The use of malicious software to extort small businesses is on the rise in Ireland as global criminals seek out easier prey. Arlene Harris reports Ransomware. At a time of rising awareness of cyberthreats and the need for adequate safeguards across all business functions, including finance, ransomware is emerging as a growing threat for even the smallest operators. And, according to Dr Richard Browne, Director of the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), ransomware is “here to stay”. A form of extortion “as old as the hills”, ransomware is a type of malicious software designed to block access to a computer system until a sum of money is paid, explained Browne. What is new in the field is a concerning rise in the number of ransomware attacks recently aimed at small- and medium-enterprises (SMEs), a segment of Irish business so far largely unaffected by this particular cyberthreat. Indeed, a statement issued in August by the NCSC in conjunction with the Garda National Cyber Crime Bureau warned SMEs that, in a noticeable shift in ransomware tactics, hackers were turning their attention away from big business and government entities to focus instead on smaller businesses. “This trend has been observed globally and Ireland is no exception, with several businesses becoming victims of these groups in the past number of weeks,” said Browne. “A number of different business models are typically used, which involve encryption of a victims data by a threat actor, whether that is a criminal gang or a lone individual.” Greater threat in newer tactics Cybersecurity has, by and large, kept pace with criminal activity online until now and experts are quite adept at dealing with established ransomware practices—which typically involve a threat actor making contact with a victim, and requesting a key to unlock or decrypt the victim’s information. The threat landscape is evolving, however, leading to newer ransomware tactics that are more difficult to defend against. “Recently, human-operated ransomware has been developed, which means there is a person in the loop with more advanced techniques,” Browne explained. “They hack into a system—or across it, in many cases—steal data and seek to encrypt an entire IT system. The old-fashioned ransomware ‘drive-by’ (often caused by clicking on a link) is not a massive threat as it can usually be stopped by anti-virus software, but human-operated ransomware is categorically a risk for businesses of any kind.” Behind the rise of human-operated ransomware are often established, integrated and organised criminal enterprises that operate “at scale and at speed” globally, Browne said. “This is very much a global market, with the ‘bad guys’ targeting IP addresses anywhere in the world,” he said. “Over the years, many have been heavily compromised, but, while their organisations have been broken up, the individuals involved are still criminals and they are still capable of conducting cyberattacks, so they tend to simply reform and go after smaller targets.” Criminals target smaller players While large corporations are more likely to have the financial means, technology and expertise to handle a sophisticated ransomware attack, the same cannot be said for many of their smaller counterparts. “Because of changes in the ecosystem, smaller companies are getting hit more often than bigger entities, which can afford to be prepared, are more resilient and much more able to deal with incidents when they occur,” Browne said. “So, [the hackers] are going after SMEs and individual companies, which might only net them a smaller ransom, but they are much more likely to be paid. “It is also easier. They don’t have to spend as much time navigating systems and don’t have to be as careful as they would with high-end security systems, so they can target more small companies. “Solicitors’ offices, for example, will often have sensitive data on file—so it is in their interest to pay not to have it released. “The criminals may also gain access to customer money sitting in a firm’s account over a weekend (for lodgement the following week), which makes them a target for other activities, such as fraud. “Of course, there have been some very high-profile attacks too, such as the Colonial Pipeline attack in the US, which took out a piece of physical infrastructure without actually damaging or physically affecting it. JBS Meats is another one and the HSE is probably the most well-known here in Ireland.” These ransomware attacks are happening “all the time”, said Browne, both in Ireland and elsewhere. “Just today, I’ve had reports of about 15 new ransomware attacks in Europe over a few days. We, in Ireland, are relatively lucky as we are something of a small player, but we are at risk nonetheless.” While criminal gangs are set to continue making money by hacking into IT systems, harvesting data and selling it on, or blackmailing companies into paying a ransom, Browne advises that there are steps SMEs can take to protect themselves from ransomware attacks. Effective security measures “We appreciate that many business owners are understandably nervous about the threat ransomware poses, but some straightforward security measures can be put in place to ensure that an organisation’s data and systems remain secure,” he said. “Some SMEs won’t have an IT system as it will be outsourced, so the first thing they need to do is to ask their vendor how prepared they are for dealing with this kind of thing.” At the very least, businesses should have two-factor identification on all of their online accounts—whether it be Facebook, Gmail or a financial services package. “It sounds simple, but, if everyone did this, it would dramatically reduce the amount of damage done,” said Browne. “After that, I would encourage firms to ensure their vendor has proper offline back-up and, internally, to decide that—on a specific day of the week—someone will be tasked with taking the external hard-drive, making a copy of it, and putting it away. “This way, they will have a secure offline system so, if they need to restore it after an incident, it can be done without taking down the company. “Beyond that, they should have an up-to-date antivirus system and ensure any vulnerabilities are patched up.” Making these provisions is becoming more essential for SMEs because ransomware, as Browne puts it, “isn’t going away”. “People need to be vigilant and governments need to do more to deal with it and ensure these guys don’t get paid, so that, eventually, it will become less prevalent,” he said. “That’s not going to happen overnight. It is going to continue to be an issue for some time. We all need to be aware and take steps to keep our systems secure.” For more advice and information, visit ncsc.gov.ie or garda.ie/en/crime/cyber-crime

The Corporate Enforcement Authority Act 2021 overhauled the legislative framework for businesses in Ireland, impacting company directors, corporate restructuring, share premiums, and the distribution of profits. Dee Moran and Lilian Halpin dig into the details Although most of the provisions of the Companies (Corporate Enforcement Authority) Act 2021 (CEA Act) came into effect in July of this year, the focus thus far has centred primarily on the Corporate Enforcement Authority, the successor to the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement. There is far more to this Act, however, including a number of interesting updates the Companies Act 2014 (CA 2014). The introduction of the CA 2014, followed the wide-ranging overhaul, modernisation and streamlining of company law in Ireland. It was inevitable, however, that there would be some gaps and omissions in the new regime. The CEA Act introduces provisions aimed at remedying some of these anomalies. While further remediative legislation is expected in the future as the legislature continues to review and refine existing law, in this article, our focus will be the amendments included by the CEA Act impacting company directors, company re-organisation, share premiums, and the distribution of profits. Requirement for directors to provide PPSN details Section 35 of the CEA Act introduces the requirement for directors of Irish registered companies to provide details of their Personal Public Service Number (PPSN) to the Companies Registration Office (CRO) when completing certain documents. While this section of the CEA Act has not at time of writing commenced, it is intended to help protect against identity theft, specifically concerning the set-up of new companies that have used bogus director details and addresses or individual names without permission. The UK’s register of businesses and their directors is famously so weak on information verification that both “Donald Duck” and “Adolf Tooth Fairy Hitler” have been listed as directors of companies. Other difficulties faced prior to this amendment included obtaining a list of directorships for an individual from the CRO as individual director filings may use different versions of the person’s name, such as ‘Eddie’ and ‘Edward’, or the person may have changed address. The introduction of the requirement to file the PPSN as a unique identifier should, therefore, make this process easier. It is important to note that there will be an alternative procedure in place for those directors who do not have a PPSN. The CRO is currently reconfiguring its online portal to accommodate this new requirement and it is expected that Section 35 will commence in the first quarter of 2023. Its implementation will not be without challenge and the CRO has set up a working group to identify issues and try to resolve them to ensure a smoother transition. The CRO is also reviewing the technical challenges that arose after the commencement in 2019 of the Registry of Beneficial Ownership (RBO). The RBO is “the central repository of statutory information required to be held by relevant entities (corporate or legal entities incorporated in the State) in respect of the natural persons who are their beneficial owners/controllers, including details of the beneficial interests held by them.” It is hoped that the CRO will take the learnings from this review and incorporate them into the new system. It is important that potential technical challenges in relation to PPSNs are resolved before section 35 of the CEA Act commences. If they are not properly considered, there is the potential for delays in the filing of changes to directors or to the filing of annual returns, and the possibility of late filing fees or the loss of audit exemption. Therefore, companies and practitioners alike need to be aware of these changes and to begin to make plans to ensure that the appropriate information is understood and updated. Three party share-for-undertaking transactions The provision for three party share-for-undertaking transactions within corporate reorganisations was introduced in section 91 of CA 2014. This section recognised that it is not uncommon for companies to enter into a transaction where an undertaking, part of an undertaking, or a subsidiary, is transferred to a new company, which then issues shares as consideration to the shareholders, rather than to the transferring company. Subsection 91(4) of CA 2014 has, however, been interpreted by certain practitioners to mean that such a transaction could only be validated by either a summary approval procedure or a special resolution confirmed by court—even where the company has adequate distributable reserves to underpin the transaction. The CEA Act has added subsection 91(4)(c) to clarify that such a transaction can take place without the summary approval procedure, or court approval, in circumstances where the company has distributable reserves that are at least equal to the value of the undertaking transferred. The use of a company’s share premium account Under the Companies Act 1963, a company’s share premium account could be applied for several purposes, such as application by the company in writing off preliminary expenses, or in writing off the expenses of, or the commission paid or discount allowed on, any issue of the shares or debentures of the company. Equivalent provisions were not included in CA 2014 in what was assumed to be an unintended omission by the drafters. This reduced the flexibility of companies in relation to the use of share premiums, causing difficulties. A company wishing to effect a transaction which had been permissible under the Companies Act 1963 was now, for example, obliged to carry out a formal reduction of company capital by the summary approval procedure in CA 2014. This meant that the company might have incurred additional expense, such as obtaining a statutory auditors’ report, or that it might have had to make a court application in circumstances where such a move would not previously have been required. In addition, because the summary approval procedure is not available for the reduction of company capital in the case of public limited companies, such a company had to apply to the High Court in order to reduce its company capital so it could write off such costs and expenses. To remedy this, section 14 of the CEA Act inserts a new subsection 71(5A) into the CA 2014. This subsection restores the status quo that had existed prior to the introduction of the CA 2014, with the exception of permitting its use for the issue of shares at a discount. Restoration of exceptions to “distribution” definition In the since repealed Companies (Amendment) Act 1983, company legislation provided for two exceptions to the rule that a company should not make a distribution except out of profits available for this purpose. They were: a reduction of share capital by paying off paid up share capital; and extinguishing or reducing all or part of a member’s liability on shares that are not fully paid up. These exceptions were not included in CA 2014 and it is worth noting that these omissions were considered and not unintentional. Both exceptions were included in draft legislation but were subsequently removed before CA 2014 was enacted. The effect of the omission of the exceptions meant that a company had to find distributable profits to be able to lawfully reduce or extinguish the liability of members in respect of any unpaid shares, or to pay off paid-up capital. The explanatory memorandum to CA 2014 refers to the omission of the exceptions as providing consistency in the legislation. However, in 2017, the Company Law Review Group—a statutory advisory expert body that advises the Minister on the review and development of Irish company law—was of the opinion that the omission of the two exceptions in the CA 2014 did not take into account the new and detailed regime in that legislation for the reduction of share capital, i.e. requiring either a court order, or to be effected under the summary approval procedure with contingent director liability. It recommended that the two exceptions which had been omitted from CA 2014 be reinstated. Section 19 of the CEA Act has now amended section 123 of CA 2014 to reinstate these exceptions. Planning for the changes ahead It is encouraging that improvements and clarifications continue to be made to legislation, particularly in company law where omissions or inadvertent changes from older legislation have resulted in difficulties in practice. Chartered Accountants Ireland continues to work with its technical committees to identify areas where further clarity on aspects of company law would be beneficial and to make representations to the relevant department outlining those areas so that they might be considered for future legislation. Dee Moran is Professional Accountancy Lead at Chartered Accountants Ireland and Lilian Halpin is Technical Manager at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Investors are asking if it’s safe to invest again. Cormac Lucey explains why they might want to hold off for now “Is it safe?” That was the question asked of Dustin Hoffman in the movie “Marathon Man” as he was being interrogated while strapped into a dentist’s chair by Laurence Olivier (playing the role of an on-the-run Nazi war criminal), expertly reimagining our worst dentist nightmares. Much like Hoffman’s position, equity markets have become a nightmare. Investors keep asking themselves whether it is safe to invest again or whether this bear market has longer to run. Jeremy Grantham, the veteran investor, wrote an article on GMO.com in late August warning that the “current super-bubble features an unprecedentedly dangerous mix of cross-asset overvaluation (with bonds, housing, and stocks all critically overpriced and now rapidly losing momentum), commodity shock, and Fed hawkishness.” He concluded that we haven’t yet seen the bottom. Having pumped vast amounts of liquidity into the world economy to stave off the deflationary effects of the pandemic in 2020, central bankers were shocked by the firm inflationary response. They responded by tightening monetary policy – the usual precursor of recessions. It’s important to note that this move pre-dated the Russian invasion of Ukraine with its resultant economic disruption, and even more important to note that the conflict in Ukraine has fundamentally changed the rules of the economic game we had become used to. Zoltan Pozsar of Credit Suisse has written that, in recent decades, “the EU paid euros for cheap Russian gas, the US paid US dollars for cheap Chinese imports, and Russia and China dutifully recycled their earnings into G7 claims.” The problem is that global supply chains work only in peacetime, “but not when the world is at war,” Pozsar notes. While Russia is currently being forcibly disentangled from trade with the west, China may decide to voluntarily and slowly remove itself to avoid the shock of aggressive disentanglement should its cold war with Taiwan ever turn hot. Key monetary indicators remain recessionary. In the US, money supply is growing at a slower pace than inflation, meaning the real quantity of money in the economy is falling. The yield curve has just inverted, meaning short-term (two-year) rates of interest exceed long-term (10-year) rates. For several decades, this has been an unerringly accurate harbinger of recession. Unfortunately, central banks remain in tightening mode for those wanting equity markets to lift as inflationary pressures prove to be more than just “transitory.” They say, “Don’t fight the Fed” (the Federal Reserve) and with good reason. Caution is warranted. There are other challenges facing equities. On previous occasions over the last two decades, the depth of downturns has been eased by the fact that not all large economic blocs have been in recession at the same time. In the wake of the Global Financial Crisis, when the western world was in deep recession, strong growth in China helped ameliorate the global impact of the recession and accelerate its ending. Today, all major economic blocs are simultaneously threatened by recession, which risks making this recession deeper and longer. What might signal an equity market bottom? I’ll be looking for a combination of value, investor sentiment, and a change in central bank behaviour. Share prices would need to drop sufficiently to be reasonable value. In 2000 and 2007, this required price drops of the order of 50 percent or greater. Speculative sentiment among investors would need to be replaced by the cold fear that characterises true market bottoms and central banks would need to replace tightening with easing. A halting of central bank tightening would certainly trigger considerable euphoria. But, having been too slow to tighten, central bankers cannot risk their diminished credibility by taking their feet off the monetary brake before inflationary pressures have been well and truly suppressed. Remember: the Nasdaq crash kept deepening two decades ago, even after the Fed had started aggressively cutting interest rates. So, is it safe? I don’t think so. Cormac Lucey is an economic commentator and lecturer at Chartered Accountants Ireland

The absence of a global baseline for reporting sustainability-related information is a concern for many, as the number of signatories to a global call-to-action on the matter demonstrates, writes Fiona Gaskin In late August, 65 companies, investors, and professional accounting firms from around the world added their voices to the call for standard-setting efforts to more closely support a global baseline for reporting sustainability-related information. All were signatories to a statement issued jointly by the International Federation of Accountants, World Business Council for Sustainable Development, and Principles for Responsible Investment, seeking to establish greater compatibility between the concepts, terminologies, and metrics in use in current draft standards for sustainability reporting. The statement acknowledged the important work of the International Sustainability Standards Board, US Securities and Exchange Commission, and the European Commission, together with the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group, in their efforts to advance sustainability reporting. The number of organisations supporting the call for the convergence of standards demonstrates, however, that the absence of a global baseline for reporting sustainability-related information is a concern for many corporates, financial institutions, and professional services organisations. The problem is very real. When various jurisdictions and standard-setters issue concurrent, but differing, standards, the users of those standards are left with varying frameworks, which can be costly and inefficient to interpret and implement. These efforts, while well-intentioned, can create confusion by adding more noise as reporting multiplies, but with different standards and objectives. A fundamental question for those setting standards and regulations is the question of whether or not reporting should be focused on information useful to investors (i.e. the enterprise value), or information useful to a wider group of stakeholders (i.e. the impact value). Enterprise value primarily focuses on the impact of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues on business—in other words, how does the world affect the organisation? Impact value focuses more on the impact the organisation has on the world around it. Both enterprise and impact value offer information that can help to hold companies accountable for their actions—whether that is to maintain or create value, or to minimise negative impacts on the planet and society. Indeed, it is possible to argue that there is really no practical difference between these two values, and that the exposure draft of the International Sustainability Standards Board’s general disclosure requirements standard already provides a few good examples. This is because it is reasonable to expect that a business operating in a way that has a negative impact on the planet and its people will—in the short-, medium- and long-term—have a negative impact on the business itself and, therefore, on its enterprise value. In the long run, which is where sustainability standards focus, enterprise value and impact align. We can see first-hand that the proposed range of emerging standards are already proving to be a challenge for corporates. To start, there is the difficulty in simply gaining clarity on the reporting landscape—what has to be reported on, and by when. Once this has been established, the need arises for an exercise in understanding the crossover between reporting obligations—in the area of metrics, for example. These requirements then need to be assessed against what the organisation is actually doing and reporting. This last step typically results in an action plan which requires time and resources to address the underlying actions. While the statement calling for stronger alignment of regulatory and standard-setting efforts around sustainability disclosure has wide-ranging support, those creating the regulations and standards will ultimately need to continue to collaborate and respond to the call to action. Given that we are at the infancy stage of sustainability reporting when compared to financial reporting, it would seem like such a wasted opportunity to create complexity when standardisation and transparency are what is needed. Fiona Gaskin is Environmental, Social and Governance Leader for Assurance and Reporting at PwC Ireland

With the launch of ‘The Garage’, Pfizer Global Business Services Dublin is helping accounting trainees discover how they can apply digital technology to make their work faster and easier It started with a conversation between colleagues about how their profession might evolve at a time of immense digital transformation, and how they might harness this transformative power to support their fast-growing Dublin enterprise. Aoife Allen, FCA and Senior Director with Pfizer Global Business Services Dublin (GBS Dublin) recalls: “It was three years ago, and we were thinking about how we would be working in the future. I remember the question was, ‘what will our future colleague look five or 10 years from now?’” At the time, Albert Bourla, Chair and CEO of Pfizer Inc, had set a challenge for the organisation globally to “win the digital race in pharma,” and Allen and her colleague John Anglim were overseeing a successful graduate programme for Pfizer GBS Dublin in association with Chartered Accountants Ireland. “Our graduate programme was really starting to ramp-up then, in terms of numbers—a cohort of younger colleagues who had grown up with digital technologies, and we wanted to find a way to help them explore how we could use digital technology to make our own processes more efficient and effective, with an enhanced control environment.” ‘The Garage’ – a digital innovation program So began ‘The Garage’, a one-hour weekly session, during which Chartered Accountant trainees were encouraged to explore how they might use digital technologies to make their work more efficient and easier to manage. “We challenged them to come up with a project idea, and then to build it. It was about teaching our graduates how to think differently and pass their learnings on to the wider organisation, so that we could harness the power of digital to improve how we worked together within the organisation,” John Anglim, Director, Pfizer GBS Dublin, explains. The Garage is an innovative applied learning program, developed and led by Pfizer GBS Dublin colleagues Colin Byrnes, Director of Global Process Transformation, and Lorna Flanagan, Director Statutory Reporting CoE. Nurturing the digital mindset “The idea behind the program was really about recognising a need to nurture and develop our graduates’ skill sets in working with digital tools and technologies as they progress through their accountancy training,” Colin Byrnes explains. “Our Garage sessions take our graduates through concepts such as design thinking, analytics and problem-solving, as well as introductions to some of the technologies we use, like Alteryx, Tableau, Dataiku and Power Automate.” As Lorna Flanagan sees it, The Garage is about equipping the accountant of today for their evolving role as the ‘accountant of the future’. “The role of the accountant has really moved on from repetitive tasks to providing higher value-add services,” she says. “Our hope is that The Garage will set our graduates up to support problem-solving at Pfizer GBS and also enhance their accountancy training experience, so that we can support them to become our ‘colleague of the future’.” Impressive results So far, The Garage has yielded impressive results, with participants using new technologies, like Robotic Process Automation, Visualisation and Predictive Analytics, to build innovative solutions for Pfizer GBS Dublin and the wider organisation. One such participant is Reza Shahrokhi, as Aoife Allen explains: “Reza’s project concerned an incredibly time-consuming process that was used by managers right across Pfizer to review Authorised Signature Limits (ASLs). “Every year, these managers had to coordinate the review of thousands of ASLs on large Excel files via email. It was an incredibly time-consuming and manual process and, through his participation in Garage, Reza found a solution that was adapted for use across the entire organisation.” Shahrokhi’s solution used Power Automate, a tool that integrates Microsoft applications such as Excel, Outlook, Teams and more, to simplify the ASL review process. “He effectively removed emails from the process, collating responses from managers in seconds and automatically updating files, reducing errors and time for follow-up,” explains Flanagan. “Reza presented his project to GBS Dublin leaders and departments, showcasing his work at a GBS Dublin Innovation Forum where he was awarded one of 10 Innovation Awards in 2021. Reza really exemplified the Pfizer goal to win the digital race in pharma by making our work faster and easier. He explored and defined the problem and leveraged technology to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of a manual process.” Automating journal entries Another successful Garage project by graduate trainee Kate Connell leveraged digital technology to automate the manual month-end journal entry process. “Kate’s project explored a recurring issue whereby a manual journal had to be booked monthly to reclass original banking entries in the SAP accounting system to certain division- or market-coded accounts,” Lorna Flanagan explains. “The process was taking two hours to post manually each month. By navigating and preparing a ‘process flow map’ and exploring the functionality of the Alteryx tool, Kate was able to apply a digital workflow to automate the preparation of the final journal.” Connell’s project was showcased to GBS Dublin leadership and, as a result, different departments were able to leverage the technology to automate repetitive manual journal entries. Digital workflow solution Ian Banahan, meanwhile, used his participation in Garage to identify a digital workflow solution for an important financial supply chain process. “Graduates who take part in The Garage are asked to identify a work activity they see as relatively simple but feel could be improved. The idea is to create a ‘focus’ for practical learning during the Garage sessions,” explains Colin Byrnes. “In his day-to-day work, Ian was involved in a process whereby the GBS Dublin team calculates and communicates critical financial information to country teams supporting the financial global supply chain and distribution of products. “While the process was robust and utilised the latest digital technologies to help calculate processes, Ian could see that there was still a lot of manual communication involved—via emails, for example.” As part of his Garage project, Banahan documented the flow of information exchange involved in the process, uncovering challenges with information tracking and management. “Ian used the Garage network to identify digital workflow tools that could potentially address these issues, assessed them and drafted recommendations. He presented his findings to GBS Dublin leadership and got approval to move ahead with the project,” says Byrnes. “Since then, the Global Process Lead responsible for this area has developed the proposal further and the plan is to start implementing Ian’s solution by the end of this year.” The future of Garage Originally introduced in 2021, the 12-week Garage programme is now entering its third cycle and, for the first time, will be open to all Dublin GBS colleagues in addition to graduate trainees. For Aoife Allen, the success of the initiatives is a point of pride. “I am very proud of The Garage. A lot of the projects that have come out of it have brought real value to the organisation, and to our day-to-day work as Chartered Accountants and financial professionals,” she says. “These accounting problems and projects are so specific to the activities we are involved in that, really, only we can fully understand and solve them. “By giving our graduates—and now our wider team—the tools they need, they are able to look at accounting processes and say with confidence, ‘I can automate this process, and then spend my working time using the information it’s giving me to carry out work that is far more valuable. “They are effectively solving day-to-day end-user problems and that is empowering, because it encourages them to think differently about how they, and how we as an organisation, approach our activities.” History of innovation Pfizer has a deeply rooted history of innovation in Ireland. One of the first pharmaceutical companies to establish a base in Ireland, the organisation celebrated its 50th anniversary here in 2019 and now employs 4,000 people at five locations in Cork, Dublin, and Kildare. GBS Dublin was established in 2003 and provides end-to-end financial accounting services, compliance oversight, and business transformation support to Pfizer operations spanning 150 markets worldwide. As such, says Allen, GBS Dublin acts as Pfizer’s own ‘in-house’ accounting firm with the same high-value capability and talent resource. “That is how we see ourselves, and what we have responsibility for are the complex, high-risk and knowledge-based accounting transactions that support Pfizer’s financial operations globally as well as regionally here in Ireland,” she says. GBS Dublin is also among the biggest employers of Chartered Accountants in the Irish market outside the Big Four accounting firms. “We are very fortunate to have access to such a big pool of very talented candidates who have a really good reputation internationally,” Allen says. “We have a young, qualified, educated, and diverse workforce. We have many different nationalities here; people who speak many different languages; who have experience in different local Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. “This means that we are able to provide an international organisation with financial support from here in Dublin, and we also now manage in-market colleagues responsible for statutory and fiduciary duties.” Evolving role of the accountant For Allen, who grew up in Wexford and trained as a Chartered Accountant with PwC, her time with GBS Dublin has allowed her to carve out a varied and satisfying career path. “I joined GBS Dublin 16 years ago as an accountant after living and working in Australia for a while after qualifying. Since joining, I’ve changed roles eight times. I have had so many opportunities. “After joining as an accountant, I became team lead, and then regional team lead, and progressed from there to a director role and, most recently, senior director, with colleagues from 41 countries reporting into my organisation.” In the years since she began her own career, Allen has also borne witness to the evolving role of accountants in all sectors. “How we do our job on a day-to-day basis now is very different to how it was when I trained. Great change is underway within the profession of accountancy and that change is being driven by digital technologies,” she says. “We have access now to digital tools—not just these big Enterprise Resource Planning systems like SAP and Oracle—but also end-user technologies like Alteryx, Dataiku and Power Automate. These tools are allowing accountants to carry out our work in new and different ways and creating the potential for real innovation.” Breakthroughs that change lives This innovation is at the heart of the GBS Dublin ethos and the driving motivation behind The Garage and other digital initiatives. “We have an amazing wealth of talent here in our own workforce in Dublin and, at the same time, access to these emerging digital tools that can really transform the way they work and add value to the wider organisation,” says Allen. “We reckon about 75 percent of the people working for Pfizer GBS Dublin have a qualification in accountancy, tax, or another high-value profession. Our colleagues are highly qualified and highly capable people, and we are part of Pfizer; a company whose purpose is to drive ‘breakthroughs that change patients’ lives’.” “Our own purpose and responsibility here at GBS Dublin, as I see it, is to employ that same ethos as an enabling function to the wider organisation and—just as our colleagues in science and manufacturing do—to use innovation to drive breakthroughs. “Being a truly innovative organisation involves learning to do things differently, being open to change, and being prepared for a future of constant change.” For Allen, meanwhile, how she approaches her leadership role as a Senior Director at Pfizer Dublin GBS is also changing. “What I’m learning is that, as a leader, you have to get out of the way. You have to give people the space to come up with ideas and to share them. You have to ask everyone to contribute, to listen and encourage all of their ideas. “That means listening equally to everyone in a meeting, from graduate right up to director level. I want to hear what the graduate has to say as much as I want to hear what the director has to say. You must listen, because absolutely everyone can bring something really valuable to the table.”

In a candidate-led market, how an organisation is perceived can be critical to its ability to attract the very best professionals. Although employers can’t create their own brand, they can do a lot to influence it. Dr Mary E. Collins explains how When recruiting, your reputation or ‘employer brand’—the stand-out differentiator for your organisation—has never been more important. This renewed focus on employer brand can be attributed, in part, to the expectations of the younger generations, who are influenced by an organisation’s reputation and peer reviews. These reviews—and the perception of an employer’s brand they help perpetuate—are a key disruptive element in recruitment, particularly with the growth in influence of review and recruiting websites, such as Glassdoor and Indeed. The Labour Force Survey results from the Central Statistics Office for the second quarter of 2022 put the employment rate in Ireland among 15- to 64-year olds at 73.5 percent – a record high. In this context, an organisation’s ability to attract and retain talented professionals in a market at near full employment—one in which people naturally have greater choice—does more than allow it to compete. It affects its reputation among all stakeholders, from customers and clients to potential employees. What is an employer brand? The term ‘employer brand’ was coined in 1996 by Professor Tim Ambler of the London Business School, who defined it as “the package of functional, economic and psychological benefits provided by employment and identified with the employing company.” The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) defines an employer brand as “a set of attributes and qualities—often intangible—that makes an organisation distinctive, promises a particular kind of employment experience, and appeals to those people who will thrive and perform best in its culture.” It is important to note, however, that an employer brand is created by other people’s perceptions of an organisation. An employer cannot directly create its employer brand, it can only influence it. The power of employee review In the past, an employer brand (even if not described as such) was based mainly on the reputation of the employer, with very little influence from other sources. Now, with the growth of digital voices through social media and review websites, employees—past and present—are key players in the creation of employer brands. We have seen this particularly with employee reviews, which has been a major driver of change. People can post honest, anonymous reviews about their employers, describing the on-the-ground experience from an ‘insider’s perspective’. Faced with this, organisations must become more accountable for their behaviour—or risk being rejected by potential talent. Candidate-led recruitment In recent years, the approach to recruitment has shifted from ‘company-led’ to ‘candidate-led’, which is evident in the interview process alone. Employers are now reviewing their interview procedures, asking if they suit candidates, and asking recent hires what they would change about the experience. Company-led recruitment This is a top-down approach, where a position is advertised and candidates apply. The information shared about the advertised position is limited. The balance of power is with the hiring organisation. This approach is summed up by the interview question: “Now tell me, why should I hire you?” Candidate-led recruitment This flips the model by guiding potential candidates to make more informed decisions about whether to apply for a role. This approach encourages candidates to reflect on their ‘fit’ for the job by providing them with detailed information on the role and organisation prior to applying. Developing a strong employer brand There are eight key steps to developing a strong employer brand, which will give you a competitive advantage and set you apart in a crowded employment market. Step 1. Define your unique selling point Organisations invest resources in developing and promoting a unique selling point (USP) for their customers, clients and even potential employees. The USP is what makes an organisation distinct, setting it apart from its competitors. An employer’s USP will inform its employer brand, responding to candidates’ desires to join teams that share their priorities and values. This could be: “trusted advisor” “provider of excellent technical service” “friendly, responsive and flexible” “creative, cutting-edge and innovative” “award-winning agency” When defining or refining your employer brand, start by articulating your USP. Larger organisations may wish to engage specialist brand agencies, while SMEs can do this through insightful, exploratory conversations with their stakeholders. Ask your existing employees why they joined the organisation, for example, and what makes the business different to its competitors. You can also ask clients for testimonials which can be published online, thereby elevating your USP, not only to prospective clients, but also to future employees. Step 2. Communicate your purpose An organisation’s strategy is a core part of its employer brand and should be included in employer brand communications. Share strategy and purpose to attract the right people. For example, if the strategy is for growth, excellence and expertise, this needs to be represented in the offer to potential employees who are looking for new opportunities and a defined career trajectory. Step 3. Identify who you need to hire Define your recruitment needs. What are the skill sets you need to achieve your goals? Can they be introduced by training existing employees? Evidence of strong succession planning not only instils confidence in shareholders, but it also showcases your employer brand to current and prospective employees. Step 4. Understand your ideal candidates Find out as much as you can about your ideal candidates. What really motivates and excites them? What can you do to drive them to your organisation? The following can be used to source information on target and prospective candidates: LinkedIn Data can be captured on your target candidates’ education and qualifications, the professional bodies they are members of, and the LinkedIn groups they choose to join. Research Conduct research into new and existing workplace generations—what is the difference between Baby Boomers, Millennials and Generation Z? This will yield information on their motivators, drivers and values, which can inform your hiring strategy. Your team Talk to your existing high-performing employees to understand their interests, professional alignments, and networks. Your networks Use your own professional and social networks for further insights from outside your own organisation. Psychometric tools These can be used to track the personality traits and aptitudes of the best performers and can inform your thinking on ideal, as well as prospective, candidates. Step 5. Define your employer value proposition An organisation’s employer value proposition (EVP) is the distinct set of benefits (financial and otherwise) an employee receives in return for the skills, knowledge and experience they bring. The CIPD defines the EVP as “describ[ing] what an organisation stands for, requires and offers as an employer.” It provides greater consistency—to an organisation’s recruitment advertising, for example. Using the data gathering techniques described above at Step 4, you can develop a bespoke EVP for your ideal candidates. To create a successful EVP, consider the following: design around attributes that attract, engage and retain the talent you are seeking; be consistent with the strategic objectives of the organisation; identify what is unique to your organisation and distinct from your competitors’ offerings. The best EVPs involve synergies between the organisation’s corporate brand and its employer brand. Hubspot’s EVP, for example, states: “We believe the people we work with are our biggest perk. That’s why our people operations team works hard to create an amazing experience for candidates and employees, every step of the way.” As demonstrated by Hubspot’s EVP, it is important that current employees feel as much of a connection to the EVP as potential hires. Your current employees should feel aligned to your brand. Maintaining a strong employer brand demonstrates commitment to invest in talent, it builds trust, loyalty and credibility, and differentiates you from competitors. By making your EVP public and transparent, prospective employees are far more likely to trust what a company’s current employees say about it than what they read in recruitment advertising. To attract talent, employers must rely on employee engagement and advocacy from the ‘inside out.’ Employers cannot publicly offer what they do not privately provide. Step 6. Understand your employer brand As well as analysing feedback from current employees, a systematic way of evaluating your employer brand is to use a tool like the Employer Branding Measurement Dashboard, created by Elizabeth Lupfer of the Social Workplace (thesocialworkplace.com). It identifies key metrics for evaluating employer brand, such as: HR metrics, e.g. retention/attrition rates, number of applicants per position, cost per hire; awareness metrics, e.g. percentage of target audience who are aware of the organisation; differentiation metrics, e.g. employer brand value/effectiveness. Step 7. Enhance your employer brand There are some key areas of focus when enhancing your employer brand. It is particularly important when losing staff, or finding it hard to recruit new people, that each area is reviewed, and appropriate actions are taken. For example: Culture Consider a more ‘people-focused’ culture, e.g. offering flexible work arrangements. Presence in the marketplace Increase your visibility to ideal candidates: attend conferences, contribute to LinkedIn conversations, engage in expert positioning and thought leadership, enhance the organisation’s media presence. Candidates’ experience Improve response times to candidates, e.g. introduce a time limit to get back to candidates following an interview and stick to it. Step 8. Communicate your employer brand Communicating your EVP should be central to communicating your employer brand. This can be done through many channels, such as job advertisements, the organisation’s website, or its social media platforms, for example. The EVP should be obvious from the organisation’s website, which should clearly reflect the company’s culture. For example, if ‘technical excellence’ is one of the key aspects of the employer brand, show this with examples of technical projects and thought leadership. Ideally, the website should have a ‘Why work for us’ page, which is most effective when current employees share their positive experiences, highlighting the EVP. Clearly communicate the benefits you offer employees, for example: flexible working arrangements; training and development supports; annual and other leave schemes; pension schemes and employer contributions; health insurance group schemes and contributions. Conclusion For employers seeking to attract talented professionals, a clear employer brand, which is supported by the views of current employees, is a critical starting point. A strong employer brand gives you a competitive advantage, setting you apart in a competitive, candidate-led employment market. Dr Mary E. Collins is a Chartered Psychologist and Senior Executive Development Specialist at the RCSI Institute of Leadership, and author of Recruiting Talented People.