The Lean methodology can help companies increase client satisfaction, cut costs and improve profitability, writes Willie Cleary The most important stakeholders for all companies are their clients. Without satisfied clients, there is no business, so understanding and accurately mapping your customers’ experiences is crucial. Doing so can help to ensure that your clients are getting the best possible product or service while also identifying and helping to manage aspects of your product or service that could be improved. Lean is a well-proven methodology that could help your business achieve these goals. What is Lean? Lean is a process improvement methodology that originated in manufacturing (e.g. car-maker Toyota) and has since been adopted by many other industries and professions.  At its core, Lean focuses on identifying and eliminating waste in a process, which can add value for clients and result in higher residual returns for business owners. Lean is a four-phase process involving the following steps: Identifying the client journey; Identifying value-added and non-value-added activities in a process; Removing non-value activities from the process; and Engaging in continuous improvement of the process. Step 1: Identifying the client journey The first step in mapping a client’s experience is to identify their journey from start to finish. This may include their initial consultation or onboarding and regular interactions thereafter, including the supply of goods or services.  The starting point here usually involves visually mapping out the entire process – on a whiteboard, for example.  All relevant team members must be included in this mapping phase to ensure that the necessary process improvement steps are captured, documented and fully understood by all. In a professional service setting, for example, the client’s journey after the initial consultation might include a formal letter of engagement.  If accepted by the client, this letter would lead to an onboarding process whereby the client would provide relevant information and documentation to the service provider. The service provider would then work with the client, providing regular updates in the lead-up to the final output, including a business plan, financial statements or tax returns. Step 2: Identifying value-added and non-value added activities  Once the client’s journey has been accurately mapped, the next step is to identify value-adding and non-value-adding activities.  Value-adding activities are those that contribute directly to the client experience. They may include meeting with clients to discuss their needs, preparing financial statements or business plans and providing regular updates or feedback. Non-value-adding activities do not contribute directly to the client’s experience – waiting for a response, for example, or unnecessary paperwork. All non-value activities must be clearly identified to improve the efficiency of the client’s journey. To identify value-added and non-value-added activities, you can use the “five whys” technique. This involves asking “why” five times to get to the root cause of an issue.  If you identify that waiting for a response from a client is a non-value-added activity, for example, you can ask why the response is needed. If the response is needed to complete the work, you can ask why it is needed to complete the work, and so on, until you get to the root cause of the issue. Step 3: Removing non-value activities from the process The third step in the Lean process involves removing non-value-added activities from the customer journey – streamlining processes, reducing bureaucracy and simplifying procedures, for example.  Removing these particular activities can create a more efficient process that adds value for your clients, mainly by reducing related costs.  You may be able to automate some of your client communication, for example, by using online document management systems to reduce paperwork. Step 4. Engaging in continuous process improvement The fourth step in the Lean process involves continuously improving the client’s experience of your business.  The output of this exercise may involve implementing new process changes based on client feedback or inefficiencies identified by your staff in their day-to-day work. Step four has two phases: Applying metrics or key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure the effectiveness of business processes (e.g. client satisfaction or query response times). By monitoring these metrics or KPIs, the business can more easily identify areas for further improvement. Involving core team members in continuous improvement by encouraging them to suggest improvements, solicited or unsolicited, and empowering them to make positive changes. This process can be supported by providing training and development opportunities for your team. The power of continuous improvement Lean is all about continuous improvement, so it is crucial to seek regular stakeholder feedback while reviewing business processes and identifying areas for improvement on an ongoing basis.  Mapping your clients’ experiences of your business has many potential benefits. It can help you to identify and eliminate costly inefficiencies, improve the client experience and increase profitability.  Willie Cleary, FCA is a Lean Consultant with LeanTeams

The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive aims to improve the quality, comparability and relevance of sustainability reporting by companies in the EU. Brendan Ringrose explains what it’s all about The pandemic, turmoil in Ukraine, stricter regulatory controls and the effects of climate change have all contributed to the heightened level of urgency surrounding environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting. The Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Act was signed into law in July 2021. The Climate Act commits Ireland to reaching specific greenhouse gas emission-lowering targets by 2030 and 2050 and provides a framework for doing so. Greenwashing and reporting The European Commission’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is a proposed legislative measure aimed at improving the quality, comparability and relevance of sustainability reporting by companies in the EU. One of the main objectives of the CSRD is to address the problem of greenwashing, which occurs when companies make false or misleading claims about ESG performance to improve their reputation or gain competitive advantage. Greenwashing undermines the credibility and effectiveness of ESG reporting, making it difficult for investors, consumers and other stakeholders to assess the true sustainability performance of a company. The CSRD will apply to all large companies and all companies listed on regulated markets (except listed micro-enterprises). Organisations must not only disclose how sustainability issues impact them, but also how their activities impact society and the environment. Strengthening sustainability The European Commission’s Action Plan for Financing Sustainable Growth directly targets ‘strengthening sustainability disclosures and accounting for rule-making’ as one of 10 key focus areas. In tandem with the trend towards mandatory ESG reporting, more and more companies are choosing to disclose ESG information to satisfy stakeholder demands voluntarily. The CSRD obliges companies within the scope to report against common EU reporting standards adopted by the European Commission as delegated acts. Companies are likely to start reporting in 2024, based on FY 2023 information. Reporting considerations Companies will need to consider the following over the next several years. Timeline for implementation The timeline for the implementation of the standards and reporting is: FY 2023: first set of Sustainability Reporting Standards will be available by mid-2023 based on the draft standards published by the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group in November 2022; FY 2024: second set of Sustainability Reporting Standards will be available and EU Member States will adopt the EU directive; FY 2025: first reports due for the financial year 2024. Who does it apply to? The CSRD applies to all large companies governed by, or established in, the EU with: >250 employees and/or; >€40 million turnover and/or; >€20 million in total assets of listed companies. Small and medium listed companies get an extra three years to comply. What must be included? A dedicated section of the company’s management report must include the information necessary to understand its impacts as well as how sustainability matters affect its development, performance and position. Though the Non-financial Reporting Directive did not require auditing, the terms of the CSRD require sustainability reporting to be checked externally when the CSRD takes effect. Companies will need to seek limited assurance of sustainability information. This requirement is less extensive than that required for the financial audit statement but will, nonetheless, require external scrutiny. Companies must disclose information relating to intangibles (social, human and intellectual capital). Reporting should be in line with Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) and the EU Taxonomy Regulation. An entity will be exempt from the reporting requirements if the consolidated management report of a parent company includes the results of the company and its subsidiaries. Reporting This must be included in the management report. The bottom line Mandating standardised reporting provides for increased comparability in the public domain. This means that organisations can be held accountable by their stakeholders and, in turn, is likely to play a role in procurement processes. Brendan Ringrose is a partner with Whitney Moore LLP Law Firm

As the unsung heroes of the family unit, stay-at-home parents must be properly compensated for their work in the home with a stable retirement, says Carol Brick According to a survey conducted by Royal London Ireland in 2022, 88 percent of women believe that the role of the stay-at-home parent is undervalued or under-supported in Ireland. About 349,500 people in Ireland work as stay-at-home parents, with 94 percent being women, the survey found, highlighting a possible risk of poverty for those people upon retirement. Despite the invaluable work done by these individuals, more than eight in 10 agree that their role is undervalued or under-supported. According to the Royal London Ireland research, the annual cost to employ someone to do the household jobs usually completed by a stay-at-home parent would be an estimated €53,480. However, the survey participants estimated the potential ‘salary’ of the stay-at-home parent at an average of €28,460 per year. Those who give up work to look after a family, whether male or female, are the least likely to save for retirement. Stay-at-home mums are at the highest risk, as retirement savings are not on the agenda without an income. This is a significant concern as the state pension, after taking their years as a homemaker into account, will be approximately €12,000 per year. These individuals must consider financial protection and planning to ensure their family is financially secure, especially in the event of an unexpected death or illness. Long-term effects If stay-at-home parents in Ireland do not plan for retirement, they may face serious financial consequences in their later years. Without a steady income stream, they may struggle to cover their living expenses, healthcare costs and other essential needs. This can lead to a lower standard of living and reduced quality of life during retirement. Without a financial plan, they may have to rely on their adult children or social welfare. Furthermore, not planning for retirement can limit the options available to stay-at-home parents. They may be forced to work longer than they would like or take less-than-ideal jobs to make ends meet, limiting their ability to travel, pursue hobbies or support their families in other ways. Planning for retirement can help stay-at-home parents in Ireland achieve financial security and allow them to enjoy their later years. Lastly, not planning for retirement can affect their mental and physical health. Stay-at-home parents may experience higher stress levels, anxiety, and other adverse health outcomes without the financial resources to cover medical expenses or other healthcare needs. Planning for retirement can help stay-at-home parents in Ireland maintain their physical and mental health and enjoy a fulfilling and satisfying retirement. Society often undervalues or under-supports the role of stay-at-home parents, despite their invaluable contributions to their families and communities. I encourage individuals to prioritise financial planning and protection, no matter their employment status. Carol Brick is Managing Director of CWM Wealth Management and HerMoney.ie

At a time when companies are struggling with employee retention, internal networking is vital for individual and organisational growth, says Jean Evans When you open any newspaper or listen to broadcasts, podcasts or news these days, you are hit with reports of people leaving the workforce. Organisations are struggling to retain and recruit staff. This is further fuelled by negative media reports on the crises our society is currently facing, from housing shortages to energy prices. It is clear that something is simply not working. People are stressed and overwhelmed. They are feeling the pressure, they are time-stretched, and they don’t have enough balance in their lives. Organisations are unsure of how to respond, leading to managers who are ill-equipped to deal with the changes needed in the workplace.  There simply isn’t enough time to learn and understand everything in this working environment. Internal networking While there is no magic wand to solve the problem of workplace churn, helping people to understand what it means and how to connect with others can help. This is where internal networking comes in.  Organisations must make the time to coach and train employees on how to connect and learn about one another and grow to create a workplace community that supports them when they put their hand up for new projects, share ideas or need to overcome a challenge. Where there are genuine connections and support in an organisation there is psychological safety. This can help to create a happier workforce that is focused on reaching shared strategic goals. Organisational benefits There are benefits for organisations that take the time to facilitate internal networking: Knowledge sharing Internal networking can facilitate the sharing of knowledge, ideas and expertise among colleagues, which can lead to greater innovation, improved decision-making and better problem-solving. Career development Networking with colleagues can provide opportunities for career development, such as mentorship, job shadowing or exposure to new projects and initiatives. Improved communication Networking can enhance communication within an organisation by promoting open dialogue, encouraging feedback and creating a culture of transparency, trust and confidence. Increased job satisfaction Building relationships with colleagues can create a sense of community and belonging, which can improve job satisfaction, employee retention and overall well-being. Enhanced collaboration Networking can promote collaboration and teamwork, which can lead to increased productivity, better outcomes and greater job satisfaction. Professional growth Networking can provide exposure to different perspectives, experiences and approaches, which can help professionals broaden their knowledge and skills. Looking at company culture How internal networking manifests itself depends on the culture of a company. For it to work, everyone must be engaged and ready to buy into the powerful notion that having connections is crucial to any organisation’s success. Jean Evans is a Networking Architect and Founder at NetworkMe

The Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023 (Act) has been signed into law. Moira Grassick outlines the Act’s key provisions and its implications for employers and employees Last month, the Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023 (Act) was signed into law by President Michael D. Higgins. This new employment legislation will introduce several new statutory rights aimed at supporting a better work-life balance for employees and also supporting those with caring responsibilities. The Act also seeks to support employees who are victims of domestic violence through the introduction of a statutory paid leave entitlement of five days. New rights In summary, the Act introduces the following rights: the right to request remote working for all employees; the right to request flexible working for parents and carers; the right to breastfeeding breaks extended to two years from the date of the child’s birth; five days’ unpaid leave for medical care purposes for parents of children under 12 and carers; and five days’ paid leave for victims of domestic violence. The right to request remote work As all employees with more than six months of continuous service will soon have a right to request remote work, employers will need to plan how to manage these requests. The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) is also developing a Code of Practice to provide further guidance for employers and employees on managing requests for remote working arrangements. An employer must respond to the request within four weeks. However, this timeframe may be extended to eight weeks if the employer is having difficulty assessing the workability of the request. While employers will be obliged to consider these requests under the new law, it should be remembered that there is no obligation to grant all requests. If employers refuse the request, the Act states they must provide a written notification to the employee confirming the reasons for the refusal. The WRC does not have jurisdiction to challenge the merits or the grounds of an employer’s decision to refuse a request for remote working. Potential impact The new rights to request flexible work for parents and carers, and remote work for all employees, are designed to promote a better work-life balance. While they represent a new development in employment law in Ireland, how these rights will operate in practice remains to be seen. Employers must develop policies for managing this type of request and prepare for negotiations with employees who want to alter their working patterns. Employers in industries that have developed remote work practices in recent years may face pressure to grant requests. If operations were largely unaffected by remote working arrangements brought in to deal with pandemic restrictions, it might be difficult to refuse a request for productivity or operational reasons. And with the jobs market remaining tight, employers who refuse requests risk losing valued employees to a competitor who does offer flexible or remote working options. Unpaid leave for medical purposes  The Act states that an employee is entitled to five days’ unpaid medical leave in a 12-month period to provide “significant care or support for a serious medical reason” for a person who is in a specified relationship with the employee, such as a spouse, civil partner, parent, sibling or person who resides in the same household as an employee. This leave is different to force majeure leave, which gives an employee three days in a 12-month period or five days in a 36-month period for an urgent family matter. Paid domestic violence leave  The Act introduces this new leave which provides for five days’ paid leave for victims of domestic violence to allow the affected employee to seek medical advice, legal representation and to engage with other specialist support services. Bespoke employment policies As it seems highly unlikely that all businesses will be able to roll out generic “one size fits all” policies to manage all these new employee rights, each company will need to tailor new policies to the specific needs of its operations. While employers should wait until the WRC Code of Practice is finalised before tailoring their remote work policies, it’s a good idea to begin preparing to update handbooks and policies to reflect these upcoming changes, making remote working more accessible for more employees. Moira Grassick is Chief Operating Officer at Peninsula

In today’s unpredictable business environment, organisations must invest in resilience to ensure they can withstand any disruption and quickly recover, writes Andy Banks  As Irish businesses grapple with a rapidly changing world, the challenges of geopolitical upheaval, soaring inflation and economic uncertainties have become ever more prevalent.   Added to this, businesses are facing the rising threat of cybercrime, supply chain challenges and the climate crisis.  To survive and thrive in this upheaval, Irish business leaders must be able to proactively anticipate and respond to disruption.  The key to success is resilience: the ability to navigate crises and the capacity to adapt and succeed in the face of disruption.   PwC’s Crisis and Resilience Survey 2023 delves into how organisations are directing their resources, efforts and investments toward building resilience to thrive in a state of permacrisis.  There are three ways organisations can embrace and invest in resilience to transform their operations in an era of constant disruption.  1. Integration: An integrated resilience programme is essential  It is no longer sufficient for organisations to operate in silos as they address today’s complex and interconnected risks. Both locally and globally, enterprises are moving towards an integrated approach to resilience.   They are centrally governing and aligning multiple resilience capabilities around what matters most to the business and embedding this programme into their operations and corporate culture.  2. Leadership: Thriving in a permacrisis means upskilling leaders and teams  Consistent with global trends, 33 percent of Irish respondents in the PwC survey said building a team with the right skills is a significant challenge in establishing a resilience programme. Fifty-seven percent of Irish organisations cite upskilling future leaders as one of the three most important elements of future-proofing resilience.  A successful resilience strategy and programme needs:  Executive sponsorship from the C-suite;  A senior leader with clear responsibility for the programme; and  A skilled team to drive the programme across the organisation.  3. Programme approach: Build operational resilience around what matters most  Organisations must build operational resilience and ensure that enterprise planning and preparation are part of a broader continuous cycle.   Irish organisations invest in teams to deliver on the resilience agenda, with 77 percent of respondents confirming at least one dedicated resource.   As more organisations integrate their resilience programmes, many firms worldwide are adopting the core principles of an operational resilience (OpRes) approach, focusing on protecting what matters most and prioritising investment based on what’s critical to their organisation and stakeholders.   This allows organisations to manage risks with high reliability and drive efficiency.  Those who have moved to an integrated resilience programme are significantly ahead in many of the core elements of OpRes: building a robust corporate immune system where an organisation can adapt, flex and grow stronger.  Technology-powered resilience   Distributed data, systems, processes and operational silos mean organisations struggle to obtain a complete view of their resilience, only identifying gaps when disruption hits.   The traditional approach to managing resilience is no longer working – simply checking off compliance with regulations does not deliver resilience.   Too many organisations miss opportunities to identify and rectify vulnerabilities before an incident occurs. What are the vulnerabilities you can and can’t live with? It’s time for a new approach.  Business leaders understand the need to underpin resilience strategies with technology that can intelligently aggregate data from across a business to provide an integrated, insight-driven single source of truth and greater agility in times of crisis.   Business leaders also want to use technology to create a living resilience programme they can continually test and evolve.  Andy Banks is Risk Assurance Solutions Partner at PwC 

Clever branding can mean the difference between success and failure for small businesses competing in a crowded market, writes Gerard Tannam Branding is a tool available to every business. Every type of business can compete for their best customers with a strong brand that influences choice.  Because a smaller business can play to the singular strengths of its brand relationships with customers to distinguish it from others, it can level the playing field with its own competitive advantage. A strong brand is good for business. It provides an advantage over competitors by distinguishing a business from them in a way that matters to customers and influences their choices.  Despite its importance, however, this simple business tool, which is available to every business, is often misunderstood, underestimated, and underused, particularly by smaller companies. ‘Brand’ can be defined in many ways: as a mark of origin or quality, as image or reputation, as a proposition or promise, and even as a badge of community or a shared belief system.   None of these definitions is entirely satisfactory, however. While each definition says something true about what a brand is or can be, none captures the part a brand plays in choice. A definition of brand As well as being a tool that businesses use to influence choice, brand is also the tool that customers use to make their choices and reassure themselves that they are correct.  When customers are spoilt for choice or do not have the time or inclination to analyse every buying decision, they often rely on brand to help them choose. And so, the brand tool is used in two different though complementary ways:  a business uses brand to help it become the natural choice of its customers;  its customers use brand to help them make the right choice of product or service.  A brand is a tool that influences choice by reflecting the relationship between buyer and seller and the value they exchange. Marks of quality or identity, such as names, symbols or logos, are means of representing the brand relationship and its value, rather than being the brand. Wedding rings, for example, symbolise a relationship (marriage) between two people – they are not the relationship itself.  The brand bridge To understand brand and how it works, consider the relationship between buyer and seller as a ‘bridge’. Just as a bridge is designed to enable people to cross over safely, quickly, and easily from one side to the other, a brand bridge enables people to exchange value safely, quickly, and easily. The two-way traffic on the bridge of give-and-take between buyer and seller suggests a partnership of equals, both of whom want something the other has and must agree on the value to be exchanged through the transaction. Brand bridges are more handshake than arm wrestle, a basis for good and sustainable business. A definition of branding Defining brand as a tool for business leads to a definition of ‘branding’ as the influencing of choice by building a relationship between buyer and seller based on the value they exchange. A brand relationship establishes a connection between a business and its customers around the value each understands the other is offering.  Branding involves putting the brand relationship to work to build and maintain the commercial relationship with existing customers and turn potential buyers into new customers. Why branding matters to small businesses Success in business comes down to an ability to influence choice. A superior product or service only takes a business so far.  Many hardworking businesses have brought an exceptional offering to market and failed. To be successful, a business must influence enough of the right kind of customer to choose what it brings to market. Brand relationship plays a critical role in the choices customers make. Even in a busy marketplace, where customers are spoilt for choice, a strongly branded business can lead its market and command a premium for its product or service.  Every business has a brand, strong or weak. The brand’s strength or weakness results from actions taken by the business in building the relationship with its customers.  A strong brand is especially important for small businesses, which are unlikely to have the spending power or marketing resources available to larger competitors.  The smaller business can play to the strengths of its brand relationship with its customers to distinguish it from other businesses in the marketplace, and so level the playing field.  Five steps to defining a brand 1. Define the value to be exchanged The value to be realised through the brand relationship is not set by one side or the other but must be agreed. For any relationship to work both parties must continue to see and realise its value.  However, while the brand relationship is defined by the value sought by the buyer and offered by the seller, this must at least match the seller’s asking price for the exchange to work.  The asking price, which the business requires for the exchange to be profitable, is a useful starting point for defining value.  This is typically based on the costs of the resources the business must invest in the relationship, plus its margin or premium.  Then the business considers how the customer is likely to rate the benefits on offer, if this accumulated value matches or tops the asking price, and whether they are likely to  pay it.  2. Identify and target the ‘best customer’ For the brand relationship to work, it is vital that the business carefully chooses the type of customer with whom it and its value proposition are best matched.  When business development lacks focus, a business will attract a wide variety of prospective customers, some well matched with it, but many not.  A business that deals with too broad a mix of customers will struggle to profitably realise the value in many of its individual transactions.  A well-matched or ‘best customer’, on the other hand, will add predictable and significant value to the exchange and deliver the premium that the business needs. Your best customer:  needs what you have to offer, considers it essential;  wants what you are offering, finds it highly desirable; values what you offer, prioritises it above all others; engages fully with all of the elements of your offering, not just its purchase; can pay for it (an ability not confined to affordability). 3. Identify and fix the customer’s ‘key problem’ People buy from other people to fix what they experience as a problem and to enjoy the benefits that result. Potential customers are more likely to be ‘best customers’ when they consider that the product or service offered by a business fixes their key problem. There are two aspects or sides to a customers’ key problems: the practical and the social.  The practical is what the product or service does and the direct, functional benefits it provides, while the social is how the customer relates to others and the world through their choice of that product or service and can be understood in terms of how it makes them feel.   For example, someone is thirsty and buys bottled water. Any bottled water will do. Another customer is thirsty but is concerned that many bottled water products use irreplaceable natural resources.  They choose a brand of water that is carbon-neutral with recycled packaging. The business with the sustainable brand has found its best customer; the customer has used brand value to meet all their needs and fix their problem. 4. Identify and fix both aspects of the key problem More customers are choosing products and services that fix the practical and social aspects of their problems, so it is important that a business identifies both aspects and determines the role that it will play in fixing them. This role must go deeper than the complementary role of seller to the customer’s buyer, and deeper too than the functional role played by the business in fixing the practical problem. When the product or service offered by a business is largely the same as that offered by its competitors, it is the role that the business plays in resolving the social aspect of its customer’s key problem that adds real value, and greater profitability, to the transaction. For example, a business owner seeks an accountant to prepare monthly accounts to support their management of the business. Any suitably qualified accountant can answer this practical aspect of the business owner’s problem.  However, the owner struggles to make sense of how accounts relate to their business and can feel overwhelmed and helpless.  They will choose an accountant that fixes this personal (social) part of the problem, guiding and advising the owner to help them to understand the numbers and the performance of their business. 5. Provide information required for the buying decision When customers are considering which product or service to choose, they will search for some or all of 10 types of information about how a business solves their key problem: Attraction – ‘What is it about this offer that appeals to me?’ Engagement – ‘What tells me that it is right for me?’ Demonstration – ‘How does this offer work?’ Sample – ‘How can I try it for myself?’ Testimonial – ‘Who else has benefitted from this offer?’ Proposition – ‘How do I take up this offer?’ Delivery – ‘How is this offer provided to me?’ Support – ‘How will you help me make the most of it?’ Recovery – ‘What will you do to help me if something goes wrong?’ Feedback – ‘How will I let you know what I think of your offer?’ Final word When the success of a business depends on the effectiveness of its brand in influencing choice, building brand relationships should not be left to chance.  Branding is a tool available to every business. Every type of business can compete for their best customers with a strong brand that influences choice.  Because a smaller business can play to the singular strengths of its brand relationships with customers to distinguish it from others, it can level the playing field with its own competitive advantage.   Gerard Tannam is founder of Islandbridge, a brand planning and strategic development company

A mainstay of Ireland’s financial services landscape for over 60 years, our credit unions are entering an exciting phase with recent developments presenting new opportunities to adapt and change Credit unions are an important part of the financial services landscape. With offices a common feature of cities, towns and villages throughout Ireland, they play a key role in the day-to-day finances of many Irish people and communities. There are more than 3.6 million credit union members on the island of Ireland.  A history of credit unions Credit unions were first established in Ireland in the late 1950s and quickly became a repository for savings and a source of loans for many people. The total value of loans extended by credit unions in the Republic of Ireland is currently around €5 billion, with total savings coming to about €16 billion.  Average sector total reserves, as a percentage of total assets, is approximately 16 percent, which serves to underpin the confidence of their members, particularly in times of uncertainty and disruptive change. These institutions are not-for-profit financial co-operatives. They are owned and controlled by their members and therefore have a different business model to retail banks. Each credit union is independent, with its own board of directors, charged with overall responsibility for running the credit union.  Because they are part of the financial services sector, credit unions are governed by legislation in Ireland, principally the Credit Union Act 1997, as amended, and regulated by the Central Bank.  Significant amendments to the 1997 Act were introduced by the Credit Union and Co-operation with Overseas Regulators Act 2012, and this is the legislative regime under which credit unions currently operate. The credit union sector has been relatively stable in terms of any legislative or government policy changes. However, two recent developments, the Credit Union (Amendment) Bill 2022 and the Retail Banking Review (November 2022), present new opportunities for credit unions to adapt and change their business models and enhance their product and service offerings to members. The Credit Union (Amendment) Bill 2022 The first major legislative change for credit unions since the 2012 Act, the Credit Union (Amendment) Bill 2022 (the Bill) was published on 30 November 2022 following over two years of stakeholder engagement, with over 100 proposals considered. Highly technical and not an easy read, the Bill is currently before the Dáil, where proposals for amendments will be considered.  There is no fixed timeline for enactment and, post-enactment, commencement of sections may occur in phases, with the Central Bank of Ireland having to amend regulations to accommodate the new provisions.  The main provisions of the Bill involve: the establishment of ‘corporate credit unions’; amending the requirements and qualifications for membership of credit unions; altering the scope of permitted investments by credit unions; changes to the governance of credit unions; maximum interest rates on loans by credit unions; provision of services by credit unions to members of other credit unions; and participation by credit unions in loans to members of other credit unions. Collaboration between credit unions The introduction of ‘corporate credit unions’ should support greater collaboration between credit unions, facilitating a pooling of resources and greater access to funding.  A new form of regulated entity, their membership would be restricted to other credit unions, with lending allowed only to those members. Further collaboration is envisaged with a provision in the Bill allowing all credit unions to refer members to other credit unions to avail of a service that the original credit union does not provide.  While such referral is not mandatory, it is a new option for making additional services available to members—for example, a current account facility where the original credit union may be reluctant to provide this service to all members based on cost or other reasons.  Another provision enabling collaboration allows a credit union to participate in a loan to a member of another credit union. This will facilitate risk sharing associated with the loan and will make it easier for an individual credit union to offer larger loans to its members.  Regarding lending to businesses, and other organisations or associations, there is a further key provision in the Bill for “bodies” (incorporated or unincorporated) to be allowed join a credit union with the same rights and obligations as a “natural person” (member).  This is, however, subject to conditions that a majority of the members of the body would be eligible to join the credit union and the body meets the common bond requirement. Ultimately, this will make it easier for credit unions to lend to such bodies and is principally focused on SMEs. While none of these changes are mandatory, they do provide new options and opportunities for credit unions. Governance changes Regarding changes in governance, two provisions stand out: the option to appoint the manager (chief executive officer) of the credit union to the board; and  reduction of the minimum number of board meetings per year to six, down from the current 10.   The extent to which these changes will be adopted remains to be seen, as many credit union boards may be content with the existing practice.   Where a credit union decides to include its manager as a board member, the Bill proposes that this will be done by their direct appointment to the board and not by election at a general meeting of members.  The term can be for any length but cannot extend beyond the individual’s term as manager.  One restriction on the manager as a board member is that they cannot sit on the nomination committee of the credit union, the membership of which is restricted to board members who have been co-opted or elected at general meetings.  Similarly, regarding the frequency of board meetings, the board may be reluctant to change the current practice of having at least one meeting per month, concluding that it cannot adequately carry out its responsibilities with only six board meetings.  Because of the voluntary ethos of credit unions, the historically close involvement of board members with the credit union, and the relatively onerous responsibilities of boards, it may take some time before six board meetings is considered the norm. Other governance changes proposed by the 2022 Bill include reducing the number of board oversight committee meetings, removing the requirement for the board oversight committee to sign the audited annual accounts, and extending from annually to every three years the review of specific policies by the board. The Credit Union (Amendment) Bill 2022 includes substantive policy change in the areas of collaboration, members’ services, and governance. It seeks to give more power to credit unions to determine strategy and, when enacted, will require consequential changes to Central Bank regulations.  To fully exploit the options and opportunities enabled by its provisions will require significant work by the sector. The Retail Banking Review 2022 In November 2022, following its approval by Government, Minister for Finance, Paschal Donohoe, and Minister of State for Financial Services, Credit Unions and Insurance, Sean Fleming, published the report of the Retail Banking Review (the Review).  Driven by the departure of two major banks, Ulster Bank and KBC, this is a broad-ranging review of the retail banking sector in Ireland, including the credit union sector.  In relation to credit unions, the Review states: “Credit unions have a strong and trusted brand, they are present in communities throughout the country, and have been developing their product offering. The credit unions are already a significant player in consumer credit, and they are making inroads in the current account, mortgages and SME segments of the market. These developments, coupled with their collectively strong levels of capital and deposit bases, leads the Review Team to believe that credit unions could play a greater role in the provision of retail banking products and services in the coming years.” Referencing the Credit Union (Amendment) Bill 2022, the Review recommends that the credit union sector develop a strategic plan to deliver business model changes that would enable it to sustainably provide a universal product offering to all credit union members. Provided directly or on a referral basis, this would continue to be community-based. The Review suggests that such a strategic plan should show how credit unions can: viably scale their business model in key product areas such as mortgages and SME lending; invest in expertise, systems, controls, and processes to deliver standard products and services across all credit unions, while managing any risks arising and continuing to protect members’ savings; provide the option of in-branch services for members of all credit unions. Both the Bill and the Review point to new opportunities for credit unions and demonstrate confidence in their future as part of the Irish financial services sector. For these opportunities to be successfully managed, however, credit unions must continue to maintain high levels of governance so that legislators, the Central Bank, their members, and the wider community can have confidence in the sector.  Credit unions have done much for many people in Ireland for more than 60 years. These developments in legislation and government policy point to their continued and increasing relevance in the years ahead. Gene Boyd, FCA, is a risk management consultant and author of The Governance of Credit Unions in Ireland

The roadmap for the EU Commission’s milestone Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive is taking shape and now is the time to start preparing for a brave new era in non-financial reporting, writes Conor Holland With the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) now approved by the European Council, entities in the EU must begin to invest significant time and resources in preparing for the advent of a new era in non-financial reporting, which places the public disclosure of environmental, social affairs and governance matters (ESG) matters on a par with financial information. Under the CSRD, entities will have to disclose much more sustainability-related information about their business models, strategy and supply chains than they have to date. They will also need to report ESG information in a standardised format that can be assured by an independent third party. For those charged with governance, the CSRD will bring further augmented requirements. Audit committees will need to oversee new reporting processes and monitor the effectiveness of systems and controls setup. They will also have enhanced responsibilities. Along with monitoring an entity’s ESG reporting process, and evaluating the integrity of the sustainability information reported by that entity, audit committees will need to: Monitor the effectiveness of the entity’s internal quality control and risk management systems and internal audit functions; Monitor the assurance of annual and consolidated sustainability reporting; Inform the entity’s administrative or supervisory body of the outcome of the assurance of sustainability reporting; and Review and monitor the independence of the assurance provider. The CSRD stipulates the requirement for limited assurance over the reported information. However, it also includes the option for assurance requirements to evolve to reasonable assurance at a later stage. The EU estimates that 49,000 companies across the EU will fall under the requirements of the new CSRD Directive, compared to the 11,600 companies that currently have reporting obligations. The EU has confirmed that the implementation of the CSRD will take place in three stages: 1 January 2024 for companies already subject to the non-financial reporting directive (reporting in 2025 for the financial year 2024); 1 January 2025 for large companies that are not presently subject to the non-financial reporting directive (reporting in 2026 for the financial year 2025); 1 January 2026 for listed SMEs, small and non-complex credit institutions, and captive insurance undertakings (reporting in 2027 for the financial year 2026). A large undertaking is defined as an entity that exceeds at least two of the following criteria: A net turnover of €40 million A balance sheet total of €20 million 250 employees on average over the financial year The final text of the CSRD has also set timelines for when the Commission should adopt further delegated acts on reporting standards, with 30 June 2023 set as the date by which the Commission should adopt delegated acts specifying the information that undertakings will be required to report. European Financial Reporting Advisory Group In tandem, the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) is working on a first set of draft sustainability reporting standards (ESRS). These draft standards will be ready for consideration by the Commission once the Parliament and Council have agreed a legislative text. The current draft standards provide an outline as to the depth and breadth of what entities will be required to report. Significantly, the ESRS should be considered as analogous to accountancy standards—with detailed disclosure requirements (qualitative and quantitative), a conceptual framework and associated application guidance. Readers should take note—the ESRS are much more than a handful of metrics supplementary to the financial statements. They represent a step change in what corporate reporting entails, moving non-financial information toward an equilibrium with financial information. Moreover, the reporting boundaries would be based on financial statements but expanded significantly for the upstream and downstream value chain, meaning an entity would need to capture material sustainability matters that are connected to the entity by its direct or indirect business relationships, regardless of its level of control over them. While the standards and associated requirements are now largely finalised, in early November 2022, EFRAG published a revised iteration to the draft ESRS, introducing certain changes to the original draft standards. While the broad requirements and content remain largely the same, some notable changes include: Structure of the reporting areas has been aligned with TCFD (Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures) and ISSB (International Sustainability Standards Board) standards – specifically, the ESRS will be tailored around “governance”, “strategy”, “management of impacts, risks and opportunities”, and “metrics and targets”. Definition of financial materiality is now more closely aligned to ISSB standards. Impact materiality is more commensurate with the GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) definition of impact materiality. Time horizons are now just a recommendation; entities may deviate and would disclose their entity-specific time horizons used. Incorporation of one governance standard into the cross-cutting standard requirements on the reporting area of governance. Slight reduction in the number of data points required within the disclosure requirements. ESRS and international standards By adopting double materiality principles, the proposed ESRS consider a wider range of stakeholders than IFRS® Sustainability Disclosure Standards or the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published proposal. Instead, they aim to meet public policy objectives as well as meeting the needs of capital markets. It is the ISSB’s aim to create a global baseline for sustainability reporting standards that allows local standard setters to add additional requirements (building blocks), rather than face a coexistence of multiple separate frameworks. The CSRD requires EFRAG to take account of global standard-setting initiatives to the greatest extent possible. In this regard, EFRAG has published a comparison with the ISSB’s proposals and committed to joining an ISSB working group to drive global alignment. However, in the short term, entities and investors may potentially have to deal with three sets of sustainability reporting standards in setting up their reporting processes, controls, and governance. Key differences The proposed ESRS list detailed disclosure requirements for all ESG topics. The proposed IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards would also require disclosure in relation to all relevant ESG topics, but the ISSB has to date only prepared a detailed exposure draft on climate, asking preparers to consider general requirements and other sources of information to report on other sustainability topics. The SEC focused on climate in its recent proposal. The proposed ESRS are more prescriptive, and the number of disclosure requirements significantly exceeds those in the proposed IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. Whereas the proposed IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards are intended to focus on the information needs of capital markets, ESRS also aim to address the policy objectives of the EU by addressing wider stakeholder needs. Given the significance of the directive—and the remaining time to get ready for it—entities should now start preparing for its implementation. It is important that entities develop plans to understand the full extent of the CSRD requirements, and the implications for their reporting infrastructure. As such, they should take some immediate steps to prepare, and consider: Performing a gap analysis—i.e. what the entity reports today, contrasted with what will be required under the CSRD. This is a useful exercise to inform entities on where resources should be directed, including how management identify sustainability-related information, and what KPIs they will be required to report on. Undertaking a ‘double materiality’ analysis to identify what topics would be considered material from an impact and financial perspective—as required under the CSRD. Get ‘assurance ready’—entities will need to be comfortable that processes and controls exist to support ESG information, and that the information can ultimately be assured. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive represents a fundamental change in the nature of corporate reporting—the time to act is now and the first deadline is closing in.

Brendan O’Hora reports on the findings of the 2022 All-Member Survey Research is conducted to discover new information or reach a new understanding of something, so the Institute’s biennial membership survey is crucial. These have been two years of significant change, and as a membership organisation, it has never been more important for us to act on the findings in a comprehensive, targeted way for the benefit of 31,000 members globally.  The survey was conducted in May and June with over 1,800 members by independent research agency, Coyne Research. This level of participation helps us to build a very accurate picture of the member experience and is much appreciated. It allows us to make the most of this opportunity to check in with members, and to ascertain how we will respond and act on the findings.  This year, we also conducted qualitative research via eight focus groups. This exercise gave us a deeper understanding of member sentiment and reinforced that we are operating in very unusual times.  The operating environment The pandemic may be in retreat, but its effects persist. An ongoing adjustment to hybrid working, declining levels of resilience after extended periods of pressure, and changing priorities among younger members, many of whom qualified or spent their early years in a virtual environment, have had an impact. Compounding this are growing cost-of-living pressures.  The top challenge emerging from the survey for businesses was, unsurprisingly, the competition for talent, up significantly on 2020. Following this is inflationary pressure and increased labour costs. What is resonating with members  Looking at our membership as a whole, the qualification is very highly regarded and a source of great pride. The letters mean a lot to our members, and that pride also extends to the robustness and quality of the education provided.  In reviewing the findings, Bernie Coyne at Coyne Research noted that members are broadly positive about the way the Institute has responded over the last two years to the pandemic.  She said: “As in previous years, members were invited to rate a range of services, based on their experience and degree of satisfaction, with sentiment remaining consistent. Over seven in 10 members rated the webinars and online CPD options as good, with a 20 percent increase in those who experienced them since 2020. The range of specialist qualifications was also rated highly, as was Accountancy Ireland magazine, the weekly Tax News circular, and the knowledge hubs on the Institute’s website.”  The research also pointed to an increase in the number of members who have communicated with the Institute by phone and email since 2020. Roughly seven in 10 rate their experience in communicating positively. While there was strong uptake of the virtual alternatives on offer during the pandemic, there is confidence in returning to face-to-face events. Indeed, the research points to a desire, particularly among younger members, to engage and learn about how they can make their membership work for them and derive the greatest value from it.  Consistent with many of our peers globally, we have seen drops in key member metrics, such as satisfaction and relevance as well as likelihood to recommend the qualification. While, unsurprising, given these unusual times, it is an important alert for the Institute that is already prompting action.   How we are responding to the findings In a changed external environment, and armed with considerable insights, our challenge now is to reposition how we engage with members, with a particular focus on younger members at the start of their career, to optimise their experience of the profession. We are working closely with the Chartered Accountants Student Society of Ireland (CASSI) and the Young Professionals Committee in so doing.  Our members are some of the strongest advocates for the profession, and, at a time when there is a continuing shortage of qualified accountants, it is incumbent upon us to ensure the membership experience is a positive, rewarding, and relevant one for these most important advocates.  One of the ways we will be doing this in the coming weeks and months will be through a campaign to put the tools into members’ hands to make their membership work for them. It will feature real members speaking about how they’ve made the most of their membership and will be accompanied by an updated member section on the website to help users better access and understand what is available, from membership details to Continuing Professional Development, conferences, social events, and supports. Our focus is on giving more control of their experience to our members, so that this experience can be tailored and made to work for the individual.   In closing, I want to return to a theme I touched on at the outset—resilience in the face of sustained pressure. One-in-two respondents reported that COVID had a negative impact on their mental health, compared to 2020. Younger members were less likely to be aware of the Institute’s member support service CA Support, and we will be working to increase awareness of this important resource.  Brendan O'Hora is Director, Members, at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Jennifer Nickerson left a successful career in Dublin to co-found a whiskey distillery in rural Tipperary. She tells Accountancy Ireland about her inspiration, ambitions and lessons learned along the way When Jennifer Nickerson co-founded Tipperary Boutique Distillery in 2014, the Aberdeen-born Chartered Accountant had already risen through the ranks at KPMG in Dublin to become an associate director in the tax department just seven years after joining as a trainee. Tipperary Boutique Distillery is now exporting worldwide and employs seven people in south Tipperary with further plans for expansion. Here, Nickerson tells us about what inspired her move into entrepreneurship and her experiences establishing and growing a small business with global reach. Q: Tell us about your life and career prior to co-founding Tipperary Boutique Distillery—what prompted you to become a Chartered Accountant? I grew up in Scotland and my dad, Stuart, was a master distiller. He managed and worked as a consultant for some of Scotland’s best scotch producers, such as Glenfiddich, Balvenie and William Grant & Sons. You could say I grew up in the industry. I loved it, especially the passion the people working in it had. I went to college in Edinburgh for six years, studying Veterinary Medicine initially and then switching to Accountancy. I decided I didn’t want to work outside in the cold and wet.  I wanted to work in an office and I had this perception that a job in accountancy would be “nine-to-five”.  I was wrong about that, but after meeting my husband Liam and moving to Ireland to train, I found I really enjoyed the problem-solving aspect of the work. Numbers make sense. There is a “right answer” and that can be very satisfying.  I worked in the tax department at KPMG and did a lot of advisory work. The hours were long but there was great camaraderie and that makes for a really nice working environment. Q: So you had settled into this new career in Dublin and you were enjoying it. What prompted you to up sticks and move to rural Ireland to set up a whiskey distillery? I married a farmer—but I did tell him that I wouldn’t be moving to Tipperary unless there was work there that would interest me as much as what I was doing with KPMG in Dublin. We talked it through and my dad had already mentioned during a visit to Ballindoney, Liam’s family farm near Clonmel, that it would be the ideal setting for a whiskey distillery. We could grow grain, we had the land to build a distillery on, there was good quality water in Tipperary and good conditions for maturing whiskey as it’s a little bit warmer than Scotland. He really just mentioned it in passing, but it struck a chord. I’d had lots of experience putting together business plans and I was lucky that Liam had a steady job working for the county council. It was a calculated risk and we could afford to do it, so we went for it. Q: What was your vision for Tipperary Boutique Distillery starting out in 2014? Ultimately, we wanted to produce a world-class whiskey from grain to glass here on Ballindoney Farm.  We knew we had everything we needed, but we also knew it would take time, because distilleries are expensive and there is also the cost of laying down spirit for at least three years before it can be sold as whiskey. It wasn’t until 2020 that we finally had the funding raised, the facility built and the equipment installed to open our own distillery. We had started outsourcing Irish whiskey casks from other distilleries cut to bottling strength with water from our farm and released our very first expression way back in March, 2015.  After that, we started taking our own grain from the farm, having it malted and distilled by my dad at other facilities. Now, we are able to do everything apart from malting here in our own distillery. We grow our own grain, we mill, we mash, we ferment, we distill, we mature and we bottle here on the farm.  Q: Tell us about your markets? What countries do you sell to and where do you have the healthiest trade? We sell into Belgium, France, Canada, into several states in the US, and a little in Korea and Singapore. We were selling to Russia, but obviously not any more, and we were in discussions with distributors in Ukraine and Poland, but the impact of the war has scuppered both. Germany is our biggest market, Italy is great, and Belgium is a surprisingly steady little market as well.  In Ireland, we sell online ourselves at tipperarydistillery.ie and through Irishmalts.com, James J Fox, The Celtic Whiskey Shop, and through local retailers around the country. Q: What was it like moving from a successful career as a tax advisor in a Big 4 environment into the cut and thrust of entrepreneurship? Was it a good experience? It was massively humbling to be honest, but also incredibly rewarding. At the start, I did miss having colleagues to talk to and bounce ideas off. I really felt I was on my own and it took me a while to find my feet. My background in accountancy definitely helped a lot with the ‘form filing’—understanding bills and applying for licenses, things like that. At the same time, there were lots of things I didn’t know about, like where to get a barcode or source seals for bottles. It was a massive learning curve. Q: What are the most important lessons you have learned so far running your own business? I had no idea starting out how vitally important sales are. That sounds like a ridiculous statement, but it took a long time for me to shift my mindset away from numbers and deadlines to just getting out there and going after sales.  What I know now is that you can’t give up. It’s no good just sending out an email to a potential customer and waiting for them to come back to you. You have to keep trying and telling literally everyone you can how great your product is and why. That can be really hard because it’s very different to sitting in front of a computer as an accountant and working to a deadline. You have to be willing and able to stand up on a stage and say, “this is what we’re doing, we’re amazing and our product is the best”.  There is a theory that 80 percent of all sales in any business come from 20 percent of costumers. Based on my own experience, I’d have to agree with that. There’s really no point in chasing one-off sales. It’s far more important to focus on valued relationships than driving around trying to get a bottle into every bar in the country. On the other side of the coin, you have to chase your bills just as much. If you’re not getting paid, you’re in trouble. Q: How has the COVID-19 pandemic and the more recent war in Ukraine affected your business and how have you responded? As soon as the Pandemic hit, our orders from overseas plummeted. We had two pallets due to go to a distributor in a country that was very badly impacted by the pandemic and they ended up having to wait six months to take delivery. Irish people are brilliant though. They started buying more Irish whiskey during the pandemic and that really saved our business. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine had a massive impact as well, because it caused major supply chain issues for us and other producers. We had to change our glass suppliers, and we had really big delays with cork supplies, the capsules for the top of the bottle seals, cardboard for packaging deliveries—you name it, everything was disrupted. Most of our suppliers I tried to keep, because we have good relationships with them and that’s really important in business. We were also probably lucky that we are quite a small operation, so we have been able to adapt more quickly than bigger producers. Q: The Irish whiskey industry has grown enormously in recent years—do you think there is room for further growth and what are your own plans from here? When we started back in 2014, there were something like six craft distilleries in Ireland, but by the time our own distillery was up-and-running in 2020, the number had risen to around 40.  The market grew so much in that time. There is a lot more competition now and a lot more diversity in the sector, but there are also a lot more customers buying Irish whiskey in Ireland and overseas. I think there is still scope for some growth in the market. Forty distilleries sounds like a lot, but Scotland has around 100. What we are seeing is that, as the market matures, there is less focus on cost and greater focus on quality. Each producer has to know their niche and communicate it well to the marketplace. For Tipperary Boutique Distillery, our plan now is to continue to sell in Europe, and expand our presence in America and Asia. We want to continue to grow sustainably and one day—hopefully soon—open our own visitor centre at our distillery here on Ballindoney Farm.

Wavering over support for Ukraine’s defence against Russia is not an option. The stakes are too high for Europe’s stability and unity, writes Judy Dempsey Russia’s war against Ukraine is approaching its tenth month. Despite Russian President Vladimir Putin’s original aim of conquering Ukraine within days after his 24 February invasion, Russian troops have been forced to withdraw from strategic areas in eastern Ukraine.  It’s too difficult to speculate how and when this war will end, but there is already a sense of war fatigue among some governments and political parties in Europe and the United States—ignoring the fact that Russia has been escalating this war over the past few months and Ukraine must continue to fight for its independence. There is even some suggestion that Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky should be persuaded to negotiate with Putin.  This would be a mistake.  Understandably, several EU countries—especially the Baltic States, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia—do not trust Putin’s intentions. They want Ukraine to continue regaining occupied territory and then negotiate from a position of strength. This kind of victory for Ukraine would have several outcomes for the region and the EU. A Ukrainian victory could deter Russia from spreading its military and political influence in Moldova, Georgia and Armenia. Such a victory would be a fillip to pro-European political movements in these countries.  As for Belarus, there is little chance that the political future of Alexander Lukashenka, who has imprisoned many Belarussians since their failed uprising over two years ago and repressed any kind of opposition, would survive.   A Ukrainian defeat, on the other hand, could encourage the Kremlin to extend its influence over Eastern Europe and consolidate Lukashenka’s regime which would, in the short-term, increase his grip on power. In the long term, this ‘stability’ based on repression would lead to instability.  In short, a victory by Ukraine could increase the stability of Eastern Europe. A Russian victory would lead to instability in the region. As for the EU, a return to Russia exerting its political and economic influence over Eastern Europe would have several consequences.  First, it would lead to new divisions on the European continent.  Second, as many EU countries have taken in Ukrainians, an unstable Eastern Europe would lead to new flows of refugees. Populist movements could exploit such a development.  Third, it would lead to deeper divisions inside the EU. The Central European countries would oppose any negotiations that would allow Putin to save face. Germany and France might be tempted to restore relations with the Kremlin—indeed, neither Berlin nor Paris have called unambiguously for Ukraine to win this war.  Fourth, given these differences, it is hard to see how the EU could ever agree to a strong and united foreign, security and defence policy. Russia’s war against Ukraine has exposed the level of distrust between the Central European and big EU member states. Small EU countries matter. Perhaps, for example, Ireland, Finland and Denmark, could form coalitions of the willing with the Central Europeans to maintain political, military and economic support for Ukraine.  Wavering over support for Ukraine is not an option. The stakes are too high for Europe’s stability and unity. Judy Dempsey is a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at Carnegie Europe and Editor-in-Chief of Strategic Europe

Attracting, retaining and upskilling their people will be a top priority for Ireland’s chief financial officers in 2023. Colin Kerr reports As Irish businesses approach another year of uncertainty, Ireland’s chief financial officers (CFOs) are looking to workforce upskilling as a major “investment opportunity” in the 12 months ahead. The latest Deloitte CFO survey benchmarked the sentiment of 1,151 CFOs in 15 countries in Europe. Published in mid-November, the bi-annual survey sought the views of 75 senior finance executives in Irish business, in sectors ranging from construction, healthcare, and manufacturing, to retail, tourism and transport.  Seventy-two percent said upskilling was a major priority for them currently, while 96 percent identified attracting and retaining skilled talent as one of the biggest risks they would face in 2023. “This outweighs their assessment of other risks, such as the economic outlook for Ireland, the geopolitical outlook, supply chain logistics, and cyber risk,” said Danny Gaffney, Partner, Deloitte Ireland. “The survey also highlighted the point that a lot of CFOs are recognising the multiple benefits of upskilling at a macro level. As Irish businesses upskill their teams, it creates capacity within those teams and CFOs see the importance of that given the constrained talent market.” Businesses in Ireland are refocusing their workforce policies and planning talent attraction and retention, according to Deloitte’s findings. Eighty-five percent are looking at rolling out flexible working patterns, while 69 percent are reviewing their reward offering.  Sixty-eight percent, meanwhile, are investing in wellbeing and assistance programmes, and 59 percent are investing in sustainability initiatives, such as measures to reduce their carbon footprint. “Wellbeing and assistance programmes are actually getting leveraged to a greater degree. Going back to the hybrid discussion, the usual supports that are available onsite are not always available when you are working in a hybrid environment,” said Gaffney. “Having in place good wellbeing and assistance programmes is very useful to organisations in the hybrid environment where CFOs and their teams are not as well-connected as they would be onsite.” Gaffney advised that CFOs put a clear strategy in place when considering how best to upskill their team. “What we need are practical solutions where team members continue in their roles and can upskill around the working day, either in person or online,” he said. “At Deloitte, we are working with clients to help them meet this challenge, including an increasing focus on digital technologies. Personally, I would encourage CFOs to look at training as a better use of their internal capital than focusing on external resources, as a means to allow them to do some of the challenging things they are not doing at present.” The pursuit of digital finance strategies is one of the challenges facing CFOs. Upskilling existing employees can help to meet this challenge. “Getting upskilling right is essential. If you don’t get it right, it falls by the wayside and the business, the CFO and the internal teams all lose out as a result,” said Gaffney. “The biggest trap CFOs can fall into is making upskilling too complicated. The three pillars I would identify are: Show, Support, Assess. CFOs need to be sure the people on their teams are getting the specific training and development they need.” Communication is equally important, as is commitment, according to Gaffney. “It is a two-way street and both the CFO and their team need to be open, upfront and honest in advance of committing to training and upskilling,” he said.  “The business needs to understand the team motive and the individual team members, who are being upskilled, need to understand the business motive behind the process. Commitment is also key because—if we are talking about businesses trying to generate capability to create business value going forward—they need to be committed to ensuring the right conditions are in place for their teams to excel during and after the upskilling.” The growing trend towards hybrid working among businesses in Ireland offers its own potential opportunities. “Remote and online training is much more commonplace now than it was two or three years ago,” said Gaffney.  “With hybrid working, the big challenge a lot of businesses and organisations have faced, and continue to face, concerns connectivity. They can say, ‘we mandate you to be in the office on particular days each week,’ and that can lead to a reaction that may be very negative.  “On the other hand, there are workplaces that are more employee-led in terms of when people are required to come into the office. The challenge in this scenario is that these employees can feel disconnected from the organisation.  “Training is a brilliant way to make people feel connected. When training is made available to me through work, I feel that I am valued and more aligned to my role. This is because I can see that both my organisation and I understand what it takes for me to be successful.” The foremost challenge for many organisations is their CFO’s capacity to “absorb costs”, both new and existing, Gaffney said. “Rates of inflation will remain higher for a longer period of time, as the cost of debt rises and the appetite for risk declines, and organic growth is more of a focus for the CFOs over merger and acquisition (M&A) activity. “Reducing M&A activity may seem like something CFOs would look to do, but they should look at longer-term investments to mitigate current risks.”

The worse the market sentiment, the better the profit opportunities and, right now, UK equities may represent “the trade of the decade”. Cormac Lucey explains why Diversity is regarded as an unambiguously good thing nowadays. Imagine the reaction you might get if you were to try to assert the contrary among your family or in your social group. But, for all that diversity is pushed and advocated, it can also sometimes be woefully lacking in our public discourse.  More than eyebrows may be raised if somebody states their support for Donald Trump or the UK’s decision to exit the European Union. But, in 2016, millions of sensible people voted for Trump and for Brexit.  Is it not odd that today their viewpoint is so universally dismissed? While being contrary is generally regarded as a negative social habit, it can pay rich dividends from an investment perspective: the worse the market sentiment is, the better the profit opportunities.  This is the credo of contrarian investing. Nathan Rothschild, a 19th-century British financier and member of the Rothschild banking family, is credited with saying that “the time to buy is when there’s blood in the streets”.  Brexit is widely regarded by “right-thinking people” as a self-inflicted wound. A June 2022 analysis by John Springford for the European Centre for Reform concluded that the UK economy had substantially underperformed post-Brexit compared to how it might have fared if the British public had not voted to leave the EU.  UK gross domestic product was 5.2 percent lower than it would have been if the UK had remained in the EU; investment was 13.7 percent lower; and goods trade was down 13.6 percent.  Since then, Boris Johnson has given way as Prime Minister to Liz Truss, and she has been replaced by Rishi Sunak. And there was that snap financial crisis triggered by Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini-budget.  The UK has seldom looked so bad.  There isn’t exactly blood running on the streets, but it is pretty bombed out as a popular investment destination. That’s one reason why Rob Arnott, Chair of Research Affiliates, has argued that UK equities represent “the trade of the decade”. He states that “UK equities offer one of the most attractive risk-return trade-offs, priced to earn a return a notch higher than emerging market equities with significantly lower volatility”.  In essence, Arnott follows the Warren Buffett dictum about the equities market: “in the short-term, the market is a popularity contest; in the long-term, it is a weighing machine”.  As investor holding periods stretch out beyond five years, realised investor returns increasingly become a function of the price paid. So, while very expensive stocks can become even more expensive over a few years, as more time passes, they will increasingly struggle to generate strong returns.  Conversely, if you buy a deeply discounted asset (such as UK value stocks today), they may not initially show a great return but, over time, they should. In fact, with an asset this deeply discounted, there’s every chance it will outperform even in the short-term.  Arnott wrote his piece in early 2021 when he argued that, among the major equity markets, UK stocks were trading in the cheapest quintile of their historical norms based on both price-to-book and price-to-five-year average cash-flow ratios and in the bottom third, based on price-to-five-year average sales ratio. His previous big call—to invest in emerging market value stocks in 2016—generated returns of 80 percent in its first two years. Since announcing this trade of the decade, UK value stocks have risen by over 20 percent while the S&P index is marginally lower than it was, and the Nasdaq has dropped by over 20 percent.  Sometimes diversity of thought isn’t so bad after all. Cormac Lucey is an economic commentator and lecturer at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Developments at the United Nation’s 27th climate conference will have far-reaching implications for financial professionals and businesses worldwide. Susan Rossney digs into the details COP27, the international climate summit, concluded on 20 November after two weeks of negotiations. While last year’s COP saw the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation announce an International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), this year had less reporting-specific news.  One headline was the commitment by CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project) to incorporate ISSB’s IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures Standard into its global environmental disclosure platform—another step towards greater comparability and coherence of global standards and reporting. On a macro level, though, COPs have a huge importance for businesses worldwide. ‘COPs’—Conferences of the Parties—are summits attended by the nearly 200 countries which have signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).  At COPs, these countries discuss their existing efforts and future plans to deal with climate change and its effects. Any new agreements made at COP tend to be named after the host city, e.g. the ‘Paris Agreement’ (2015), the ‘Glasgow Climate Pact’ (2021). This year we have the ‘Sharm el-Sheikh Implementation Plan’, named after the Egyptian city in which it took place. This plan set up a new loss and damage fund for vulnerable countries most severely impacted by the effects of unpreventable climate change (floods, drought, desertification, and land loss due to rising sea-levels). The inclusion was a landmark moment in global climate politics as it acknowledged that the world’s richer countries—and biggest carbon emitters—are responsible to the developing world for the harm caused by global warming. How to finance this loss and damage, specifically how finance would be channelled to the developing world, was a dominant and contentious topic at COP27. The scale of the finance required is truly enormous. At least $2 trillion a year will be needed by developing countries to enable them to transition from fossil fuels, invest in renewable energy and other low-carbon technology, and cope with the impacts of extreme weather. The final figure is likely to be multiples of that. Although COPs have been criticised as political talking shops, divorced from the lived experience of most citizens and businesses, they have a considerable impact. Close to 200 countries gathering to debate a global response to climate change keeps alive an issue that affects all citizens, albeit not equally.  It restates the importance of holding global warming to the levels agreed upon at the Paris Agreement—i.e. well below 2°C and preferably 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels (we are currently at 1.1–1.2°C). What is decided at COP filters down to organisations through legislation and policy, like Europe’s ‘Fit for 55’ package, Ireland’s Climate Action Plans and sectoral targets, and through investors’ continued demands for projects that are aligned to climate targets to meet their own portfolio requirements.  Ireland will come under continued pressure from the EU to act on measures such as developing our renewable energy and tackling our carbon emissions. Changes are required across all sectors, and all businesses, including SMEs, will have to make changes. Accountants, as their trusted advisers, will need the knowledge to help businesses adapt and thrive in this new reality.   Susan Rossney is Sustainability Officer at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Moves underway globally to reform the audit process should reduce the likelihood of corporate collapses and internal fraud, writes Paul Kilduff Whenever there is a sudden company collapse, a shocking fraud or a financial scandal, the details make the front pages of the newspapers and news sites, and the shareholders and the public rightly ask: ‘And where was audit?’ Work is presently underway to address this vital question. In the US, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) oversees the audits of public companies in order to protect investors. There are quality control standards in place covering personnel, ethics, engagement performance and client acceptance, but the chair of the PCAOB accepts that these are outdated and do not adequately promote audit quality.  The PCAOB’s plan is to close the gaps by updating the rules for how firms should police their audit work. It recently issued its 2022–2026 Strategic Plan for public comment, so these planned developments will take time. In the UK, the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) develops and maintains auditing and assurance standards. The most recent annual report from the FRC on the quality of audit in the UK found that 33 percent of all audits reviewed needed improvement. This was an unacceptably high number of audits, according to the accounting watchdog. Of the 147 audits inspected by the FRC, 41 required ‘further improvements’ and seven needed ‘significant changes’.  The Institute of Internal Auditors believes the FRC findings underline the need for urgent audit reform and robust measures designed to increase audit quality. One solution is to put the FRC audit regulator on a statutory footing with enough new legal powers to do its job effectively. Sadly, the problem of audit quality remains, and it has impacted the work of the auditor for years. High-profile scandals When Nick Leeson single-handedly destroyed Barings Bank, I was an internal audit manager with HSBC in London. My first reaction was one of relief that the calamitous events had not occurred at our bank. My second reaction was one of concern that the bank’s internal audit team and external auditors in Singapore had not discovered the £869 million trading loss hidden by Leeson. Leeson outfoxed audit. When internal audit arrived from the London head office, he met them on the chaotic trading floor of SIMEX, he told them he was very busy, and he avoided the office and all meetings with the auditors. When external audit from a Big 4 firm asked him for a confirmation for a large bogus option trade, Leeson manufactured the confirmation from a page of headed bank notepaper, using scissors, glue, and a photocopier. The audit team was none the wiser as to his deceit. Wirecard AG, a Munich-based electronic payments provider, once valued at €24 billion, went kaput in 2020. The accounts of this listed company included a bank deposit in Singapore of €1.9 billion, which simply did not exist. The Financial Times reported that, instead of obtaining confirmation of the deposit directly from the bank, the auditors relied on documents and screenshots provided by a third-party trustee and by Wirecard staff.  This audit failure happened not once, but at three successive year-ends from 2016 to 2018. I qualified as an ACA many years ago, but even then, obtaining independent confirmation of bank deposits was covered in day one of audit training. The head of the German financial watchdog BaFin was critical of the audit work performed and said the Wirecard scandal was ‘a complete disaster’, adding: ‘It starts with looking at a complete failure of senior management and it goes on to the scores of auditors who couldn’t dig up the truth.’ In the UK, there are recent examples of previously robust companies, which had been audited by leading UK accounting firms, suddenly failing. The demise of retail chain BHS, travel agency Thomas Cook and construction giant Carillion had a major impact on the UK economy, costing the taxpayer millions. The Institute of Internal Auditors believes that stronger governance and audit can help to prevent such collapses occurring in the future, protecting jobs, pensions, investors and incomes. Necessary reform The necessary improvements to audit must deliver on several fronts. The audit profession must ensure that it attracts capable individuals with strong product knowledge, an inquiring mindset, and a character strong enough to deal with any management obstruction.  The improved audit approach must be documented in revised policies and procedures, which must be ingrained in audit work. Quality Assurance functions must be set up or enhanced in firms to ensure standards are met. The cost of implementing these audit reforms must be reasonable to bear, whether the auditor is in an internal audit function, a Big 4 audit firm or a small audit firm with a more limited budget. There is an expectation that audit reform must use all available technology to improve the quality and scope of audit work. In the past, audit sampling may have been acceptable, but with advanced Computer Assisted Audit Techniques (CAATs), 100 percent auditing is the likely optimal solution. Global audit reform must also consider the changing nature of work, and the associated risks. Few auditors thought three years ago that so many employees would now be working on a hybrid basis, relying on remote systems access for client verification, payments processing and other critical tasks.  When reform does arrive, there should be international convergence, so that the audit quality rules in the US, UK and other jurisdictions are consistent and align with international standards, thereby avoiding unnecessary differences and costly duplication that could weaken audit effectiveness.  In the meantime, accountancy bodies are providing new guidance to members.  New guidance  In the UK, the Institute of Accountants in England and Wales recently reported on the significant resources devoted to fraud-related activities within audit firms. It also acknowledged the public perception that auditors can and should be doing much more to deter and detect fraud and to prevent the unexpected failure of large companies due to fraud. It was Lord Justice Lopes who famously summed up the auditor’s duty in the case of Kingston Cotton Mills Co., where the company directors had fraudulently overstated the value of stock, by proclaiming: ‘An auditor is not bound to be a detective. He is a watchdog, but not a bloodhound.’  Lopes opined that the auditor cannot be liable for any wrongdoings they had no reason to suspect were taking place, but that landmark legal judgement was handed down in 1896. The expectation placed on both internal and external auditors is significantly higher today.  The auditor is not specifically expected to search out any fraud or deception in their audit, but if there are warning signs that all is not well, the auditor must investigate these to reach a satisfactory conclusion regarding the audit opinion.  While writing my latest banking book, I researched the case of Joseph Jett, a former bond trader with Kidder Peabody in New York, who created $350 million of phantom trading profits on the bank’s computer systems.  The subsequent post-mortem report stated that the internal auditors learnt that Jett had booked billions of dollars of unusual transactions, but no auditor followed up on this anomaly. The auditor had to explain his work in court, as audit workpapers were produced with hand-written annotations without evidence of action. This is not a situation any auditor would wish to defend.  I also came across Sir Allen Stanford and his Stanford Financial Group, based in Antigua, which was later revealed to be a giant Ponzi scheme. His bank at the time had a value of $8 billion, but it was audited by a small Antiguan audit firm with just ten staff. This should never have been acceptable. When corporate disaster does strike, it is easy to point the finger at the auditor, but this is often unfair. Every auditor comes to work with the intention of doing a good job. The aim of audit reform is to assist and guide the auditor in their work, rather than to make their work more onerous. The global audit reform process is underway, and it must deliver improvements to reduce the likelihood of further high-profile corporate disasters, which damage the reputation of the auditor. In the meantime, the auditor at large would do well to maintain a healthy sense of scepticism.  Paul Kilduff B.Comm FCA is an author and banker, who has worked with HSBC, Bank of Ireland, Bank of America, Barclays and Citibank. His eighth book, Stupid Bankers: The World’s Worst Banking Disasters Revealed, is available exclusively on Amazon UK in paperback and Kindle format

Irish Government finances are in surplus and Ireland’s debt-to-GDP ratio has stabilised, so why are there calls for higher taxes? asks Dr Brian Keegan It’s hard to avoid concern fatigue setting in. What with the war in Ukraine, the cost-of-living crisis, the continued Northern political stalemate, multiple dire warnings amplified at COP27 over climate change and another possible COVID-19 surge—the list of concerns seems particularly endless at the moment.   Some time ago, the commentator Marc Coleman projected that population growth—and, by implication, skills growth—would drive prosperity in Ireland. Coleman’s ideas have been given additional credence by the current situation in the UK. Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s November budget looks towards an extended period of economic stagnation. British productivity has not grown in line with government spending in recent years. In the moribund British economy, there is a record low level of people out of work while the number of job vacancies is at a record high.   There is a straightforward, one-to-one relationship between economic growth and the growth in tax yield, which permits more government spending without further borrowing. When the growth in gross domestic product (GDP) stalls, so too do the tax figures.   In his book The Best is Yet to Come, Coleman pointed out some of the links between more workers, growth and greater resources for public services and benefits. Though the timing was unfortunate (the book was published just months before the 2008 financial crisis), Ireland is now indeed in a better place, at least economically, than it has been for many years. Government finances are in surplus and the debt-to-GDP ratio, at around 50 percent, is back under control.   Unlike the British situation where a Budget bordering on the austere was required to meet existing public spending commitments, without an intolerably high borrowing requirement, the recent Irish Budget took a cost-of-living crisis in its stride, with grant aid against soaring energy bills for households and businesses alike being met through current tax receipts. Nevertheless, a narrative has emerged that the burden of taxation in Ireland will have to increase.   Why this should be the case is not always specified. There are unquestionably problems with housing, health, and education, but it does not automatically follow that these problems arise from underinvestment. At the time of writing, close to half a billion euros set aside in 2022 for local authority housing remains unspent. This points to management or capacity problems, not funding challenges.   The much-heralded report of the Commission on Taxation and Welfare has not had a huge impact on the political debate. This may be because it presents solutions in search of a problem. As research from the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council has pointed out, “its work was not framed around any specific shortfall in funding that needed to be filled. Instead, it was guided by a broad intention to generate additional revenue”.   Even government politicians, who are rarely scathing about the output of an expert group, which the government itself commissioned, were dismissive of the recommendations. Clearly, there are some areas of the economy where additional tax funding will be required, if not immediately, in the medium-term.   Unless there is an unforeseen level of immigration of people of working age, the ratio of workers to pensioners is going in the wrong direction. Climate change management, ironically being driven more by energy security concerns than global altruism, will come with a price tag. The sustained high corporation tax take may have peaked. In Britain, the urgent need for higher taxation has been unanswerable. In Ireland, there needs to be a clear business case for any form of new or additional taxation. We have enough to be concerned about without the prospect of unnecessary taxes. Dr Brian Keegan is Director of Advocacy and Voice at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Chartered Accountant Eamonn Hughes is playing a leading role in Bank of Ireland’s Responsible and Sustainable Business Strategy. Hughes tells Accountancy Ireland about the four-year plan and his goals as Chief Sustainability and Investor Relations Officer  Before joining Bank of Ireland Group in February as Chief Sustainability and Investor Relations Officer, Chartered Accountant Eamonn Hughes had a longstanding career as a sell-side market analyst with more than 25 years’ experience in capital markets and domestic banking.  Having worked most recently with Goodbody, the stockbroking firm, as Irish Banks and Insurance Sector Analyst and, before that, Head of Research, Hughes also had a clear view of the swift rise in environmental, social and governance (ESG) to the top of the financial agenda worldwide. “I could see that ESG was becoming hugely important in capital markets and the financial sector. The climate crisis, in particular, is a critical threat, but also a significant opportunity,” said Hughes. “For our planet, there is no Plan B, but the discussion about sustainability is not just about climate change. It is also about creating a more sustainable business model. Our vision at Bank of Ireland is to be the national champion in Ireland, to use our balance sheet and resources to drive positive change for a better, fairer society and improve the environment. “This gives me a very strong framework to think about my role, because, if we can deliver on our ESG strategy, we can ultimately deliver a more sustainable business model for all stakeholders and positive returns for investors. “The ESG agenda also involves regulators, so disclosure and risk management are very important—and there are reporting frameworks in place, but they are evolving very quickly. This is one of the challenges we face and is also why transparency and the availability of clear data is so important.  “With my background in capital markets, I can clearly see the mobilisation in capital, and I think the banking sector has a very obvious supporting role to play in society’s sustainability transition.” Investing in tomorrow Bank of Ireland published its Responsible and Sustainable Business Strategy in March 2021, a year before Hughes joined the group.  Bank of Ireland’s four-year Investing in Tomorrow strategy set out its own goals to support the green transition, alongside two additional pillars: enabling colleagues to thrive; and enhancing customers’ financial wellbeing. The Investing in Tomorrow green transition pillar included the setting of science-based targets aligning the bank’s lending portfolios with the Paris Agreement. The international treaty on climate change, adopted in 2015 at COP 21, set out a goal to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels. “Data is key across all three pillars, because reporting is essentially an output of what we are doing in support of climate change, colleagues, customers and the organisation as a whole,” said Hughes. “We need to focus on how we interact with our stakeholders internally and externally and, in my role, investors are obviously a key priority. As investors now have to produce more disclosures themselves, they will need to engage more with us in terms of what we are doing on our own ESG journey.” Clear reporting strategy How Bank of Ireland communicates with, and reports to, stakeholders on the progress of its ESG strategy is a priority for Hughes in his role as Chief Sustainability and Investor Relations Officer. “Ultimately, we need to explain how we are meeting the targets set out in our strategy, and it is incumbent upon us to develop the capacity and skill sets we need to support reporting and strategy delivery,” he said. “My role is to support in delivering across all three pillars, which involves a lot of data-gathering internally, particularly from a regulatory and reporting perspective.” Detailed progress reports on ESG will now be a core part of Bank of Ireland’s annual reporting cycle. “We need to be able to demonstrate clearly that we are creating a sustainable business strategy, enabling colleagues to thrive in the organisation and enhancing financial well-being among customers, in addition to supporting the sustainable transition,” said Hughes. “Transparency is hugely important. There are a lot of differentials in this space, so we need to standardise our reporting; to be able to explain clearly and cohesively what we are doing and why.” Commercialisation is becoming increasingly important as Bank of Ireland continues to implement Investing in Tomorrow, Hughes said. “Like many banks, we are in the commercialisation phase of our ESG strategy with the creation of sustainable finance solutions for, and increasing engagement with, customers. We are supporting and incentivising customers through competitive rates to buy or build an energy efficient home or to retrofit their home or business to make it more energy efficient.” Sustainable finance fund Bank of Ireland recently announced a €3 billion increase in its Sustainable Finance Fund, which will bring it to €5 billion by 2024. The fund covers green propositions, including mortgages, home improvement loans and business  loans.  Bank of Ireland’s inaugural standalone Responsible and Sustainable Business Report, published in June, tracked the progress of its ESG strategy in 2021. More than €1.8 billion in mortgages, home improvement loans and business loans had been drawn down from the Sustainable Finance Fund by the end of the year, the report stated. Thirty-five percent of all mortgages provided by the bank in 2021 were green, rising to 48 percent in the first half of 2022.  Bank of Ireland was also the largest provider of wholesale finance for electric vehicles in 2021, providing finance to 13 of the 15 car manufacturer franchises. The publication of the Responsible and Sustainable Business Report marked a significant “step-change in the tracking and transparency” of the bank’s ESG reporting, Hughes noted.  “Our stakeholders—including customers, shareholders, and regulators—are demanding far greater transparency as to how we are meeting our ESG commitments,” he said. “This report provides insight into our strategic approach, appraisal of our progress to achieve our purpose, and information on the key focus areas we plan to progress in the years ahead. Being clear on ESG, and showing how you are delivering what you sign up to, is now a commercial imperative for all lenders, including Bank of Ireland.” Science-based targets Bank of Ireland has also committed to setting science-based targets across portfolios and operations to align lending practice with the low carbon ambitions set out in the Paris Agreement. “We completed two successful green bond issuances in 2021, raising €1.25 billion with the capital used to finance green buildings, renewable energy projects and clean transportation,” said Hughes. “Thirty-five per cent of the mortgages we provided in 2021 were green and we have also launched a green mortgage product in the UK.” Bank of Ireland is providing finance for the development of at least 750 megawatts of renewable wind capacity across the island of Ireland. The bank is also in the process of decarbonising its own operations—reducing absolute emissions by 88 percent between 2011 and 2021. Social and governance Although supporting the green agenda is a major part of Investing in Tomorrow, the strategy also sets goals for investing in colleagues and enhancing customers’ financial wellbeing. “We recognise the supporting role we can play in Ireland’s response to the climate crisis, but the ‘S’ and ‘G’ are equally important when we consider ESG,” Hughes said. “We have a strategy to improve the financial wellbeing of our customers and to foster a financially inclusive society.” Bank of Ireland was, Hughes said, supporting customers to become more financially confident, while also working to simplify processes, so that the “financially marginalised have easier access to banking services.” Financial health and inclusion  Bank of Ireland is one of 28 banks around the world that have signed the Commitment to Financial Health and Inclusion published in December 2021 under the United Nations Principles for Responsible Banking (PRB). A first-of-its-kind initiative aimed at promoting universal financial inclusion and health in the banking sector, its launch closely followed the publication of the UN’s PRB Collective Progress Report. The report identified financial inclusion as the third most pressing sustainability challenge facing signatory banks, behind climate mitigation and adaptation. “This UN initiative is particularly important in an environment in which we have a cost-of-living crisis and customers are facing major challenges in the medium- to long-term. The question for us is, ‘how can we deliver this particular skill set and support our customers at a time when they really need it?’” said Hughes. Bank of Ireland is also helping customers to “live more sustainably” with the recent announcement of the roll out of bio-sourced debit and credit cards. Launched in October, the initiative will over time replace all plastic debit and credit cards issued by the bank, to help support the reduction of single-use plastic. “If we are to live in a more sustainable way, we need to do things differently, including through our everyday banking. The introduction of bio-sourced cards is a very practical way we can help our customers to reduce their environmental footprint,” Hughes said. “As a bank, we are working very closely with our customers on the sustainability transition. As they deliver, we deliver. It is a symbiotic relationship and an exciting place to be.”  

Martin Moloney, Secretary General of the International Organisation of Securities Commissions, outlines his priorities for the year ahead Irishman Martin Moloney is Secretary General of the International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). Headquartered in Madrid, Spain, the international body brings together the world’s securities regulators and is recognised as the standard setter for the securities sector worldwide. IOSCO develops, implements, and promotes adherence to internationally recognised standards for securities regulation, working closely with the G20 and the Financial Stability Board (FSB) on global regulatory reform. Accountancy Ireland sat down with Moloney to discuss his goals, priorities, and concerns for the year ahead. Q: What are the biggest risks facing investors around the world right now and how is IOSCO working with securities regulatory agencies to address these risks? The risks that investors face never really change. There are some fundamentals. You can hire the wrong advisers, you can pay them too much, you can choose the wrong times to get in or out of markets, and you can invest in the wrong things. These risks are the core risks for investors, and they have been for as long as financial markets have existed. The difficulty is that financial markets are constantly changing. New asset classes like crypto are emerging, and there are new ways in which intermediaries work on your behalf, but also earn fees for themselves. This creates new risks for investors. Also, as we saw from recent events in the UK, markets can go into sudden periods of stress and crash. We do our best, working with others, to try to make markets as resilient as they can be, to ensure that these episodes are few and far between insofar as we can. These are the big issues facing us currently. Really, it all comes down to integrity—being able to trust the price you see when you invest in the markets and ensuring that you are not being fooled by people who are trying to cheat you out of your money. Q: You have described the rise of cryptocurrency as an area fraught with risk, requiring “a lot of work” on the part of regulators. Can you tell us more? There is no doubt in my mind that we have reached a turning point in relation to crypto. This is not because of the so-called ‘Crypto Winter’. The value of crypto might go up or down, but that is not really the issue. The point that we all have to observe and recognise is that crypto has survived and has continued to survive over a number of years. It is reasonable to assume that it is not going away and, therefore, it has to be regulated. I am delighted to say that, since I have joined IOSCO, the organisation has moved forward with its policy in this area and is now very quickly developing a set of guidelines for the market on how different jurisdictions should regulate crypto and the common standards they should aim to achieve in doing so. We are seeing a number of regions, notably the United States and Europe, now moving towards developing legal frameworks. I have no doubt that this is far from the end of the matter, however—it is just the beginning. Crypto is going to evolve and change as people get on top of the technology and new opportunities emerge. The most important thing we must all keep an eye on here is the outcome for the investor. In the first years of crypto, a huge number of people lost money through fraud. Other people, who may not even have been aware of it, lost money through market manipulation, insider trading and various other dubious activities we know well. Very often, this has been driven by conflicts of interest. If you dig down into the principles articulated by IOSCO for financial markets many years ago, you will find us warning against many of the phenomena we are now seeing in crypto markets. Theft does not change. It might happen in a different location, but theft is still theft. Bad management is still bad management, no matter where it happens. It is up to us to re-articulate these very simple, but really important, ideas and explain how they can apply in the crypto space. It is also important for the crypto sector itself to come up with good solutions and technologically enabled solutions, so that its work can be supervised and that it can reach the same standard of regulation as the rest of the financial sector. There are a number of individuals, I think, within the crypto sector who have come to understand that they need to move positively towards a strong regulatory framework in order to bottom out their businesses and remain stable. If we do not start to see self-regulation within the crypto sector, then I think we will see more jurisdictions banning crypto. It is just not sustainable over the medium term to try to avoid the regulatory frameworks that apply to everyone else. It is one thing to see yourself as a different asset class. It’s quite another to see yourself as an entirely different industry when you are effectively doing the same thing. Q: So, you do believe that cryptocurrency has a long-term future provided that there is robust regulation in place across the board? I think there is some potential for this asset class, but it is going to become more challenging. I don’t have a crystal ball, so I try not to predict the future. I see some very interesting new products developing in the decentralised finance space, and I wonder if this is ultimately where crypto is going to go. We are all used to a simple model in which you get quite non-functional assets like Bitcoin being traded and people making money primarily out of the bubbles in Bitcoin. The use cases for crypto continue to be worked on extensively, however. So, every time you have one of those bubbles, what is actually happening is that money is being raised to allow people to invest in new potential use cases. There are now so many use cases that have come and gone, and failed ideas that have been touted and promoted, you could be forgiven for thinking that there are no use cases left for crypto—but that is probably wrong. I think people will continue trying to figure out good use cases for crypto. I don’t think it’s going away any time soon. Q: You have spoken recently about the greenwashing risk facing securities regulators—what can be done to address this? We put out a couple of reports in 2021 where we looked at the greenwashing issue in great detail, listing the different ways in which this phenomenon occurs. We had to acknowledge, however, that it is not just about ‘evil intent’. Activity that might be described as greenwashing often happens, because the market structures needed to adequately support sustainable finance are not yet in place. Sometimes, you do get people who are frankly trying to fool investors by issuing misleading information, but, equally, the markets as they stand are just not built for sustainable financing. Having identified the problem and having asked the industry to work as hard as possible to reduce the amount of greenwashing that now exists, we have had to acknowledge that the system itself needs to change. Regulators have to do it, governments have to do it, standard-setters have to do it—to create a better system to achieve true sustainable finance. If, for example, I am proposing an investment that has a strong impact in terms of reducing carbon emissions, I should get a better price on the market and a better investment price for that security than someone who comes to market with a security for a carbon-emitting project. We want the market to be sensitive to the environmental impact of different proposals, companies and products. They must have access to information that is reliable; that has been independently audited; and that brokers can bring together to compare stocks from different parts of the world and determine differential pricing based on their impact on the environment. Getting all of this right would be an incredibly hard job, so we have broken the job down into a number of elements. We will be progressively working on putting these building blocks in place over the next couple of years, in order to make sure that the process can be regulated and that people who don’t do the right thing can be held to account on the basis that they could have done the right thing and chose not to. Q: As the move to establish standards for environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting gathers pace, what is your take on the current efforts underway? We have a very close relationship with the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). We effectively oversee its work and, if we like what it is doing, we will endorse its standards, and recommend those standards to individual regulatory securities agencies around the world, so that these jurisdictions can adopt the standards as they see fit. The fundamental issue we are all facing is that a sustainable financial marketplace has to be a global marketplace. If you have fragmentation and you don’t have the same information sets available in different parts of the world, you cannot have a true comparison between different securities, and capital cannot flow to the best projects. It is no good for anyone if Europe is pristine, while the rest of the world is working in a different way. What happens in the Amazonian rainforest matters to all of us. Capital, therefore, has to flow from those places where it is abundant, such as Europe and North America, to locations in which the opportunities exist to do the right thing. What IOSCO has said to the countries we work with around the world is, “do this any way you want, but use the ISSB standards as a baseline and build your own approach on that foundation”. Put simply, you can do all you want in the ESG space, but unless we have a common core, we cannot create a global financial market that will bring about any real change. Q: Can you tell us about the work you are doing with the Financial Stability Board in relation to investment funds? This is a very big project for us. Investment funds are a crucial mechanism all around the world for people to get access to markets on a collective basis, but they can have a concerning impact on markets in periods of crisis. We have been doing work in this area since 2016. We have done a lot already, but there is more to do. A major focus for us next year will be trying to make sure that the kind of funds both ordinary individual investors and the more risk-averse institutional investors choose are safe in a crisis. We are trying to ensure that, if you are investing in a product that is riskier, it will be clear to you that it is more difficult to get your money out of it; that these kinds of investment funds are not the equivalent of a bank account. This is a typical example of what we do, but there are lots of others. We do a lot of work on cyber-resilience, and we are also very interested in the change in the behaviour of retail investors and their vulnerability to scams. One of the problems we face at the moment is that, while technology has made it easy or cheap for people to invest in the markets, it has also made it easy or cheap for fraudsters to get at many thousands of people. We need to figure out better and better ways to stop these fraudsters and prevent them in their designs. About Martin Moloney Prior to joining IOSCO as Secretary General in September 2021, Martin Moloney was Director General of the Jersey Financial Services Commission and, before that, he worked as a Special Adviser on Risk and Regulation to the Central Bank of Ireland, where he served for 16 years, previously heading up the Markets Policy, Markets Supervision, and Legal and Finance Divisions. Moloney began his early career working in industry with Barclays Bank and Bank of Ireland in London, before returning to Ireland to work with the Department of Justice, Department of Finance, the Irish Competition Authority. Born in Dublin, he has a master’s degrees in Business Law and Economic Policy, both from Trinity College Dublin.

Elaine Coughlan, one of Ireland’s most successful venture capital investors, tells us how her experience in accountancy and audit led to a high-flying career in technology Since qualifying as a Chartered Accountant and cutting her teeth in audit in the 1990s, just as the first wave of tech entrepreneurs in Ireland were beginning to access US capital markets, Elaine Coughlan has carved out an illustrious career in venture capital. Dublin-born Coughlan is the co-founder and joint Managing Partner of Atlantic Bridge, the global growth technology fund with more than €1 billion in assets under management across nine funds. For Coughlan, her career is a testament to both her training in finance and the power of human connection in business the world over. “Atlantic Bridge has over 35 companies we have successfully sold or ‘IPOed’ and I am immensely proud of that,” she says. “The wins drive you on because you can see what’s possible and those Irish entrepreneurs become role models for the next generation. I’m proud of the assets we have under management, and that Atlantic Bridge now has people in Dublin, London, Paris, Munich and Palo Alto in Silicon Valley. That is a truly global footprint, and it really helps us to scale our companies.” Early connections Coughlan credits the professional connections she made at an early stage in her career at Ernst & Young with setting her on the path to professional success. “Some of the people I met back in the nineties, our clients at the time, were hugely influential on me,” she says. Among those clients was Smurfit (now Smurfit Kappa), already a long-established industry leader in paper packaging production. “I was seconded from Ernst & Young to work with Smurfit when it was probably the number one Irish company in terms of market capitalisation and really blazing a trail in Irish business,” she says. “It is still a phenomenal company today, but for me at that time, Smurfit was just so ambitious and far-reaching in its approach to mergers and acquisitions, and the capital markets. I worked on fundraising and acquisitions with them and had early exposure to some of their senior executives—people like Gerry Fagan, their then-CFO.” Coughlan forged other crucial connections at the time with Bill McCabe, founder of CBT, the e-learning group, and Iona Technologies’ Chris Horn. “Bill and Chris were the first entrepreneurs in Ireland to float tech companies on the Nasdaq and, if you look at what they had in common with Smurfit, it was really that they were all entrepreneurial,” she says now. Coughlan would leave Ernst & Young to join Iona ahead of the company’s Initial Public Offering. “I knew then that practice probably wasn’t for me. That’s not to say that you can’t be entrepreneurial in practice, but the cut and thrust of the tech business pulled me in,” she says. “I remember traveling over to the US with CBT back in 1993 and that was it for me. There was such a sense of possibility.” Coughlan went on to join Parthus, the semiconductor IP company co-founded by Brian Long, and the pair formed an abiding partnership, co-founding both Atlantic Bridge and GloNav, the GPS company acquired in 2007 for $110 million. “All these years later, I am still in business with the same people, and they were the people that had an impact on me starting out. They were the people I learned from and the people who were generous with their time and their knowledge, and willing to give me experience and opportunities,” she says. For young Chartered Accountants starting out in their career, Coughlan has this advice: “Above all else, nurture your connections. These young professionals will already be well-qualified and proven in their ability and resilience, because training to become a Chartered Accountant is challenging in itself,” she says. “The question they have to ask themselves is ‘what differentiates me beyond that?’ It comes down to being able to combine your knowledge with strong relationships in ways that bring about better outcomes.” As Coughlan sees it, building solid sustainable relationships in business isn’t simply a case of networking and ‘transactional interactions’. “It’s about finding people who share your values and ethics, whose accomplishments and abilities you admire, and who have the ability to lead and inspire. You always have to be thinking long-term, not just about your next connection on LinkedIn,” she says. Supporting start-ups Coughlan’s commitment to supporting start-ups and advancing Ireland as a leading hub for technology development was recognised at this year’s Irish Accountancy Awards, at which she won the prize for outstanding contribution to the profession. “When we started Atlantic Bridge in 2004, we wanted to help tech companies in Ireland to scale successfully. Ireland is a small island and a small economy, so there are two things tech companies here need to scale—they need to move beyond the island to reach customers and they need access to capital,” she says. “We wanted to cross the Atlantic to the US, because it is the largest market in the world in terms of customers and capital markets. At the time, Ireland had a VC market of less than €100 million. It’s 10 times that size now, but back then, it was really small.” The primary focus for Atlantic Bridge today continues to be “deep tech” innovators in the business-to-business (B2B) space. “We’re not after instant gratification or overnight success. These are businesses with defensible research-intensive technologies that are primed to scale when the time is right,” says Coughlan. “Our investors are patient. They are looking for strong long-term returns, and we are very proud to have reached the stage where we have raised nine funds, because that is not an easy thing to do in this industry.” Coughlan warns, however, that we are entering a “new investment cycle”, in which surging inflation, rising interest rates, and the risk of recession, are all making investors more risk averse. “The outlook for Atlantic Bridge in the short-term will be cautious and tactical, but beyond that, we are optimistic and deeply committed to the technology trends we are seeing today that will make a difference in the future,” she says. “A lot of the technologies we’re investing in now are in climate change action—low-power, low-carbon enablers—and in medical technology and the digitisation of health, where we can meet unmet needs. We’re focusing on technologies like Artificial Intelligence and semiconductors—the fundamental building blocks that will be built into new products over the next three to five years.” Research and development As the economy enters uncertain terrain, Coughlan is urging the Government to continue investing in research and development (R&D). “Ireland has to continue to invest in R&D. We need to hold our nerve in continuing to invest in the best and brightest people and start-ups, because they will drive the next generation of growth,” she says. “Today, we are investing about 1.25 percent of GDP in R&D. We need to get that up to between 2.5 percent and three percent. The future economy will be knowledge-intensive and that requires knowledge-intensive people.” Coughlan is equally committed to the advancement of her profession, and proud of her own achievements as a Chartered Accountant. “The ‘bean counter’ perception is one too many people have of accountants, but I would probably be the last person you’d ask to do a P&L statement,” she says. “I can tell you if it is right or wrong though, because I understand the numbers and what they mean. I can interrogate and interpret any set of numbers and that is because I am a Chartered Accountant. All business now is run on data and our profession gives us a really strong grounding in using data to make decisions—and that is the future. “There are doors that are opened to you when you train as an accountant. You learn about process, structure, deadlines, and relationships. All of these skills are incredibly important. “You come out of it battle-hardened and resilient, and with all these options: to stay in practice; to focus on technical work; to go into consultancy; financial services; or business and entrepreneurship. The opportunities are phenomenal.” Growing up in Beaumont in north Dublin in the recession-hit 1980s, however, Coughlan had envisaged a different career for herself. It was a chance encounter that set her on the path to accountancy and a high-flying career in venture capital. Early career path “I was good at numbers at school and I studied accountancy for the Leaving Cert, but I wouldn’t say I was destined to be an accountant. I fully recognise now that it was my accountancy and audit experience that led me into the technology industry, but my real interest growing up was people,” she says. “I wanted to work in a people-focused environment, so I applied to study marketing and languages at DCU and went for a summer job at a small accountancy firm to keep me going in the meantime.” Coughlan didn’t get the summer job, but she was contacted by her interviewer and urged instead to consider accountancy as a full-time career. “It was 1989, unemployment in Ireland was something like 15 percent and so many people were emigrating to find work in the UK and the US,” she says. “I didn’t know anything about becoming a Chartered Accountant, but I wrote to the Institute and was offered a training contract with Ernst & Young. Here was this opportunity to have my fees paid and earn a wage with guaranteed work in a really tough economy. It was a great deal. That’s why I always say to this day, ‘what’s meant for you won’t pass you by’.”

Dawn Leane examines the main barriers to success experienced by women and what organisations can do to break the career inhibitors down In workshops organised after the publication of the research study carried out by Fiona Dent and Viki Holton for their book Women in Business: Navigating Career Success, women were asked to identify factors they believed had hindered their progress. Their responses are broadly categorised as follows: Limiting beliefs; Family issues; Work colleagues; Personal style and skills; Lack of organisational support; Gender issues; Taking the wrong career path; and Politics and bureaucracy. The most frequently mentioned issues focus on self-doubt and limiting beliefs. As this is a nuanced subject, it is important to distinguish between limiting beliefs and confidence.  Limiting beliefs vs confidence Beliefs are assumed truths developed over time from our direct experiences and observations. They usually don’t exist as explicit propositions. We may barely be aware of them, but they influence what we think, say, and do.  When they manifest self-doubt, they become limiting beliefs. An example of a limiting belief may be ‘I can’t handle conflict’, which could lead to a lack of assertiveness or the tendency to give in to others. Limiting beliefs can have a significantly negative impact on our ability to achieve our full potential. Confidence, however, can be significantly influenced by workplace culture. Women are regularly told that they should be more confident, which is particularly unhelpful as it puts the responsibility firmly back on women, as opposed to examining the environment as a contributing factor. One way in which the office environment can impact confidence is ‘backlash avoidance mechanism’, whereby women feel uncomfortable self-promoting due to perceived social consequences. Feedback and career development In the workshop, 59 percent of participants believed that men and women are judged unequally, particularly when it comes to feedback and development in the workplace. This is supported by the Women in the Workplace study—a study of US women in the workplace conducted by LeanIn.Org and McKinsey & Company—which found that women report receiving feedback much less frequently than their male co-workers. In fact, women are more than 20 percent less likely than men to receive difficult feedback, which is essential to improving performance. One reason cited by managers is their fear of an emotional response, which is less of a concern when giving feedback to male employees. Further, the feedback that women receive is often vague and non-specific. In their Harvard Business Review article, ‘Research: Vague Feedback is Holding Women Back’, Shelly J. Correll and Caroline Simard advised that “women are systematically less likely to receive specific feedback tied to outcomes, both when they receive praise and when the feedback is developmental.” They also found that when women did receive feedback, it was largely focused on their style of communication. Family issues While it is widely accepted that family issues can be a barrier to success, most participants in Dent and Holton’s research recognised that decisions made in relation to family life require compromise—and that it was typically the woman in the relationship who compromised out of personal choice. Many women accepted this as an inevitable consequence of motherhood and feel obliged to take responsibility and be available for their children. Managing employee long-term success The overarching message from these pieces of research is that what happens early in a woman's career significantly impacts her long-term success. It is important that both the career accelerators and inhibitors discussed in this series are considered by organisations when developing talent management and career development programmes. You can read the first two articles in this series: Empowering women for better balance in the workplace Four success factors for women in the workplace Dawn Leane is Founder of Leane Leaders and Leane Empower.