundation, I have seen first-hand how this approach can be a powerful catalyst. When we leverage our unique business capabilities to unlock meaningful, lasting change. Check out the link in the comments to download the briefing 👇

Governance and Sustainability 🌍 Governance is a foundational element for advancing sustainability. It connects strategic priorities with operational execution and ensures that sustainability is not treated as an isolated function. It provides strategic direction by defining sustainability goals that align with broader business objectives. This alignment ensures that environmental and social factors are embedded across the organization. Accountability is reinforced through governance structures. Clear roles, oversight mechanisms, and defined responsibilities drive performance and reduce the risk of fragmented efforts. Effective governance integrates sustainability risks into enterprise risk management. ESG risks are evaluated alongside financial and operational exposures to support more resilient decision-making. Resource allocation is influenced by governance. Structures and processes ensure that capital and capabilities are directed toward initiatives that generate long-term environmental and social value. Incentives are aligned through governance. Compensation, evaluation, and recognition frameworks reflect sustainability outcomes, creating stronger internal drivers for impact. Governance enhances transparency. It supports the production of accurate and credible sustainability disclosures, increasing trust among investors, regulators, and other stakeholders. It also builds stakeholder confidence. Feedback mechanisms and engagement processes ensure that diverse voices are heard and integrated into strategy and reporting. Governance enables adaptability. As regulations and expectations evolve, governance frameworks ensure that organizations remain aligned with current standards and positioned to lead in sustainability performance. #sustainability #sustainable #esg #business

🤔 Midweek Reflection 🔍 Why We Need to Broaden the Data Governance Conversation and Toolbox: A few years ago, we developed the 4Ps of Data Governance framework: ➡️ Purpose; ➡️ Principles; ➡️ Processes; ➡️ Practices. Since then, we’ve seen meaningful progress...: ✅ There is growing convergence around shared principles, such as those outlined in our recent paper on Universal Principles for Data Governance. 💻 Read: https://lnkd.in/ezuKbqJD ✅ The recognition of data stewardship as a key role has helped build the necessary people infrastructure within institutions and governments. 💻 Read: https://lnkd.in/ewPXMA5U ➡️ But when it comes to practices —how we actually implement principles across the lifecycle of data—the conversation remains far too narrow. Most dialogues often default to legal mechanisms, particularly data protection laws. ➡️ That’s why, in recent conversations with policymakers we encouraged them to think more expansively. 📊 Below is a framework of 10 Data Governance Mechanisms that can be used to determine the portfolio of data governance practices (note that no single mechanism is sufficient on its own): 1️⃣ Contractual Mechanisms Legally binding agreements defining access, use, and third-party responsibilities. Examples: Data Sharing Agreements, SLAs, API Terms of Use 2️⃣ Policies & Guidelines Institutional or governmental rules that operationalize principles. Examples: Open Data Policies, AI Ethics Guidelines 3️⃣ Technology & Governance by Design Embedding governance into digital systems and infrastructure. Examples: Differential privacy, federated learning, access controls 4️⃣ Standards and Vocabulary Shared protocols and terminologies for interoperability and quality. Examples: ISO 27001, DCAT, FAIR principles 5️⃣ Codes of Conduct Agreed-upon norms for ethical and responsible data use. Examples: EU Code of Practice on Disinformation 6️⃣ Procurement & Vendor Management Ensuring governance requirements are built into procurement processes. Examples: Data clauses in RFPs, public sector data-sharing mandates 7️⃣ Licensing Setting clear conditions for data reuse and redistribution. Examples: Creative Commons Licenses, SocialLicenses 8️⃣ Data Stewardship & Institutional Arrangements Roles and structures that enable accountable data use. Examples: Chief Data Stewards, Data Commons, Independent Auditors 9️⃣ Audit & Compliance Mechanisms Methods for monitoring and enforcing governance rules. Examples: Algorithmic Impact Assessments, Transparency Reports 🔟 Training & Cultural Change Initiatives Developing literacy and a governance-minded culture within organizations. Examples: Privacy trainings, data ethics workshops ➡️ Any mechanisms that should be added? 🙏 Thanks to Begoña Glez. Otero for review of earlier list - #DataGovernance #DataStewardship #ResponsibleAI #DigitalGovernance #DataPolicy #OpenData #SocialLicense #DataForGood

When Self-Interest Overrides Cultural Integrity: A First Nations Perspective on Board Conflicts By Nicole Brown On Day Two of the AICD course, the topic of failing to act in good faith sparked necessary reflection — especially when applied to the realities of First Nations governance. The reminder that “boards decide if conflicts exist” and that directors must “disclose any material interests” becomes even more complex in our communities, where kinship, culture, and politics are deeply interwoven. Let’s be clear: perception matters. In fact, in First Nations communities, perception can be just as powerful as the facts. Even when a director believes they’re acting appropriately, if their actions are perceived as self-serving or exclusive, trust can be lost in an instant. And in small communities where decisions echo loudly, perception is reality. In a good light, perception can uphold integrity — when a board is transparent, inclusive, and actively declares conflicts, it builds confidence. When mob can see that decisions are being made fairly, it fosters cultural safety and strengthens the legitimacy of the leadership. This is the power of perception used well: reinforcing accountability through visible action. But in a bad light, perception can destroy credibility. If a board refuses to acknowledge or record conflicts of interest — or worse, doesn’t even have a conflict of interest register — it gives the impression of secrecy and favouritism. Directors may think they’re just “helping out family,” but when they influence decisions that benefit their personal networks, the perception is one of corruption, even if it’s not illegal. That damage is long-lasting. Let’s not forget: people naturally look after their own self-interest. But governance isn’t about instincts — it’s about discipline. It’s about putting the interests of the whole community above individual or family gain. It’s about doing the right thing, even when no one is watching — and especially when everyone is. That’s why boards must go beyond compliance and foster a culture of transparency. That means: ☑️ Actively maintaining a living conflict of interest register ☑️ Discussing perceived conflicts, not just actual ones ☑️ Creating space for culturally safe disclosures ☑️ Recognising that perception alone can undermine the board’s credibility In First Nations governance, acting in good faith is about more than rules. It’s about relationship, responsibility, and respect. Perception, when managed with integrity, can be a powerful ally — but when ignored, it becomes a quiet storm that erodes the very foundations we stand on.

ETHICAL LEADERSHIP IN AN AGE OF CRISIS: When Power Meets Conscience   Why be just when you can be rich? Plato’s Ring of Gyges still shadows every boardroom. If profit is possible through injustice and no one is watching, what will you choose? Today’s leadership culture—built on compliance, KPIs, and risk management—dodges Glaucon's famous question. The result is predictable: systems that reward getting as close to the “moral minimum” as possible, monetising harm while branding it “value creation.”   Today we inhabit the ruins of our own success: record share prices, record inequality, a planet in distress. Leadership has become performance art—purpose statements on our office walls, denial in our dashboards. We brilliantly manage our own blindness, mistaking agility for progress and OKRs for meaning. This is not a crisis of capability but of conscience: a failure to understand how our systems themselves produce the outcomes we claim to fight.   Most leadership models treat ethics as a compliance problem—but when regulation fades and profit trumps penalty, why be good at all? Secular ethics—utilitarian, contractual, procedural—fail the Gyges test. If values are mere preferences, exploitation becomes rational. When social systems are treated as neutral markets rather than moral orders, injustice hides inside the algorithms of efficiency.   Ethical leadership begins where management ends: with the question of what legitimises power. It's not charisma or style but stewardship—the disciplined use of power for the common good. It rests on three practices: truth, seeing systems as they really are; imagination, envisioning what they could become; and judgment, choosing wisely when values collide. This is practical wisdom—the courage to act rightly, even when no one measures it.   To make this real, organisations must be designed for character, not compliance. Profit must serve purpose; incentives must reward contribution, not extraction. Governance must mature from box-ticking to moral judgment—boards as trustees of conscience, not guardians of quarterly returns. Accountability cannot be procedural alone; it must be moral. Leadership is public trust, not private property.   Developing ethical leaders means rethinking formation itself. Not tournaments of ambition but apprenticeships in judgment. Not high potentials but humble stewards able to hold power to account—including their own. No system can rise above the moral maturity of those who lead it—if leaders refuse to grow, they must make way for those who will.   Ethical leadership, at the end of the day, is the bridge between the actual and the possible. In a world of cascading crises, only leaders grounded in care, imagination, and moral courage can restore trust and renew possibility. The world is watching. So are our grandchildren. #EthicalLeadership #LeadershipDevelopment #CorporateGovernance #SystemsThinking #Sustainability #BusinessEthics #ResponsibleLeadership #ESG #Philosophy #PurposeDriven

❓ Is your sustainability strategy ready for the real world? So, You've done the work—research, securing stakeholder buy-in, choosing the right partners. You’ve laid a strong foundation for a sustainable supply chain. But before you launch, have you considered every detail that’ll keep your efforts on track? Imagine this: You’ve set ambitious goals, like reducing fleet fuel consumption by 5% or cutting warehouse electricity use by 10%. But to hit those marks, you'll need the right checkpoints. In the first month, check in with your data partner—is everything being captured effectively? At two months, ask your suppliers if they're comfortable with the Service Level Agreements (SLAs) you’ve set together. By six months, assess whether the data you’ve gathered allows you to make meaningful predictions and take new action. Data backs the need for these checkpoints. A study by McKinsey reports that companies with a structured sustainability strategy see 20% higher supply chain efficiency. And according to the World Economic Forum, sustainable supply chains can reduce overall environmental impact by up to 50%, while increasing resilience against future challenges. But sustainability isn’t just about hitting numbers. It’s a cultural shift. From top leaders to new hires, your team needs to embrace the mindset that goes beyond "doing business as usual." Internal education is essential—create programs that inspire every team member to see the value of these efforts. When your employees understand how their day-to-day work impacts long-term goals, the commitment deepens. Remember, Sustainability is also about outward visibility. Sharing your journey publicly can set you apart as a trusted, forward-thinking organization in your industry. When others see your authenticity and progress, customers and partners are more likely to trust and admire your mission. Let’s lead the change, One small improvement at a time, and proves that businesses can drive meaningful impact for people, the planet, and profit alike.

All Above Board: Great Governance for the Government Sector (second edition) by Julie Garland McLellan, is a comprehensive guide focused on corporate governance specifically within government-owned organizations. It covers various aspects of governance and how directors can effectively manage these organizations while balancing public policy, financial objectives, and social responsibilities. Key Themes in the book: - Corporate Governance Definition: Governance in the government sector refers to how organizations are directed and managed, including setting objectives, monitoring risks, and optimizing performance. There's an emphasis on balancing commercial goals with broader public policy objectives. - Differences Between Private and Government Boards: Government-owned entities often have a single shareholder (the government) and their goals go beyond financial returns, focusing on social and policy outcomes. Boards in this sector must navigate political and public interests, requiring a balance between profit motives and community responsibilities. - Director's Roles and Responsibilities: The book emphasizes the importance of understanding legal frameworks and regulations specific to the public sector, along with fiduciary duties. Directors are accountable to their government shareholder and must ensure that their organizations meet public expectations while minimizing risks. - Public Policy and Planning: A significant part of the book explores how government boards align their strategies with public policy goals, manage stakeholder expectations, and handle financial planning in a highly regulated environment. - Risk Management: The risks in the public sector are often higher due to regulatory complexities and public scrutiny. The book provides examples of government-owned organizations that have faced challenges and offers strategies for managing these risks effectively. - Ethics and Transparency: Ethical behavior, transparency, and accountability are critical in maintaining public trust. The book offers guidance on promoting responsible decision-making and fostering a culture of openness on government boards. Case Studies: The book includes practical case studies, such as the management of the New South Wales Grain Board and the challenges of providing services in monopoly situations (e.g., electricity supply), demonstrating how directors can navigate complex governance issues. This guide is tailored for both aspiring and current directors of government-sector boards, helping them to understand the specific challenges of the public sector and offering insights into effective governance practices.