Latest news with #ASX100
AU Financial Review
19-05-2025
- Business
- AU Financial Review
Light & Wonder keen on more M&A deals, primary listing in Australia
It's the kind of performance that has left Light & Wonder chief executive Matt Wilson wondering what's next. Nearly two years have passed since the Nasdaq-listed company took a secondary listing on the ASX. Since then, its Australian shares have almost doubled, and the gaming group now sits comfortably in the ASX 100 index. For the past few months, Wilson has been talking to shareholders about whether Light & Wonder's future is solely on the ASX or as a dual primary listed stock. 'Migrating more of the stock to the ASX so we're directly in comparison with our obvious major competitor, Aristocrat, makes a lot of sense,' Wilson tells The Australian Financial Review.
Forbes
30-04-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Fiduciary Responsibility On The DEI Battlefield
The political and legal landscapes on DEI programs are shifting rapidly. Presidential edicts and threats of government enforcement have driven some companies that once bragged about their diversity initiatives to now renounce them. Litigation risks, employee demands, shareholder concerns, and public outrage from all sides have left much of corporate America spinning. But in all the coverage of the twists and perils in the DEI war, there is little discussion about fiduciary duty. Pundits and academics may debate the nature of fairness and justice, but boardrooms face a more practical calculation. In a capitalist system aimed at profit, how is a fiduciary to shareholders supposed to navigate this moment? Corporate success has long been associated with innovation, understanding the market, and investment in the future. In the past, before the term 'DEI' was coined, corporate strategists talked about expanding market share, attracting and retaining talent, and evolving to match the younger consumer base. While liberals pushed for equal opportunity and reparative justice, corporate America has always been most responsive to its bottom line. Indeed, it is the 'business case' that likely accounts for the rapid rise of diversity initiatives in the last decade. Most notably, McKinsey's 2015 report, 'Why diversity Matters,' revealed a strong link between diversity and financial performance.[1] Based on an analysis of proprietary data from 366 public companies across a range of industries in Canada, Latin America, the United Kingdom, and the United States, McKinsey found that companies in the top quartile for racial and ethnic diversity are 35 percent more likely to have financial returns above their respective national industry medians. The study found a linear relationship between racial and ethnic diversity and better financial performance in the U.S.: every 10 percent increase in racial and ethnic diversity on the senior-executive team, resulted in an 0.8 percent rise in earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT). In 2018, Deloitte published a study showing similar results.[2] That study examined the financial turnaround at Quantas from an AUD$2.8 billion loss in 2013 to an AUD$850 million profit in 2017 with shareholder returns in the top quartile of its global airline peers and the ASX100. CEO Alan Joyce attributed the success to the investment in 'a very diverse environment and a very inclusive culture' which 'got us through the tough times… diversity generated better strategy, better risk management, better debates and better outcomes.' The Deloitte study also debunked the myth that diversity and inclusion hinders cohesion within teams. To the contrary, it found higher levels of collaboration and cohesiveness. In the early 2020s, many U.S. companies publicly touted their diversity and inclusion initiatives, including Target, Cisco, Microsoft and UnitedHealth Group. In 2020, Target became one of America's most forceful supporters of DEI, pledging to increase its Black workforce by 20% over three years and take other steps to 'advance racial equity,' including establishing an executive Racial Equity Action and Change committee to 'focus specifically on how we can drive lasting impact' for Black employees and customers. The company vowed to spend more than $2 billion with Black-owned businesses by the end of 2025, including adding more products from 500 Black-owned vendors to stores, and pledging $100 million to support Black-led nonprofits and provide scholarships to students attending HBCUs. Target stores were redesigned with designated areas promoting 'Pride' products, Black history month, and partnerships with sellers of color. But on the eve of Trump's return to office, Target's leadership dramatically reversed course, ending all efforts to increase diversity in its workforce, disbanding its executive racial equity committee, and changing its 'supplier diversity' team to a 'supplier engagement' team. It also stopped participating in external diversity-focused surveys. Target was not alone. Similar dismantling occurred at Boeing, Brown-Forman,Walmart, Google, and Meta. Consumer backlash was fierce. Various advocacy groups condemned the policy reversals and called for boycotts. The People's Union USA designated February 28th for 'economic blackout,' calling on consumers to refrain from buying goods from major offending retailers for 24 hours. On March 6th, Rev. Jamal Bryant from Atlanta and other faith and civil rights leaders, organized the 'Target Fast' to begin the first day of Lent. The boycott was described as 'a spiritual act of resistance.' Walmart, Whole Foods, and Amazon also faced calls for economic restraint by consumers. The economic fallout was immediate. Foot traffic in Target fell for nine consecutive weeks. Target's stock plummeted by approximately $27.27 per share within the month of February, erasing $12.4 billion in market value. Walmart also saw foot traffic fall and over 20% drop in share price between mid-February and mid-March. In contrast, Costco had a shareholder vote on whether to review the risks of maintaining its DEI initiatives, and over 98% of the shareholders rejected the proposal. The board followed with a statement that it 'believes that our commitment to an enterprise rooted in respect and inclusion is appropriate and necessary.' And consumers are now seemingly rewarding the move with their dollars. Costco saw an increase of 7.7 million visits and its stock hit an all-time high in February 2025. Costco also was not alone. Apple's board similarly urged shareholders to reject a similar proposal. Delta Airlines told reporters on a Jan. 10 earning call that it is not reevaluating DEI or sustainability policies because 'they are actually critical to our business,' stating DEI is 'about talent and that's been our focus.' Deutsche Bank CEO Christian Sewing announced that the company stands 'firmly behind' its 'integral' DEI programs because 'Deutsche Bank has benefited from it.' NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, in advance of a record-breaking Super Bowl LIX in terms of viewership and profit, defended the NFL's practice of considering diverse candidates for head coach, general manager and coordinator positions 'we've proven ... that it does make the NFL better.' The companies that have remained committed to DEI are facing pressure and threats from state AGs and federal agencies. In January, 19 states AGs collectively sent Costco a letter warning the company 'end all unlawful discrimination imposed by the company through diversity, equity, and inclusion ('DEI') policies.' Similarly, the Federal Communications Commission has opened investigations into Verizon, Comcast and Disney 'to ensure that every entity the FCC regulates complies with the civil rights protections enshrined in the Communications Act... including by shutting down any programs that promote invidious forms of DEI.' Conservative groups have been active in bringing lawsuits that frame Target's plummeting stock price as evidence of price inflation due to alleged misrepresentations about the benefits of DEI. Three related lawsuits are now pending in Florida against Target for securities fraud on this theory. But significant litigation risk exists in the other direction too. Most obviously, public statements about abandoning 'diversity,' 'equity,' and 'inclusion' can run a company head-first into claims of violations of Title 7 and the American with Disabilities Act claims. And there exists a counterpoint to the securities lawsuits too. Those with a legal obligation to act in the best interest of shareholders can be held responsible for rash action leading to destruction of market value. While corporate directors and officers are typically protected by the 'business judgment rule' from liability for business decisions that prove detrimental or unsuccessful, that protection is limited to decisions made in good faith, with reasonable care, and in the best interests of the corporation. Failure to examine the impact of DEI on corporate profit, growth, and consumer loyalty could be viewed as careless, reckless, and a breach of duty to the company and its shareholders. Some companies have already recognized the financial implications. Coca-Cola warned in its most recent annual filing that abandoning DEI could hurt business, because its diverse employee base 'helps drive a culture of inclusion, innovation and growth,' and if the company's employees do not reflect the 'broad range of consumers and markets we serve around the world, our business could be negatively affected.' In any event, the Target case study is a cautionary tale against sudden reversals of corporate commitments based on the whims of the current Administration. As corporate leaders navigate the waters of the Administration's war against DEI, a plaintiffs' bar ready to pounce in both directions, and consumers that are fired up to vote with their wallets, failure to consider the full economic impact of DEI exposes fiduciaries to liability for breach of their duty. [1] Vivian Hunt, Dennis Layton and Sara Prince, McKinsey Study: Diversity Matters, (February 2, 2015). [2] Juliet Bourke and Bernadette Dillon, Deloitte Review, The Diversity and Inclusion Revolution: Eight Powerful Truths, (January 2018). To read more from Karen R. King or Catherine M. Foti, please visit Stephane Clare, a staff attorney at the firm, assisted in the preparation of this article.
The Australian
21-04-2025
- Business
- The Australian
Diverse talent pipelines needed to drive sustained competitive advantage for business
Australia has made significant progress towards gender equity in the last decade, particularly in the professional field. The majority of accountants and solicitors in Australia today are women, as are approximately half of all Bachelor of Business graduates. Given the gender splits in these fields are now more or less equal, you might expect the C-suites of our largest companies to follow in lockstep. However, there are signs progress is flatlining. Take finance — despite a concerted push for change at most large Australian corporates, Deloitte research shows that towards the end of last year, only 23 of the Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) at ASX100 companies were female, a figure mostly unchanged on the prior year, and the year before that. The simple truth is that despite how far we've come, the female talent pipeline for executive roles still isn't long enough. What can be done to change that? In a recent Deloitte report that we co-authored on this topic — Empowering future generations of finance: Stories and strategies from leading female CFOs — we spoke to 15 high-profile female CFOs to hear about their successes and the challenges they have faced throughout their careers, to see what we can learn from their lived experiences. Through these conversations we found five key themes kept emerging, providing insight into the successes and the setbacks commonly faced by professional women. The first, unsurprisingly, was choosing the company you keep. In the corporate world, this means choosing an employer with an inclusive organisational culture orientated towards encouraging greater diversity in leadership, which can significantly impact career progression and personal fulfilment. Several CFOs told us that the pivotal moments in their careers came when their employers provided them with meaningful opportunities that allowed them to expand and refine their skillsets, ultimately helping them demonstrate their aptitude as a future leader. But equally important was the willingness of the employer to support female talent through events that shape many people's lives. Joy Linton, CFO of biotech company CSL, said that it was 'super, super important' to support employees returning from parental leave with 'meaningful work' that was 'right sized' for whatever that returning employee's work arrangement looks like. The second common theme, similar to the first, was the importance of building a robust support network for all parts of your life. For the aspirant female leader, this means making sure the people in your personal life — your partner, your family — are willing to help you align it with your professional life. As Endeavor Group CFO Kate Beattie told us: 'It's not about obtaining a work life balance; it's about integrating work and life into a cohesive whole.' Practically, many CFOs advised taking the plunge and investing in childcare and other services and viewing the cost as an investment in career development. Many acknowledged, however, that such support — be it of a personal or professional nature — was a privilege and may not always be within one's control or means. The third theme was all about professional mentorship or finding your tribe. Building a strong support network is essential for career growth: mentors offer personalised guidance and advice, while sponsors help create opportunities, advocate on your behalf, or as one CFO told us, 'drag' you through particularly difficult stages of your career. Whether a sponsor or mentor was arranged through a formal program or came across organically, they all provided great value to the CFOs we interviewed. Interestingly, many CFOs saw value in having male mentors and allies who could broaden their perspective and advocate on their behalf to other male leaders. At the same time, many female CFOs warned against 'hitching your wagon' to particular individuals, as it risks you being stranded if they leave the organisation. They also emphasised taking responsibility over your own career. That advice dovetails nicely into the fourth theme — expand your swim lanes — or make sure you embrace lateral moves and opportunities as part of a broader commitment to continual professional development. All the CFOs we interviewed emphasised the importance of exposing yourself to different approaches, organisations, cultures and leadership styles. They also believe sideways moves are sometimes just as important as forward advancement, warning female finance professionals from staying too siloed within the technical finance field. Alison Harrop, CFO of Stockland said she continuously advised people to add a new skill every year and 'always put your hand up for something you haven't done before', with the role of finance officers becoming broader than they have been in the past. The fifth and final theme contains a piece of advice that many female professionals need to hear — back yourself and stretch yourself — be confident, express your ambitions, and be your own champion. While plenty of women have no problem doing this, numerous studies suggest that women are typically less assertive and confident than men in a workplace environment — and that can impact advancement. REA Group CFO Janelle Hopkins said: 'Take control of your career. Don't wait for people to come to you saying you're the right person for the role', and that sums it up in a nutshell — so many CFOs told me that learning to self-advocate was a pivotal development in their career. However, confidence is different to arrogance — potential female leaders should always declare ambitions in an appropriate and authentic way. These five themes represent the collective wisdom of female CFOs who have seen successes and setbacks over their remarkable careers. They contain lessons for both professionals and for organisations who are hoping to break stagnant progress on lengthening the female talent pipeline in the finance profession. Change is under way — but it will take visible leadership, sustained commitment, and courage for Australian businesses to get their unfair share of diverse talent into the future. Tharani Jegatheeswaran is Deloitte Australia's Client Relationships Leader. - Disclaimer This publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication. About Deloitte Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee ('DTTL'), its network of member firms, and their related entities. DTTL and each of its member firms are legally separate and independent entities. DTTL (also referred to as 'Deloitte Global') does not provide services to clients. In the United States, Deloitte refers to one or more of the US member firms of DTTL, their related entities that operate using the 'Deloitte' name in the United States and their respective affiliates. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting. Please see to learn more about our global network of member firms. Copyright © 2025 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved. -
Yahoo
13-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Activist investor against Woodside directors' election due to climate concerns
(Reuters) -An activist investor is opposing the election of directors at an upcoming annual general meeting of Australian energy major Woodside Energy, citing poor returns and the company's failures in managing climate risks. The Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) said on Thursday that Woodside continues to follow a high-cost, high-carbon and low-value strategy that has led to its financial underperformance. Woodside's total shareholder returns over the past 15 years have been 168% lower than the ASX100 and 83% lower than the MSCI World Energy, indicating significant underperformance against both local and global markets, the activist investor said. ACCR said the firm failed to respond to investor feedback on climate risk management with 58% of shareholders voting against the Climate Transition Action Plan in 2024, marking the world's first majority vote against a company's climate plan. The activist investor recommends voting against Woodside directors Ann Pickard, the sustainability committee chair; Ben Wyatt, the current chair of the audit and risk committee; and Tony O'Neill, a sustainability committee member. Woodside is reviewing the activist group's member statement, a company spokesperson said in an emailed response to Reuters. "We consider the perspectives of all our shareholders as part of our decision-making."
Reuters
12-03-2025
- Business
- Reuters
Activist investor defies Woodside directors election citing climate risk, poor returns
March 13 (Reuters) - The Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) expressed dissent on Thursday against all directors due for election at the upcoming annual general meeting of Woodside Energy ( opens new tab, citing failures in managing climate risks, among other reasons. The ACCR filed members' statements attributed to Woodside's persistent shortcomings, including poor shareholder returns and inadequate management of climate risk. here. Woodside's total shareholder returns over the past 15 years have been 168% lower than the ASX100 and 83% lower than the MSCI World Energy, indicating significant underperformance against both local and global markets, the activist investor's statement outlined. ACCR added that the company continues to follow the same high-cost, high-carbon, low-value strategy that has led to its financial underperformance. On the issue of climate risk management, ACCR highlighted that 58% of shareholders in 2024 voted against Woodside's Climate Transition Action Plan, marking the world's first majority vote against a company's climate plan. Woodside directors, who will be voted against by ACCR in their upcoming re-election or election in 2025, are Ann Pickard, the chair of the sustainability committee, Ben Wyatt, the current chair of the audit and risk committee and Tony O'Neill, a member of the sustainability committee, ACCR said in the statement.
