Skip to main content

tv   After Words Dambisa Moyo How Boards Work  CSPAN  July 11, 2021 1:00pm-2:01pm EDT

1:00 pm
>> weekends on c-span2 are an intellectual feast. every saturday you will find events and people that explore our nation's past un-american history tv and on sundays but tv brings you the latest in nonfiction books and authors, television for serious readers. learn, discover, explore.
1:01 pm
global economist, a corporate board of director and this is not your first book. you learned a lot in your more than a decade on different boards across industries. many ways is the playbook on how ports work, how they are evolving and how they work in the future. action want to go back there when you're 39 years old, that is him you joined your first board and your writing on emerging markets and international issues and set you apart from others that came up to corporate america. how did you learn how to be a good board member? >> thank you so much for the opportunity to be here and to talk to you about my book called how boards work but to also give you an insight into the challenges as well as the opportunities for not just boards but the corporations that they lead. your question is interesting
1:02 pm
because i do worry sometimes that writing this kind of book gives the impression it was always meant to be, it was easy and straightforward. the reality is i'd actually tried for more than half a decade to get on boards unsuccessfully. and as you rightly point out in terms of global, large organizations, my first board was indeed miller. the real opportunity i'm not a conventional board member i am 39 i'm obviously black and a woman press born and raised in africa. but also i did not come through the sea sweep which is a traditional pool for board candidates. what really did set me apart as you mentioned is coming through the perspective of a much more global purview.
1:03 pm
i had traveled to over 80 countries now around the world. having that perspective of developed versus developing economies et cetera i was particularly important. have i learned? a number of key takeaways i hope are clear -- clearly outlined in the book. first of all, by the time you're on a board the reality is these are very complex organizations. the board of barclays is been a companies have been around for three to 60 years. if you take a step back and think about the historical context of many of these corporations, they've gone through wars, pandemics, good times and bad. they somehow managed to stay afloat. i think that requires a lot of open-mindedness, good judgment, in the face of complex issues to steady the
1:04 pm
ship and really do the job as a fiduciary but also custodian of these very, very important organizations. and so it listening more than speaking is the key take away. but also really appreciating, by the time something appears on the board agenda it means it is extremely difficult, to quote president obama if it were easy somebody else would have solved it. we do need to think about these issues and their more fulsome and sort of broad perspective. not just in a sort of ideological only one answer kind of way. those are some the things i have learned. >> also found a couple big issues. what boards are and how they operate? the risk for the future and of course a lot of the big issues that are playing out now. want to first look at one point you may print going to read from your book, the changing times at bates boards
1:05 pm
more indispensable than ever. how has that changed in the last year? we are in this global pandemic , i would love to hear it with last year has meant as a board member. >> it has been phenomenal in many respects. but it's important to put these things in context. in my book i talk about the first board really being established or at least reported in the 1600s. and in many ways if you look back at history over several centuries the fundamental mandates of the board hasn't really changed much. i would say that traditionally boards have had two responsibilities. one is providing oversight on strategy and number two is hiring an incentive instances firing the ceo. but really, over the last half decade, even more, there has been a material shift towards the need for corporations to take on a much more social and
1:06 pm
cultural responsibility than being good citizens if you will. that obviously was a counterforce to freedman's 1970 article in which he basically planted a flag in the sand about essentially suggesting that the financial were really the key of attributes important roles corporations play. >> a shareholder versus eight stakeholder. you can't talk about it without saying how milton freedman is maybe not in the modern times we are in right now. >> frankly it's a whole other conversation. i do think he had been misquoted somewhat. very clear in that article that the nature of how corporations participate in the global economy and society was very much driven by social
1:07 pm
and cultural context. think there's enough degrees of freedom to think more broadly about what the admission and role of corporations are. and of course and they wanted 40 character world with basically given the short trip and blames him for the argument sprayed that changes as you know 2019 with the business roundtable, essentially articulating a very clear widening aperture with the responsibility of corporations to incorporate, not just financial shareholders but the whole range of shareholders such as communities, employees, regular tours at large. just to come back to your specific question what does this mean about the changing role? there's a whole pool for ration on areas such as environmental, social and government questions. which according to j.p. morgan now represents about $45 trillion under
1:08 pm
management. so hugely important everything from climate change, to racial agendas concerns about worker advocacy, voter rights, gun control it has really opened up a wide array of issues. notwithstanding the fact that board members are not elected. but at the same time i think the last year has reminded us that we don't only have a strategic role inking about how companies would evolve over time, we have to block and tackle in the here and now to be able to adapt in a more tactical weight to and things go awry. whether the pandemic or financial crisis. i will not belabor the point to but i did publish an article in the harvard business review around march or april of 2020 in which i basically talk about how as a
1:09 pm
board member we were initially incredibly concerned about operations. our people safe? are people able to log into their computers? did they have access to healthcare? we think about the financial health of the company. can this company run? did they have a lot of debt or are they able -- can they use the cash to cover their responsibilities? then you start to think about other considerations such as the broader marketplace and how we can step up in a world that's challenged. if you remember was also very little information rate that is how it's changed i would safer make broader strategic role too much more tactical role. that to me as part and partial being a good board member. >> absolutely pretty right how many people think the buck stops with the ceo. but in fact they're all these risks board members to take on given new strategy or on the company and operations. not having to short-term thinking. a big part of board members
1:10 pm
role, as you write to ceo succession. and we know now that ceos were the most expected and expanded quite a bit. can you tell us a little bit about how you've been involved in ceo succession in the past and are there different questions you are asking these days that fit into what is expected of business leadership. >> yes. the truth is basically a collection of human beings, human beings change reminded very recently by a board colleague served on a while goes in his 80s. the only thing i can guarantee you it is at your life as you are always going to be surprised. be the rise of china, any manner of geopolitical risk, america first et cetera.
1:11 pm
i think it's an important frame in thinking about how organizations run. but also about the selection of the ceo. traditionally boards and i have been involved in hiring in some instances i'm afraid firing. >> definitely part of the job. >> it is an unpleasant part of the job. but it is a part of the job nevertheless. with traditionally looked at a ceo candidate financial and expiration of experience have eight managed teams? what is their leadership style? how does their leadership style merry with where a company is? if a company needs to restructure rude deuce because his is a ceo who can lead the charge through difficult time? how do they think about strategic opportunities in an
1:12 pm
error that might be much more positive and constructive? is frankly been a big area missing. with the ethical compass and the moral compass of candidates. how have we done that? we have relied very heavily on references. but obviously we are living in a world were just 18 months, over 400 ceos and business leaders lost their jobs because of me too. it does sort of really bring a much more stark relief the importance of ethics as one of the articles of this discussion and the book i really tried to emphasize is that as a muscle organizations are going to have to really strengthen. not just electing the ceo but selecting a board members, thinking about the organization more generally as well. the ethical question is going to move us from just thinking
1:13 pm
about opportunity to is it profitable? is it legal in the realm of way to second is it also ethical? it's how we want to brand to be seen or the organization to be viewed. >> absolutely pretty cannot just say to someone are you ethical? are you moral? it's not as simple as that. plead there is a specific question you said you like to ask which is i think what is the worst thing you have done to someone else, am i getting that right dry river correctly? >> the question is what is the worst thing you judge another human being. i was actually joking with my siblings and friends and said such a great date question as well. [laughter] but you know emily, the truth is these are not -- it's not missing a right or wrong answer. think that is really trying to get at this challenge and the complexities of the issues boards have to deal appeared we are not looking for a box ticked, this is the right answer for that cannot possibly be the case there's
1:14 pm
always a right or wrong answer. in fact because were operating in different cultures different ideological societies, afferent jurisdictions legally and the regulatory means we always have to be very open minded and judicious with our opinions and ideologies. >> absolutely. i will say when he read that question i really took a beat myself and think what is the worst thing i've done to another human being. in due eyeful comfortable saying is it something when you're ten years old at really makes you think a lot. so, another really big part of being a board members helping to develop company strategy, direction, you write a lot about assessing business units and how you need to mix data analysis, market contacts and other measures but you are cautioned by in an external auditor to not fall into a trap when evaluating business units can you tell slow but more about that? >> yes this is very early in my board career is it an
1:15 pm
external auditor who said people tend to be very focused on differences that look like they might cause trouble. he cautioned me and said he should be as seem to be doing too well. we tend to think that is a brilliant this company or business unit is doing so wonderfully we do not need to worry about that. that's exactly when you should probe what kind of market allows what is this mean for a regulatory perspective what is mean from a competition perspective. there questions that should emerge and make sure you're not doing things that are unethical or of course illegal or indeed they i sick corrupt. that is tremendously important advice again in a world that's incredibly complex it's chaotic in the sense that we
1:16 pm
have a list of de- globalization, lots of issues with respect to technology and disruption what that might lead too. i think it's important for us to be vigilant not just on the downside but also on the outside opportunity when we see you then. >> indeed. i want to take a few moments to talk about some specific you mentioned by own board experience how that helped you learn more from those experiences. you mentioned how of course there all of these things that you just cannot plan for. and sometimes you just cannot anticipate it. the share price swung from $7 to $53 while you were on the board, wow. what is that like as a director to have that kind of fluctuation? >> for someone like myself who is relatively new as a board member in general and in corporate governance it was quite traumatic. this is why you want people
1:17 pm
who have knowledge, savvy, and have been able to navigate companies through challenging times. the thing about barrick gold in particular is it is a price taker. they are a company that relies on mining minerals such as gold and copper that are actually not priced they are priced by the market. you are a price taker of many global event second heavily influence not just your performance in terms of the operation but also the share prices. the good news we should not forget is that trading above $20 bounce back. >> very good point here. [laughter] >> to accompany the board but for the company to turn that kind of a challenging environment around. >> indeed. it's not just market fluctuation preview on the board of miller going back to the first time you joined as a director. it was about $400 billion in
1:18 pm
2016 which i believe you said was the largest deal that year. one of the larger deals. the board initially did not think the company would be bought. what was going on back then? >> no. i think this is another reason why in the book i suggest it's a very good thing. [laughter] to avoid. anything can happen. you know aside from that transaction i had been on boards in over a decade now, just over ten years of serving on boards at eight chairman diane office as an activist for the had been a regulatory fines that work a company that trading and negative retained earnings. if you think about is quite shocking. i share price is highest 53, as low as seven and what that might mean. but i do think in terms of that transition in particular,
1:19 pm
the board had made a number of assumptions. for the second largest beverage company. in the world. we fought the notion the number one company would swalwell the number two company. it seemed so distant partly because we were competing in the same areas there is also going to beat regulatory antitrust issues we thought would be hard to work through. we totally misjudge the fact that in order to buy us this company, number one company anheuser-busch had to basically do the largest bond transaction ever, $40 billion. it seems so implausible they surely would not do that. and again boy, were we wrong for to add to that i was a chairman of the risk committee at that time. not only had we assumed would not happen in 2016 but if it were to happen there is no way people would vote brexit. and that had material consequences from the
1:20 pm
valuation of the company and really the increasing or altering the probability of the transaction getting done. but the transaction did get done. i think that is a lesson there that anything can happen. i also write in the book there is no company that is too big, too regulated, too powerful that could not be visited upon by activist. the same attitude that i've been on a number of boards with a shareholder comes into the and you think this is how is this possible customer but anything can happen bird. >> fastening to hear about it in retrospect. and all of those things, all started to abide and sometimes they do. you mention brexit, obscene geopolitical changes something so big were going to get morons that little bit later. but will more quick anecdote from your experience on board here on the barclays word is
1:21 pm
it considered withdrawing from africa. what was that like? >> so for me personally quite traumatic. i was born and raised in africa. my first bank account was an african branch of barclays bank. at the time i was serving on the board and had been an -- make it a bit in africa for 100 years. and many ways i had to separate the emotional, personal me someone born in africa. seven is very committed to africa's progress by all good progress in society and the world from the sort of job at being a fiduciary in a custodian of an organization to make sure it survives and thrive over the long-term. it was a very hard decision. i wanted it to stay in africa. but at the same time that regulatory environment if you would recall when the 2008 financial crisis. it's what's called a globally
1:22 pm
significant systemically important company. on that basis the regulators had increased some of the capitol requirements that made it very, very challenging indeed to stay in the countries in the manner we were. but sort of again underlining and underscores this challenge of having to do things that are perhaps empathetic goal for what you'd like to see happen in the interest of making sure you're doing your fiduciary duty but also making sure his company will take time to thrive and is very much alive and kicking. >> you mentioned and as a former banking reporter for five years, that shocked me a little i have not heard that in a while. >> i want to go a little broader for a moment. write a lot about board make up a somewhat even gets to be
1:23 pm
on a board. and the whole power structure within a board let's go really high level for a moment. it's been a topic of debate recently. curious should employees sit on a corporate board something senator elizabeth warren has called for and as you are right, exist in germany. >> let me just take a step back and say the following because i've had the privilege of serving on corporate boards in different jurisdictions, the u.s., the uk, canada and also continental europe. i'm constantly thinking about ways what is best practice but should we do to enhance board activity. i do address the specific question around employees. ways to really upgrade boards i'm sure we will get to that. it's a question about it's a really interesting one. the board structure in germany in particular slightly different it's a two-tiered system. so there is a sense there's
1:24 pm
eight managerial board as well as supervisory one. it is slightly different from what you might see elsewhere. i will just say before address a specific question there's a lot of overlap in terms of the governance responsibility. all of these have committees they have conversation committees and in that respect i think is very small margins and differences. in this about employees is an important one. i recently wrote an article about the fact i do believe two things, we are more and more in the boardroom able to get the viewpoint of the employee base into the boardroom in a way that is very important spray technology is allowing us to go beyond the source of company managed. >> you write about glass door
1:25 pm
so board members are following that. >> absolute pretty wanting from her clients when you're for the stakeholders, employees absolute. it's the only will becoming the best decision. we are getting that message loud and clear. there's always room for improvement as technology continues to evolve. on the other hand i do argue is an article for bloomberg opinion a few weeks ago talking about how it's really important i think for us to make sure there still is some responsibilities that are decision points made at the boardroom or at the managerial level because the organizational leaders tend to have a much broader purview. if you have one aspect one business unit in a company might have a very risk tolerance from the way the company in its entirety should
1:26 pm
be viewed if you want to think about something like risk. i do sometimes, generally made the point we have to be careful about bringing employees are certain viewpoints into the boardroom have to be careful about that. we talk about a large non- independent strategic stakes, activist onto the board because you do not one them to bring a view that might be very narrow. mab does not take into consideration the picture. these are evolving debates and discussions that i think the best boards have all the time because things are changing. but we do want to make sure were getting that message in from the employees in particular but more generally from society at large. >> in terms of the makeup of the board there's a question what should employees be private or not?
1:27 pm
it's also about what kind of diversity sits on boards for you write about major institutional shareholders, there's legislation in california, i read a proposal recently. what data do you seek out to track and monitor when it comes to diversity, inclusion, either on boards in general or the employee base which is again something that is definitely at the forefront for many, many major companies. >> absolutely. let's just take a minute here to fully appreciate my very good friend melody he was the chairman of starbucks often says the numbers don't lie. and we know the numbers tell us very clearly that more diverse boards, corporations, just do better. the return on equity is far superior than the cost of capitol. their ability, not just to survive but to thrive and compete is enhanced by having
1:28 pm
more diversity. in the book i cite specific dates from the kinsey report, use them all for a lot of work in this area. it's not a matter of window dressing. it's a matter of a few and to compete in the 21st century you need to be really hypersensitive to the issue of diversity. diversity of views, diversities of race, gender, the background is absently brilliant for long-term success. now having said that, boards have some lovers to influence this. fortunately we talked already about hiring a ceo for that is a real opportunity for us to not just hire diverse candidate but to think about whoever is taking that seat can be a standard bearer for understanding and pushing the agenda around a more diverse society for more diverse company. we also do it through compensation. not just diversity issues but
1:29 pm
issues around broadly absently parts and parcel on a percentage basis i considered part of how to determine compensation. certainly for the ceo as well as the top management and business leaders print think it will continue to be that. with that said notwithstanding what i said we do not want to be in a world were fighting discrimination with discrimination. so high-performing white guys absolutely welcome and companies they should be encouraged to compete and succeed as much as any other group. but there are clearly gaps we have been lagging behind in terms of remedying the shortfall and diversity. i am pleased to say the companies i am involved with but more generally there is a real fence this is not just about employees and boards et cetera. it's also about subcontractors , people who are advising us
1:30 pm
in the external auditors. people are managing the pension fund money. there's much more corporations can do. of course many of these companies have large events and gatherings across the united states, cross the world for there is a lot of scope for companies to say you know what, we want to know more information about what the record is in terms of education in terms of employment in terms of criminal justice and in terms of healthcare to their population. it's an exciting period to think about beyond a narrative which sometimes people just push. >> it's almost someone has described to me as a spoken wheel model not just the company itself it's all the other pieces that come together. despite even talking about this right now and how much progress has been made and the thought that goes into the future there is a moment you wrote about in your book that
1:31 pm
frankly made my jaw drop. going back to may 2010 you write an annual shareholder meeting and the shareholder stood up and said something quite shocking part i would love hear you tell the story. >> : : : the only visible minority meaning i was the only woman on the board and as the only black person and so from that respect already standing out and you are correct in the shareholder stirred up-- stood up during q&a and pointed aggressively at me and said i want to know what the credentials are up that woman that she could serve on this board and thankfully i had spent almost 10 years working at goldman sachs and i have a phd
1:32 pm
in economics and i felt pretty confident i could justify my existence on the borge. >> oh a, yes. >> but, i often say to minority candidates and to people interested in boards that we shouldn't be in a position where we have to lead with our race or gender. we should lead the conversation in our abilities. we try to work extremely hard. we want to learn, grow and contribute and it's not about getting any breaks or any favors we want a fair shot at these opportunities and i think that really was my big take away from that experience. when we came off the podium, three of my white male colleagues say thank god they didn't ask me about that because i don't know what i would've answered. i don't think i could have answered anything credible at the time, but the good news is the world is changing. in the uk for example we have about 34% of the women
1:33 pm
represented on the ftse, most important ftse companies and more generally i think we find it peculiar when you look aboard and you don't see diversity or women and racially, i think it's just odd and certainly the boards i'm on. i mean, we all are very much attuned to more diversity and its value add most importantly, its value add for competition. >> thank you for sharing the story and i think it ties into what you are talking about where company culture, you know do people want to be a part of these companies, do they feel included and do they want to stay even when they bring people into people want to stay. you write about how company culture is important and it's a big part of being a board member object can you describe it more about how boards get involved in crafting a company's cultural message. it feels very abstract, so what is that like when you are in the
1:34 pm
weeds? >> you know, it's a wonderful question because it's incredibly complex and it varies from business to business. i recall on at least one occasion where we had a visitor, someone who was a cultural sort of champion and i was really struck by something he said. he said it's actually in a way easier to influence and change and to the culture of organizations where there is a risk an employee can die by being on the job and he was talking about having advised the national health service in britain, advised energy company where they had an accident. we talked about being an advisory of cultures to an army. again, people will not go home if do-- they don't follow certain cultural norms and the challenges more when you think about how to drive culture in places where you can work in a bank, for example, and the risk
1:35 pm
is perhaps mitigated of dying on the job and i think the way that the board engages, whether they think more about process versus outcome and i love talking about netflix you know, if you are trying to produce-- you want as few degrees of freedom as possible, the peninsula tablet or the vaccine i should be-- get should be for much identical to what you get and went with that respect you could argue the process is really critical and everything it needs to be to the nth degree the same. that's a very different cultural as for netflix for example where people need to be creative and come up with ideas as crazy as they may seem and they want them to throw it on the wall and see what comes out of it. to the degree of freedom is much broader and of course that
1:36 pm
respect the role of the board and how they sort of check and challenge the culture of the company would be quite different. i will say really how we do it and it check this and make sure it's working is an evolving-- much for of an art than a science and we are interested in thinking about things like agenda, should we nudge employees to change behaviors. should we penalize people literally dock them on their bonus if they behaved badly? should we incentivize people or bonuses? they are so, so different tools and we are constantly looking at how these types of tools and efforts within the lavers we have and the powers we have can actually be impactful for changing culture, but it's definitely you know school is not out on this one. at something we will continue to deal with and thankfully i don't
1:37 pm
think there is a point where we say that is the end, nothing more can be done. >> no more work on culture. [laughter] can you imagine? i think it became even during this global pandemic many workforces when promote, question about employees that were being-- and employee loyalty and at the same time we've seen this whole employee activist movement or at least increasingly more vocal employees. i went to the back back to him one point we looked at briefly earlier where as a board member you are saying, you know you are just having whatever management is presenting on how employees feel, you seek it to get information to really get the full scope of how employees are doing. what was that like as a board member during the pandemic and how were you assigned it to figure that out? >> you know, it's incredibly challenging because you are struggling and recognizing that
1:38 pm
at some point these companies are going to have to stand up and continue to operate. what does that new world look like? yes, absolutely. you are in the here and now trying to make sure the company is in a position to compete and also make sure people are healthy and safe and that it can operate and pay salaries and do that in a safe way, but at the same time you want to make sure when the company comes out any learning, any change we are talking about what this work life balance and also what does the office look like post covid. we are trying to telegraph those future scenarios. clearly the deployment of different-- digitalization, the downside risk in upside opportunities. yes people and out, what does it mean for cyber risk, but what does it also mean poor productivity so there's a lot of work in these areas and certainly i think the best
1:39 pm
boards and i am very proud of the work we have done in our family office and also more generally in the boards on which i serve to really steer that course and say we can't get sort of gazing in the here and now only two at some point we have to figure out how to get back to post covid environment and i think that balancing act is critical. >> absolutely. you talk so much and write so much about not just having short-term thinking, but being able to long-term what happens and also what risk might come in the future. one more quick question i want to get to some broader point you bring up. investors and employees and other stakeholders have really been demanding companies do more environmental social government factors and i don't even think we were speaking for five minutes before you brought up bsg which is at the forefront of a lot right now. it's kind of change, pay equity and even writes about how companies have to consider
1:40 pm
obesity. what role does the board to serve ranging from mental health, gun-control, can you walk us through? these are big topics and i guess many people may not realize where corporate boards play on those. >> again this is one of the areas which is quickly evolving. if i look back on my board career, the first five years this was always somewhat of an afterthought. we thought about community service and things we called csr, and things we did out of the foundation, there were things and maybe we would have an employee that loves to run marathons and thinking of how we could raise money in the communities in which we operate but it's changed so dramatically now, we have gone through the whole narrative of thinking about risk mitigation, greenhouse gases, it continues to them be important but we are moving into a word where we think wait a minute it's just
1:41 pm
good business, integrating all these aspects into how we operate on a magna basis. i mentioned already 10 years ago i was the only woman on my board and the only black person, i mean, that would be insane in 2021. i can even imagine now that i lived in that environment. there is no doubt about it that these things are very complicated and doesn't know answer. six month ago i didn't think or certainly before the tragic death of murder george floyd i didn't think boards would have to opine on racial dynamics to the extent we have had to do. i didn't expect to have to think about voting rights, but guess what we did we have to and there is no sort of compass to say this happened and this is what you need to do. very much the environment we are in now. have to think about in six months what might it be, so i'm very interested and the book i'm
1:42 pm
trying to push for the thinking and efforts around these issues to make sure we are very transparent so you don't end up with a situation where aging employees say we have violence against asian employees but we were so hourly spoken when talking about black lives matter, why are you doing that for asians. we want to be transparent. we wanted to be sustainable so whatever it is we want to be able to have teeth long term, we to be innovative. i think looking for solutions that work in the here and now, but aren't really innovative in terms of changing the mold, then there is so many other aspects. they have to be considerate of different cultures. i was asked not to long ago by a gentleman who said he identified himself as conservative, religious, white and said what is the board at doing for me. i don't hear any consideration
1:43 pm
of my views and i was struck by that so it's about all these things and bringing all those voices and, but i think also most of all really understanding that we try really hard to reduce the amount of the degree of the trade-off. we don't want to leave anyone behind and so thinking about things you know talking about racial discrimination, not fighting discrimination with this termination and making sure everyone feels like that an opportunity if the-- also, in things like climate change, making sure that we are not just racing towards solutions that ignore the fact that 1.5 billion people around the world have no sustainable cost-effective and reliable energy. we have got to talk sustainable solutions that make sure people are not ending up in more dire straits and then one last thing to say about this is that i think also boards have to be
1:44 pm
highly attuned to second order and so when people for example put pressure on the investors to defund an energy company, we need to understand what that means. we are not just impoverishing people along the world, but really changing and altering the trajectory of people's ability especially people like myself who come from the developing world to actually get educated, to get active in healthcare and lead a decent life. look at the southern border of the united states, all those challenges must be talked about in a sensible and considerate way and this is not at all to dismiss the urgency and importance of getting to a real solution, but i think there is a nuance that needs to be appreciated as we delve it through and go through these
1:45 pm
challenges. >> absolutely. we mentioned before some of the timeline on the prior boards you served on and you are now on the boards of chevron and 3m so i wanted to note that. i went to take a piece of your book where you really talk about forward-looking challenges and in particular the globalization. what you wrote blew my mind. i had not even connected these dots and you write how companies really have to weigh questions around supply chain, data privacy, integration and so much more. can you set the stage for what the globalization could mean for companies and how you are thinking about that? >> yes. absolutely. i think one of the challenges is that we have had a phenomenal economic growth and success. certainly between 1950 and 2008 many ways mirrors the gilded age in the united states in 1870 to 1900 with a lot of economic
1:46 pm
growth, globalization in terms of trade, in terms of the movement of people, in terms of capital, in terms of a global cooperation with institutions, but also we saw the emergence of a lot of large important corporations that were really driving a lot of the agenda in terms of growth and partnerships with governments. that if you take a step back and data shows we have only had liberal democracy and market capitalism for 1% of human history, so if i go back and start to think about one of the key responsibilities of a board on a regular basis is to mitigate for risk, we need to start thinking about wait a second, so odds are that we might be in a world that's much more challenged and more ideal at least they are in mind idealized global environment and
1:47 pm
we have seen that. we have seen with respect to trade, we have seen the bilateral regional agreement, ppp. these are all really affecting not just traits and services, but also supply chains. as you mentioned, i happen to serve on the board of 3m and we make the masks. we have been making a lot of masks. [inaudible] dpa, which i was-- former president trump put in place basically restricting the sale of masks outside of the united states during covid, so it's also about capital flow. people like yourself that work in finance are familiar with the carry trade, borrow cheaply in new york and london and invest
1:48 pm
in high risk adjusted returning environments like brazil and argentina. that world is very fractured now with home values and investors, but also capital control. you start to think about immigration and how much that is a issue and people across the world resisting immigration, creating pockets of disorderly immigration. we have seen in europe and we see in the southern border of the u.s. that has a lot of implication for hiring. how do you hire if you don't have that global talent pool" you think about the internet and the real risk of fracturing around technology and intellectual platforms where there could be one chinese lead, when us-led and what it could mean for how you article the business dare i say it, finally the breakdown of cooperation as we have known it where we actually had a liberal order of
1:49 pm
the wto, world bank are on the map and being challenged by chinese initiatives. also, within the european and america sort of the ally there are real tensions and we have seen that with the rollout of the vaccines and covid response, so i have sort of gone through a horrible portfolio of issues, but the bottom line is we have to mitigate for those risks to wake up in a world where it's more fractured and balkanized. you know, how do you think about running your business in a world that's more sideload i think is an important question that companies and boards need to think about. that is very much important. i will also say, if i made that it's also not just about again thinking about the risks and downside, it's also about where the opportunities may lie
1:50 pm
because as you know as i mentioned you can't shrink your way to grow for. you have to think about expanding the companies for longer periods. >> that glass is half-full even though these are weighty questions. lastly we talked about this a bit and i'm sure you've been waiting to go back to it because investor, the investor base is dramatically changing. when a new director joins the board i'm curious about the advice you give them with dealing with investors and i'm thinking institutional investors demanding more, investors and how they align themselves and of course activists and investors coming the norm. how do you even advise on that front? >> well, i think the most important thing is to read up on the most-- motivation and the angles that the investors may take. i think we tended to think about large powerful investors whether there an accident or passive investor as being sort of out
1:51 pm
there to cause trouble and i think that sometimes people take that approach and i think that's an ideal approach and i think we are actually all on the same side, but perhaps there is a delta or bulk of information we may have as board members and sort of insiders that they may have so i think there's a lot of utilities in talking to and engaging with shareholders, but it's important for them to also understand as a fiduciary it's not just my responsibility to the big and powerful. we need to think about mom and pop. >> retail investors. >> exactly. retail investors model-- matter a lot. you know, it's also important to think about the end asset owner, not just asset managers, the asset owner because often they have very aligned goals for the long-term.
1:52 pm
at they are not just looking for shorter-term returns or the next quarter. they are also interested and we are talking about pension funds, talking about pensioners and people who invest in these large organizations and whose money is managed. they want to see investment in education and infrastructure. i would hazard that they like us to look through these quarterly sort of machinations and think more strategically about what are we doing for society if your how are we helping society to progress and not just thinking about what their returns are in the short term, so i think there's many different types of shareholders. now, we have to think about where do we need to prioritize the ranking system, what metric matters to them. there's a lot of work i think the best institutional investors are doing before what needs to happen is we would have two people show up from the same organization. one would be checking in terms
1:53 pm
of whether we need requirements and another one thinks about traditional financial returns pick that message-- message needs to be married as well to i'm optimistic to i think we are all on the same side for human progress and society and economic development and functioning global economy and world and in that respect i think we have more in common than we might want to believe. >> i think that's an optimistic note to to wrap up on. doctor dambisa moyo, thank you. it lays out what a board member does, how they operate, focus areas and all the really broad topics you need to think about and getting into the nitty-gritty. it was a fascinating read and i appreciate the discussion. >> thank you so much. >> afterwards is available as a podcast. to listen, visit c-span.org/podcast or research c-span afterwards on your
1:54 pm
podcast at and watch this and all previous afterwards interviews at book tv.org. just click the afterwards button near the top of the page. >> weekends on c-span2 are in intellectual feet every saturday history tv documents america's story and on sundays book tv brings you the latest in nonfiction books and authors. funding for c-span2 comes from these television companies and more including red robin. ♪♪ ♪♪ buckeye broadway and along with these television companies support c-span2 as public service. recently house museum and he stayed hosted a virtual event
1:55 pm
with columbia university professor who explained why he believes the future pandemics can be prevented by expanding vaccine literacy. >> i started writing this book about a year before, 19 began, and i think one of the points of the book is that what happened-- what's happening with covid in 19 isn't the extraordinary event that many claim it is, but rather a culminating event of a lot of unraveling, what's been happening over the last year with this chronicling the collapse-- i don't want to say, total collapse partial unraveling of mobile health infrastructure and all the things we put in place, which includes a lot of vaccine diplomacy. by vaccine diplomacy i define it broadly as cooperation between nations around global health, but particularly vaccines because vaccines are such powerful tools in global health.
1:56 pm
the beginning of it actually goes with the beginning of vaccines. when edward jenner developed the first smallpox vaccine in the late 1700s, some say 1790, he was immediately called upon to mediate prisoner exchanges between the british and the french during the napoleonic wars and thomas jefferson used his vaccine as a goodwill gesture to send the vaccine for exploration of the wilderness with native american groups. the more modern version began with albert sabin who not many people realize he developed a or -- oral polio vaccine with the soviets. he sent polio strains to the ussr, got permission from state department and his soviet counterpart whose son actually worked at fda and a friend and
1:57 pm
colleague got permission to work together. that's when the vaccine was developed, tested on 10 million soviet school children, shown to be safe and effective and led to the licensure of the polio vaccine and it happened again for smallpox eradication with soviets that found a whale to scale up production of the smallpox vaccine which allowed you to take that version into tropical areas so it wouldn't be destroyed by heat. that led an american to lead smallpox eradication campaign so the point is some of our greatest successes in global health at least around infectious diseases always relied on international cooperation and cooperation between countries, which generally did not agree ideologically. they were willing to put aside their ideologies to work together and this is something that i have been impressed with as a vaccine scientist over the years, how can we sort of dusted
1:58 pm
us off and maybe given a fresh coat of paint and reinvigorated and i had the u.s. science envoy for the state department in the white house between 2014 and 2016 in the obama white house during a difficult time in the middle east when the isis occupation is starting. we were at the height of the syrian conflict and a civil war. it's when the proxy wars came around and saudi arabia was beginning in yemen so it was during an awful time looking at cooperating between muslim and shorting nations for vaccine development and made some progress, but the point is i think this is a time when we needed more than ever. we can talk about what we are seeing now unraveling with what russia is doing, with what china is doing to some extent and now as if life isn't complicated enough this very aggressive
1:59 pm
antiscience disinformation campaign, which is both homegrown in the united states and being launched by russia. how we bring this back and kind of restore vaccine diplomacy to its rightful place because of its incredible track record of success. >> evil can find the rest of this program on our website, but to be.org. search for the title of the book using the search box at the top of the page. ♪♪ >> secret service was founded in the aftermath of the assassination of abraham lincoln. it wasn't until the death of john f. kennedy at the presidential protective service began to get closer attention from the american people. carolyn nick began reporting on the secret service for the "washington post" in 2012. in the prologue of her new book, zero fail, she writes that she started her coverage on the scandal in which agents brought prostitutes to their hotel room
2:00 pm
while making arrangements for president obama to visit columbia. we talked with her about her in-depth look in her new book subtitled the rise and fall of the secret service. >> carolyn nick on this episode of footnote plus, listen as he spat.org or wherever you get your podcast. >> you are watching the tv for complete television schedule visit book tv.org. you can also follow along behind-the-scenes on social media at book tv on twitter, instagram and facebook. >> tonight we are honored to listen in on two career long champions of liberty. as they ponder the state of religious freedom domestically and globally. tom for but serves as president

9 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on