DOCSLIB.ORG

180706 AR DAX 30 Event Presentation Engl FINAL

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

DAX 30 supervisory board study 2018 Selected results July 2018 Jens-Thomas Pietralla & Dr. Thomas Tomkos Board & CEO Practice Private and Confidential The following assessment and evaluation is based on publicly available biographical data *) on supervisory board members of DAX 30 and MDAX companies. Obviously, the effectiveness of supervisory boards also depends on the board culture, the personalities of their members and their constructive dialogue. *) Data sources: bioGraphies made available by companies, invitations to annual meetings, annual reports, voting results from annual meetings; additional externally available bioGraphical data where necessary Private and Confidential 2 Preview... § As expected, the ”super election year 2018” has resulted in siGnificant chanGes: 89 seats were up for election, of which 42 were filled by new candidates § EiGht new diGital directors add critical expertise to the DAX 30 boards. As of 2018 more than half of the companies can rely on this experience § For the first time the share of women amonG shareholder representatives in DAX 30 exceeds 30% § Equivalent representation of women in chairperson and committee positions is still laGGinG behind § While the number of foreiGn board members in DAX 30 declined sliGhtly, the companies are able to attract experienced female board members, especially from the anglophone world § The cross-linkage of “Germany Inc.” is shifting: there are less supervisory board members with more than one DAX 30 mandate; however, several current DAX 30 executive board members take on DAX 30 supervisory board sets for the first time § The average grade of all DAX 30 supervisory boards according to the German school grading system improves aGain: from 2.3 to 2.2 § Lufthansa, Daimler, Bayer and MunichRe lead the rankinG in 2018. Especially Lufthansa is able to leap from position 16 all the way to the top Private and Confidential 3 Content – Results from the “super-election-year 2018“... DiGitalization! Quota fulfilled? Competency profiles and breadth of experience. Return to “Germany Inc.?” The current rankinG LookinG ahead – “super election year #2”! Private and Confidential 4 Core messages § Digital expertise in DAX 30 supervisory boards is developing positively § EiGht new diGital directors entered the boards this year; more than half of the companies now have members with diGital experience § Their backGround ranges from technoloGy and online-focused industries to classical CIOs and leading experts in IT, industry 4.0 and diGital content Private and Confidential 5 Digital directors in the top 300 global companies by region vs. DAX 30 and MDAX With the 2018 changes, DAX 30 and MDAX are moving up in comparison to their international peers. However, concerning “highly digital boards”, the USA is still ahead of the Germans Russell Reynolds study: „Digital Directors 2016: Supervisory board study 2018: Diverse Perspectives in the Boardroom“ 13% 20% 10% 40% 70% 47% DAX 30 MDAX „HiGhly DiGital”: two or more diGital directors on the supervisory board Private and Confidential 6 Number of digital directors in DAX 30 and MDAX by gender - cumulated Until 2014 hardly any female digital directors were elected into office. Starting 2015 more women (+22) than men (+12) took office *) Number of digital directors in DAX 30 and MDAX over time 35 Total: 23 + 150% 57 30 As of 2018: + 12 25 20 15 + 22 25 Women 32 Men (44%) (56%) 10 5 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 M FW Year *) Data base: supervisory board members still in office, counted from the year when they were first elected Private and Confidential 7 “New digital directors“ 2018 in DAX 30 Eight additional digital directs with very diverse profiles entered the DAX 30 – some of the supervisory boards already had digital expertise Handelsblatt , cio.de ; IT service provider Blockchain exec Digital service builder IT foundation builder Victoria Ossadnik, Marie Wieck Michele TroGni Martin Jetter Commerzbank (& Linde) Daimler Deutsche Bank Deutsche Börse Wallstreetandtech.com Digital transformer Process designer Digital strategist CEO in the Cloud Aicha Evans Diane Greene Michael Nilles Dr. Mario Daberkow Picture sources: company websites; LinkedIn; Lufthansa Deutsche Post SAP SAP Private and Confidential 8 Core messages § Germany needs qualified women for top-leadership levels § The mandated 30% female quota on DAX 30 supervisory boards was achieved – but on CxO, first and second leadership level more than 1,100 female leaders are missing § Despite the fulfillment of the quota: only one chairperson, only 8% female committee chairpersons and only 18% of committee positions are occupied by women Private and Confidential 9 Development of the share of women With currently 31.6%, for the first time in history the share of women among DAX 30 shareholder representatives has surpassed 30%. Changes in index membership, board sizes, as well as a high share of re-elections among women helped achieve this milestone, despite a relatively low share of female candidates among newly elected members 40% Share of women among successors 50% 37% 34% 34% 39% 46% 41% 33% 35% +2.5 PP +5 PP +0.4 PP 31.6% 30% +2.5 PP +3.6 PP 25% +3.8 PP 20% +3.8 PP +3.0 PP 15% 10% Total share of women among shareholder representatives 5% After the respective annual meetings 0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Women/Total SH Reps 19/258 27/259 36/256 44/250 53/251 59/249 75/261 76/261 81/256 Private and Confidential 10 DAX 30 supervisory boards – share of women among shareholder, employee representatives and in total For the first time the average share of women among both, shareholder and employee representatives exceeds 30%. Thus the total share of women improves by 2 percentage points to 33.8% After 2018 elections SH Reps Empl. Reps Total After 2018 elections SH Reps Empl. Reps Total Adidas 25% 25% 25% HeidelbergCement 33% 33% 33% Allianz 33% 33% 33% Henkel 25% 50% 38% BASF 33% 33% 33% Infineon Technologies 25% 50% 38% Bayer 30% 30% 30% Linde 33% 33% 33% Beiersdorf 33% 17% 25% Merck 25% 50% 38% BMW 30% 30% 30% Munich Re 40% 50% 45% Commerzbank 40% 40% 40% RWE 30% 30% 30% Continental 20% 40% 30% SAP 56% 22% 39% Covestro 33% 33% 33% Siemens 30% 40% 35% Daimler 30% 30% 30% ThyssenKrupp 30% 30% 30% Deutsche Bank 30% 30% 30% Volkswagen 30% 30% 30% Deutsche Boerse 38% 50% 43% Vonovia 33% 33% Deutsche Lufthansa 30% 40% 35% Total 2018 31.6% 36.2% 33.8% Deutsche Post 30% 40% 35% Deutsche Telekom 30% 50% 40% Total 2017 29% 34% 31% E.ON 29% 33% 31% Total 2016 29% 32% 30% Fresenius Medical Care 33% 33% Total 2015 24% 29% 26% Fresenius SE 33% 33% 33% Total 2014 21% 28% 24% Total 2013 18% 26% 22% Adidas and Beiersdorf have objected to “joint fulfilment”. Adidas uses the leGal provision to round down, thus fulfilling the minimal requirement. Beiersdorf‘s next opportunities to improve the employee representative number will be in 2019 Private and Confidential 11 Newly elected women in DAX 30 – top executives Ten women with top executive experience were newly elected to a total of 11 supervisory board positions. Seven are sitting executives, four are digital directors buj.net – Rotsch Commerzbank Daimler Deutsche Bank Deutsche Bank Deutsche Börse Dr. Victoria Ossadnik Marie Wieck Michele Trogni Mayree Carroll Clark Barbara Lambert (GER, 1968) (USA, 1960) (UK, 1965) (USA, 1957) GER & CH, 1962) CEO General ManaGer Former SVP & CIO Founder & MP Former Group C Risk O E.ON EnerGie GER IBM Blockchain IHS Markit Eachwin Capital Banque Pictet & Cie Telekom & SAP SAP SAP VolkswaGen ources: Russell Reynolds Associates; company websites; S HeidelbergCement Aicha Evans Diane Greene Dr. Friederike Rotsch Marianne Heiß Margret Suckale (USA, 1969) (USA, 1955) (GER, 1972) (AUT, 1972) (GER, 1956) SVP & C Strat. O CEO General Counsel CFO, BBDO Group Former ED, BASF Intel GooGle Cloud Merck Private and Confidential 12 Newly elected women in DAX 30 – consultants and experts Three women without top executive experience were chosen for the expert knowledge they contribute to their respective supervisory boards Wikipedia - Shafik & Sapiro Lufthansa Siemens ThyssenKrupp (& MunichRe) Miriam E. Sapiro Dame N. T. Shafik Ursula Gather (USA, 1960) (UK, 1962) (GER, 1953) ManaGinG Director Director, London Dean, TU Dortmund and head of the Sard Verbinnen School of Economics board of trustees at Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach-StiftunG Former member of the US Formerly with IMF and Mathematical statistics and industrial foreiGn ministry and World Bank; applications; national security council; International development, Extensive international experience and international trade and economic policy well connected security Sources: Russell Reynolds Associates; company websites; Private and Confidential 13 Representation of women and men among chairpersons and in committees Taking chairpersonship and committee membership as measure for influence in supervisory boards, the DAX 30 is still very much dominated by men One female chairperson Ten female committee 76 of 411 committee positions out of a total of 30 chairpersons of 129 occupied by women 3% 8% 18% W 57% of all women and 78% of all men hold committee position M (Only shareholder representative considered) Private and Confidential 14 Share of women on upper management levels The share of women is increasing and the targets get more ambitious. But there is still a long way to go towards “30%” Share of women Missing women Vs. target (vs. share of 30%) Supervisory Board 5 (5) Executive Board 12 (37) Leadership level 1 65 (197) Leadership level 2 378 (916) Total staff Total: 460 (1155) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Actual / TarGet / 30% Source: company statements 2017 (tarGets until 2020-22) plus calculations / estimates RRA (i.e. leadership span=7) Private and Confidential 15 Share of women on different leadership levels There seem to be several different “distribution archetypes” “Glass ceilinG” “Grow organically” ”Create pull” “Surround” Beiersdorf Continental SAP MunichRe 50% 50% 50% 50% 40% 40% 40% 40% 30% 30% 30% 30% 20% 20% 20% 20% 10% 10% 10% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% VSEB LL 1 LL21.
Recommended publications

  • The Politics of Privatization and Restructuring in Germany

    4^ ^ >v •> Dii.'^.^/ HD28 .M414 The Politics of Privatization and Restructuring in Germany Lufthansa and Deutsche Teleliom J. Nicholas Ziegler Revised October 1997 WP# 3880 Sloan School of Management Massachusetts Institute of Technology MIT, E52-581 Cambridge, MA 02142-1347 tel. 617-253-3698 fax 617-253-2660 [email protected] The privatization of public service companies offers an excellent case for assessing pressures for institutional convergence versus the staying power of distinctive national economic institutions in the advanced industrial countries. This paper examines the privatization of Lufthansa and Deutsche Telekom in order to see whether changes in enterprise ownership reflect a process of convergence in the rules of coiporate governance. While the outward form of privatization in Germany looks quite similar to privatization in Britain and the United States, these two cases show little evidence that the change in ownership is driving any formal changes in corporate governance. If anything, German financial institutions and trade unions continue to exercise distinctive roles that rest on their historical positions in the German economy. FEB 081998 LIBPARtCS Politics and Privatization in Germany Lufthansa and Deutsche Telekom J. Nicholas Ziegler Introduction Recent changes in the world economy have prompted scholars and practitioners to ask whether all countries are converging on a single most efficient set of institutions for economic management. Some observers argue that the three processes driving worldwide competition — globalization,
  • Conversion Report (PDF, 958

    Conversion Report (PDF, 958

    This document is an English translation of the original German language document. The translation is exclusively for convenience purposes. Only the original German language document is authorative and binding. Fresenius SE Change of the Legal Form into a Partnership Limited by Shares Conversion Report of the Management Board Convenience Translation Important Notice: This conversion report is neither an offer to sell voting ordinary bearer shares or non-voting preference bearer shares, nor an invitation to make the Company an offer to buy voting ordinary bearer shares or non-voting preference bearer shares. Such an offer requires special publication as the case may be, and, in so far as required by national law, a separate prospectus. This conversion report is not an offer to sell securities in the United States of America (USA). Securities may be sold or offered for purchase in the USA only with prior registration or without prior registration only on the basis of an exception provided. This conversion report is neither an offer to sell voting ordinary limited partner shares nor an invitation to make the Company an offer to buy voting ordinary limited partner shares. Such an offer requires special publication as the case may be, and, in so far as required by national law, a separate prospectus. This conversion report is not an offer to sell securities in the USA. Securities may be sold or offered for purchase in the USA only with prior registration or without prior registration only on the basis of an exception provided. This document does not constitute an offer document or an offer of transferable securities to the public in the United Kingdom to which section 85 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 of the United Kingdom (“FSMA”) applies and should not be considered as a recommen- dation that any person should subscribe for or purchase any securities as part of the Transaction.
  • RWE Supervisory Board Decides on Successions for the Executive Board of RWE AG

    RWE Supervisory Board Decides on Successions for the Executive Board of RWE AG

    Press release RWE Supervisory Board decides on successions for the Executive Board of RWE AG • Dr. Markus Krebber to become Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of RWE AG as of 1 July 2021 • Dr. Michael Müller to take over as new Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the company at the same point in time • Zvezdana Seeger appointed Chief Human Resources Officer (CHR) and Labour Director of RWE AG effective 1 November 2020 Essen, 18 September 2020 Dr. Werner Brandt, Chairman of the Supervisory Board of RWE AG: “Today, the Supervisory Board decided on the succession of positions within the Executive Board of RWE AG. This will ensure that RWE's strategic orientation, which Rolf Martin Schmitz and Markus Krebber have advanced consistently since 2016, will continue to be pursued with the utmost resolve: to position RWE as a global leader in renewable energy with the declared goal of being carbon neutral by 2040.” At the end of July this year, the Supervisory Board of RWE AG had already appointed Dr. Markus Krebber (47) CEO of RWE AG effective 1 July 2021 for a term of five years. He succeeds Dr. Rolf Martin Schmitz, whose contract expires on this date, as scheduled. At its meeting today, the Supervisory Board took further important personnel decisions in order to ensure a seamless transition of responsibilities. With Krebber taking up the CEO position, Dr. Michael Müller (49) will succeed as the Group's Chief Financial Officer (CFO) as of 1 July next year. The Supervisory Board appointed Müller to the Executive Board of RWE AG effective already 1 November 2020.
  • Heidelbergcement Half-Year Financial Report January to June

    Heidelbergcement Half-Year Financial Report January to June

    Half-Year Financial Report January to June 2020 HeidelbergCement achieves good half-year results for 2020 in challenging environment Weak demand due to coronavirus in second quarter – revenue decreases by 10% in first half of 2020 COPE action plan with high cost savings and preservation of liquidity – result 1) declines only slightly by 2% in the first half of 2020 Group share of net result for the period reduced by non-recurring effect from impairments – adjusted Group share rises by 5% Free cash flow at a strong level – net debt decreases by €1.4 billion Solid start into third quarter but business prospects for second half of 2020 remain uncertain – long-term outlook positive 1) Result from current operations before depreciation and amortisation Overview January to June 2020 January - June €m 2019 1) 2020 Revenue 9,212 8,254 Result from equity accounted investments (REI) 126 98 Result from current operations before depreciation and amortisation (RCOBD) 1) 1,438 1,404 RCOBD margin in % 15.6% 17.0% Result from current operations 1) 754 710 Additional ordinary result -128 -3,490 Earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) 1) 626 -2,779 Financial result 1) -176 -157 Profit / loss before tax 450 -2,936 Net income / loss from continuing operations 300 -3,075 Net loss from discontinued operations -9 -20 Profit / loss for the period 291 -3,095 Group share of profit / loss 212 -3,133 Investments 501 458 1) Changed due to reclassifications Due to rounding, numbers presented in the Half-Year Financial Report may not add up precisely to the totals provided.
  • Assortment Planning

    Assortment Planning

    3DEXPERIENCE for CPG & RETAIL September 2013 1 Our Legacy 2 Our new strategy ‘Social Industry Experiences’ Why Experiences? Consumers buy Experiences An Experience is Bigger Than a Product 3 CPG & RETAIL Segments 4 TOP 5 Cosmetics: Top Markets & Leaders Top 10 Countries of A balanced global market representative of most CPG segments Leaders (HQ) RUSSIA UK France Germany UNITED STATES Spain Italy CHINA JAPAN BRASIL Leaders : L’Oréal, P&G, Unilever, Estée Lauder, Shiseido, Avon, Kao, Beiersdorf, Johnson & Johnson, Chanel 5 Consumer Packaged Goods - Challenges 6 Consumer Packaged Goods : Innovation (Forbes 2013 ranking) 1 Salesforce.com 26 Fanuc 51 Smith & Nephew 76 Roper Industries 2 Alexion Pharmaceuticals 27 Diageo 52 Mondelēz International 77 ASML Holding 3 VMware 28 Hershey 53 Infosys 78 Assa Abloy 4 Regeneron Pharmaceuticals 29 Danone 54 Kellogg 79 Apple 5 ARM Holdings 30 Procter & Gamble 55 Ultrapar Participacoes 80 Air Products & Chemicals 6 Baidu 31 Dassault Systemes 56 Intuit 81 Tenaris 7 Amazon.com 32 Colgate-Palmolive 57 Technip 82 Precision Castparts 8 Intuitive Surgical 33 Ecolab 58 PepsiCo 83 Rockwell Automation 9 Rakuten 34 Monsanto 59 Schlumberger 84 Nintendo 10 Natura Cosmeticos 35 Reckitt Benckiser Group 60 Fresenius Medical Care 85 Cameron International 11 Henan Shuanghui 36 Keyence 61 SMC Corp 86 Secom 12 Coloplast 37 Kone 62 Valeant Pharmaceuticals Intl 87 Schindler Holding 13 Cerner 38 Yahoo Japan 63 Unilever NV 88 Campbell Soup 14 Unicharm 39 BRF-Brasil Foods 64 China Oilfield Services 89 Kubota 15 Estee Lauder Cos
  • Allianz: Frontrunner on Climate Change in Danger of Losing Ground

    Allianz: Frontrunner on Climate Change in Danger of Losing Ground

    Allianz: Frontrunner on Climate Change in Danger of Losing Ground Briefing Paper by Urgewald and the Unfriend Coal Coalition August 2, 2017 Introduction Since 2015, Allianz has been rightfully praised for its divestment from coal. The company must now also take the next logical steps: 1. The company must cease to offer insurance services to coal companies from which it has divested share and bond holdings. 2. Recent research on financial investments shows that the Allianz investment portfolio still contains vast amounts of shares and bonds from major coal companies such as India’s NTPC or the Polish energy utilities PGE, Energa and Enea. This is in line with the Allianz divestment decision because the decision only pertains to investments the company makes on its own account. To fully exclude coal investments from its portfolio, Allianz must extend its divestment decision to funds it manages on behalf of third parties. French insurance company AXA committed to doing just that at its 2017 Annual General shareholder meeting (AGM): Exclude insurance of coal companies covered by its divestment decision and extend the divestment to funds the company manages on behalf of third parties. 3. Alliance must also cut ties with companies that do not fall under the threshold of at least 30 percent share of coal but that have massive expansion plans for coal extraction or consumption. In 2015, Allianz made history with its announcement to exclude coal companies from its portfolio. The divestment decision applies to companies that generate a minimum of 30 percent of their revenue from the sale of coal and those that use coal for at least 30 percent of their electricity generation.
  • Maintaining Rural Retail Networks: Best Practices Abroad and Their Implications for the US Postal Service. Report Number RISC

    Maintaining Rural Retail Networks: Best Practices Abroad and Their Implications for the US Postal Service. Report Number RISC

    Cover Office of Inspector General | United States Postal Service RISC Report Maintaining Rural Retail Networks: Best Practices Abroad and their Implications for the U.S. Postal Service Report Number RISC-WP-20-003 | March 25, 2020 Table of Contents Cover Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Observations .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Background: Rural Trends that Affect Postal Providers ........................................................... 3 Government Policies Shape the Size and Mission of Rural Postal Networks .................. 4 Government Subsidies for Postal Retail Services ........................................................................ 6 Strategies to Reduce the Cost of Rural Retail Networks ......................................................... 8 Strategies to Produce More Revenue from Rural Outlets ....................................................... 13 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................... 16 Appendices .....................................................................................................................................................
  • Offizielle Mitteilung Der Schweizer Boerse

    Offizielle Mitteilung Der Schweizer Boerse

    Bekanntmachung auf KeyInvest Änderung der Valorennummer und ISIN der Unilever N.V. Change of the Valor number and ISIN of Unilever N.V. Im Zusammenhang mit der Änderung der Valorennummer und ISIN der Unilever N.V. (Bloomberg Code: UNA NA) wurden die Bedingungen der unten genannten Produkte der UBS AG, per 1. Juli 2019 angepasst. Die detaillierten Informationen befinden sich in der entsprechenden Produktedokumentation (Termsheets). With regard to the change of the Valor number and ISIN of Unilever N.V. (Bloomberg Code: UNA NA) UBS AG will adjust the terms of the following products as of 1st July 2019. Detailed information can be found in the respective product documentation (Termsheets). ISIN Name CH0391674139 6.25% p.a. EUR Kick-In GOAL linked to worst of Henkel / Unilever / Beiersdorf / BASF CH0400505621 6.50% p.a. CHF Kick-In GOAL linked to worst of Unilever / Nestlé / Anheuser-Busch / Danone CH0420778752 5.00% p.a. EUR Kick-In GOAL linked to worst of Carrefour / Danone / Nestlé / Unilever CH0410512831 5.50% p.a. EUR Kick-In GOAL linked to worst of Nestlé / Unilever / Danone / Kellogg CH0426877814 5.50% p.a. CHF Kick-In GOAL linked to worst of Barry Callebaut / Mondelez / Danone / Unilever CH0434742570 5.50% p.a. EUR Kick-In GOAL linked to worst of Beiersdorf / Henkel / LOréal / Unilever CH0456067161 8.00% p.a. EUR Callable Kick-In GOAL linked to worst of adidas / LOréal / Unilever / Carrefour CH0468335655 6.00% p.a. EUR Callable Kick-In GOAL linked to worst of Mondelez / Danone / Unilever CH0472609830 8.00% p.a. EUR Kick-In GOAL linked to worst of Carrefour / Danone / Unilever CH0477599200 8.50% p.a.
  • Managing Political Risk in Global Business: Beiersdorf 1914-1990

    Managing Political Risk in Global Business: Beiersdorf 1914-1990

    Managing Political Risk in Global Business: Beiersdorf 1914-1990 Geoffrey Jones Christina Lubinski Working Paper 12-003 July 22, 2011 Copyright © 2011 by Geoffrey Jones and Christina Lubinski Working papers are in draft form. This working paper is distributed for purposes of comment and discussion only. It may not be reproduced without permission of the copyright holder. Copies of working papers are available from the author. Managing Political Risk in Global Business: Beiersdorf 1914-1990 Geoffrey Jones Christina Lubinski 1 Abstract This working paper examines corporate strategies of political risk management during the twentieth century. It focuses especially on Beiersdorf, a German-based pharmaceutical and skin care company. During World War 1 the expropriation of its brands and trademarks revealed its vulnerability to political risk. Following the advent of the Nazi regime in 1933, the largely Jewish owned and managed company, faced a uniquely challenging combination of home and host country political risk. The paper reviews the firm's responses to these adverse circumstances, challenging the prevailing literature which interprets so-called "cloaking" activities as one element of businesses’ cooperation with the Nazis. The paper departs from previous literature in assessing the outcomes of the company’s strategies after 1945. It examines the challenges and costs faced by the company in recovering the ownership of its brands. While the management of distance became much easier over the course of the twentieth century because of communications
  • Templeton Eafe Developed Markets Fund

    Templeton Eafe Developed Markets Fund

    TEMPLETON EAFE As at September 30, 2020 DEVELOPED MARKETS FUND Summary of Investment Portfolio REGIONAL WEIGHTINGS (%)* ASSET CLASS WEIGHTINGS (%) Europe 49.97 Common Stocks 91.84 Asia 41.87 Short-term securities and all other assets, net 8.16 INDUSTRY WEIGHTINGS (%)* TOP 25 HOLDINGS (%) Pharmaceuticals 10.94 Cash and cash equivalents** 5.79 Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components 5.49 Deutsche Telekom AG 3.39 Multi-Utilities 5.30 Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. 3.11 Real Estate Management & Development 5.05 E.ON SE 2.95 Chemicals 4.71 Hitachi Ltd. 2.93 Food & Staples Retailing 4.23 Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA 2.83 Banks 4.18 BAE Systems PLC 2.80 Automobiles 4.09 AIA Group Ltd. 2.72 Semiconductors & Semiconductor Equipment 3.99 Bayer AG 2.63 Diversified Telecommunication Services 3.47 Kyocera Corp. 2.55 Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels 2.96 Sumitomo Metal Mining Co. Ltd. 2.48 Health Care Providers & Services 2.83 Honda Motor Co. Ltd. 2.41 Aerospace & Defense 2.80 Sony Corp. 2.37 Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods 2.74 Covestro AG 2.36 Insurance 2.72 NXP Semiconductors NV 2.36 Machinery 2.60 Veolia Environnement SA 2.35 Metals & Mining 2.48 Matsumotokiyoshi Holdings Co. Ltd. 2.22 Wireless Telecommunication Services 2.44 Komatsu Ltd. 2.18 Industrial Conglomerates 2.38 Mitsui Fudosan Co. Ltd. 2.13 Household Durables 2.37 Roche Holding AG 2.08 Electrical Equipment 1.80 Sanofi 2.05 Construction & Engineering 1.59 Seven & i Holdings Co. Ltd. 2.01 Construction Materials 1.57 Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Inc.
  • Factset-Top Ten-0521.Xlsm

    Factset-Top Ten-0521.Xlsm

    Pax International Sustainable Economy Fund USD 7/31/2021 Port. Ending Market Value Portfolio Weight ASML Holding NV 34,391,879.94 4.3 Roche Holding Ltd 28,162,840.25 3.5 Novo Nordisk A/S Class B 17,719,993.74 2.2 SAP SE 17,154,858.23 2.1 AstraZeneca PLC 15,759,939.73 2.0 Unilever PLC 13,234,315.16 1.7 Commonwealth Bank of Australia 13,046,820.57 1.6 L'Oreal SA 10,415,009.32 1.3 Schneider Electric SE 10,269,506.68 1.3 GlaxoSmithKline plc 9,942,271.59 1.2 Allianz SE 9,890,811.85 1.2 Hong Kong Exchanges & Clearing Ltd. 9,477,680.83 1.2 Lonza Group AG 9,369,993.95 1.2 RELX PLC 9,269,729.12 1.2 BNP Paribas SA Class A 8,824,299.39 1.1 Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. 8,557,780.88 1.1 Air Liquide SA 8,445,618.28 1.1 KDDI Corporation 7,560,223.63 0.9 Recruit Holdings Co., Ltd. 7,424,282.72 0.9 HOYA CORPORATION 7,295,471.27 0.9 ABB Ltd. 7,293,350.84 0.9 BASF SE 7,257,816.71 0.9 Tokyo Electron Ltd. 7,049,583.59 0.9 Munich Reinsurance Company 7,019,776.96 0.9 ASSA ABLOY AB Class B 6,982,707.69 0.9 Vestas Wind Systems A/S 6,965,518.08 0.9 Merck KGaA 6,868,081.50 0.9 Iberdrola SA 6,581,084.07 0.8 Compagnie Generale des Etablissements Michelin SCA 6,555,056.14 0.8 Straumann Holding AG 6,480,282.66 0.8 Atlas Copco AB Class B 6,194,910.19 0.8 Deutsche Boerse AG 6,186,305.10 0.8 UPM-Kymmene Oyj 5,956,283.07 0.7 Deutsche Post AG 5,851,177.11 0.7 Enel SpA 5,808,234.13 0.7 AXA SA 5,790,969.55 0.7 Nintendo Co., Ltd.
  • European Accounting and Management Review

    European Accounting and Management Review

    EAMR EUROPEAN ACCOUNTING AND MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOLUME 5, ISSUE 1, ARTICLE 2, 21-46, NOVEMBER 2018 Value Creation and Women on Boards Bettina C.K. Binder Hochschule Pforzheim Received September 8, 2018; accepted October 26, 2018. ABSTRACT Value creation is a major claim of most companies. Mahajan (2017) argues that “value and value creation are natural to and basic in human behaviour and endeavour”, nevertheless women are often marginalized and impeded in their advancement towards leadership positions, where they could shape and influence the process of value creation. The present article looks at the companies of EURO STOXX 50 index in the year 2015 and offers an overview of women representation on the boards of these 50 companies. The paper tries to establish whether the success of these companies can be related to the percentage of female members in supervisory positions. The findings reveal the existence of a weak correlation between Earning before Taxes (EBT) and the proportion of women on the boards of the EURO STOXX 50 companies. KEYWORDS Value creation, women on supervisory boards, key performance indicators, gender quota, earnings before taxes. Bettina C.K. Binder 1. Introduction Value creation is a major claim of most companies and when leafing through the annual reports of companies one encounters expressions such as “value to our shareholders”, “we provide value for our customers”, “we create value for our employees, shareholders, business partners, neighbours and the public”, etc. While it seems to be clear for whom value is created, the concept of “value” itself is subjected to various interpretations and is regarded in the literature as ambiguous (Lepak, Smith and Taylor, 2007; Marinova, Larimo and Nummela, 2017).