Aequus Partners' Diversity and Flexibility e-newsletter, December 2009
Dear ColleaguesIn this newsletter we look at new gender and leadership initiatives. Have you also noticed a change in the air?
Over the past month we have observed renewed energy to tackle gender inequity from a range of international business and political leaders. An insightful report by Goldman Sachs JBWere connecting GDP to gender equity in Australia, a benchmarking report on the current state of play of women in leadership in the USA, an Australian Inquiry into pay equity and initiatives in France, Hong Kong and Australia to increase women’s participation on boards.
In particular we look at:
- AUS research: Australia’s Hidden Resource – The economic case for increasing female participation Goldman Sachs JBWere’s recent Research Report Australia’s Hidden Resource: The economic case for increasing female participation highlights the disparity in participation, wage and productivity levels between the female and male workforces. GSJBWere argues that this disparity means that women comprise an under-utilised market resource and that unleashing Australia’s ready-made pool of talent would increase Australia’s GDP. Recommendations are made to address the gender pay and participation gaps, including via education, incentives and leadership inclusion targets. This report is a valuable contribution to the gender equity debate.
- USA research: The White House project report – Benchmarking women’s leadership The “White House Project Report: Benchmarking women’s leadership” provides a clear benchmark of “by how much” the gender gap in leadership and pay differs in 10 major sectors within the USA (eg business and academia). In summary, while women are well-represented in low to mid-level employment positions, they are substantially under-represented at senior levels. The report argues that the advancement of women is vital to address the workforce participation issues associated with the looming retirement of many “baby boomers.” Controversially the researchers also argue that the leadership qualities of female leaders are more effective than males in this current unstable economic period.
- AUS Government report: Making it Fair – Pay equity and associated issues related to increasing female participation in the workforce Making it Fair is the Australian House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment and Workforce Participation’s response to the Federal Government’s Inquiry into women’s participation in the workforce, particularly in relation to pay equity. It contains 63 recommendations for change, which cover legislative amendments, the establishment of a Pay Equity Unit, greater powers for the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, more rigorous data collection and new supports for disadvantaged groups.
- International change: Women on boards Quotas or targets? In countries around the world, governments and governance bodies are laying out changes to ensure gender parity for women in leadership positions. The French government has proposed a quota system, similar to that of Norway and Spain. In Hong Kong and Australia, corporate governance bodies have made public recommendations that companies publicly disclose their diversity initiatives and progress. One way or the other, accountability for gender equity is being firmly placed on the shoulders of company directors.
1. AUS research: Australia’s Hidden Resource – The economic case for increasing female participation
Goldman Sachs JBWere’s Research Report Australia’s Hidden Resource: The economic case for increasing female participation argues that Australia has been looking in the wrong places for solutions to address the steady decline of Australia’s labour productivity growth over the past decade. Instead of focussing on migration and training as a way to increase skilled labour, Australia should be unleashing its ready-made pool of talent, namely the highly educated female workforce. GSJBWere concluded that currently “Australia is only 2/3rds of the way to unlocking the hidden value of the female labour pool”.
In making this economic case, the report confirms that female participation in the workforce has consistently been lower than males and is substantially skewed in a number of industries. Additionally, although females comprise half of Australia’s labour workforce, this is not reflected in participation metrics, eg pay, power or number of hours worked. The report argues that the benefits of increasing female participation and productivity include growth in GDP (eg by 11% in Australia) as well as higher rates of corporate profitability. Further, initiatives to increase female participation would alleviate the fiscal burden of an ageing population in Australia.
In terms of remedial strategies, GSJBWere focussed on encouraging women out of pink ghettos (eg health, education and social services); maintaining workforce participation levels (commensurate with skills levels) post maternity leave; educating schools in how to break gender stereotypes; and providing a timeframe for Australia’s top 200 boards and executive teams to lift female participation at executive levels. In essence the report builds a strong economic case for gender equity and contributes valuable ideas for organisational/governmental action plans to increase female participation levels.
Editorial note to readers: Go straight to paragraphs 1.2 and 1.3 below if you are more interested in the economic case that demographic facts and figures (para 1.1)
1.1. Facts and figures: Women in the Australian workforce
The report identifies the shape of gender inequity in the Australian workforce, namely in terms of (i) the structure of the workforce; (ii) hours worked; (iii) occupational segregation; (iv) education; and (v) income.
(i) Structure of the workforce
Despite the equal proportion of female and male populations in the Australian workforce in 2009, women are less likely than men to be employed for the whole year (40% for women of working age, compared with 53% of men) and are more likely to be out of the labour force (one-third of women of working age, compared with 22% of men). However, GSJBWere found that this outcome was not driven by employability as females are equally as employable as males (as indicated by the fact that 0.7% of both the male and female labour force, who are actively seeking work, are unable to secure employment).
(ii) Hours worked
During times of market volatility, since the mid 1980’s (when the data first became available) female hours worked tend to be more stable than male hours. GSJBWere attribute this finding to the high concentration of female employment in part-time roles which tend to provide more flexible scheduling in comparison to full-time (predominantly male) employees who are more likely to be retrenched in an economic downturn. In addition, this can be attributed to the high concentration of females working in the non-cyclical sectors of health-care, social assistance, education and training.
(iii) Occupational segregation
The report shows that women are more likely to work in one of three industries: (i) education and training; (ii) health care and social assistance services; and (iii) retail. Additionally women working part-time (less than 35 hours per week) are more likely to work in one of three roles (i) clerical and administrative roles; (ii) community and personal services; and (iii) retail sales. Finally, women are 50% less likely than a man to hold a management position (even though men and women are equally likely to hold professional positions) and 50% less likely to own a business. Editorial note: We suggest that these data may indicate that women are not working at levels commensurate with their skills, but may be opting for jobs below skill level to gain flexibility and thus balance their work and family commitments.
(iv) Education
Females are more educated than their male counterparts, yet participate at lower levels in the Australian workforce. In particular females are more likely than males to complete Year 12 (the final year of High School in Australia), more likely to achieve a bachelor degree and advanced diploma, and are just as likely to complete a post-graduate qualification. Despite these high educational levels, women are much more likely to concentrate their study in the areas of health care and education, and much less likely to work in professional, scientific and technical, manufacturing and construction industries.
(v) Income disparities
Females have been, and continue to be, paid less than men, irrespective of whether the comparison is by hourly rate or full-time rate. Indeed there is not a single industry which can demonstrate that females are paid more than males. The worst industries are finance (with a 27% disparity), health and community services (23%) and mining (21%). For more information in regards to pay inequity, please refer to article 3 below in the newsletter.
1.2. Specific issues
Insightfully, the GSJBWere report goes beyond broad demographic trends and identifies specific issues relevant to gender equity namely (i) productivity; (iii) the drivers of employment growth; and (iii) the role of public policy.
(i) Productivity
An economic assumption underlying market analyses of productivity is that the lower the unemployment rate, the lower the quality of the remaining labour pool, consequently the marginal product of labour declines in tandem with a declining unemployment rate. In lay language, if almost everyone is employed, all that is left is “the bottom of the barrel”. This assumption overlooks the additional capacity in the female talent pool, which is the main thesis of the GSJBWere report. Hence GSJBWere argued that a key micro economic reform to lift labour force productivity is to unleash female talent, and that the high quality of this talent will have direct positive impacts on lowering interest rates, increasing household income and boosting income tax revenue.
(ii) Drivers of employment growth
GSJBWere identify the three primary drivers of employment growth as population growth, the participation rate (of men and women) and the (un)employment rate. Overall the last decade shows population growth, increasing levels of workforce participation and decreasing levels of unemployment. This overall picture however masks gender differences in the participation and unemployment rates (but not of course population growth). Critically, and this is a major contribution of the GSJBWere report, male employment growth is connected to the rising employment rate, whereas female employment growth is connected to increasing levels of female participation. Accordingly GSJBWere argue that this driver should be the focal point of remedial strategies. Moreover that these strategies should be less about women entering the labour market and more about retention post maternity leave (eg via subsidised childcare and flexible work practices), and pay equity.
(iii) The role of public policy
GSJBWere observed that public policy to address gender equity has been inconsistent and piecemeal. Indeed on occasion public policy initiatives have provided disincentives to women’s workforce participation, eg family payment subsidies. GSJBWere argued for great uniformity in public policy consistent with an overarching strategy of gender equity and incentivising female workforce participation.
1.3. Benefits
GSJBWere conceptualised the expected benefits of unleashing the female talent pool in terms of (i) GDP outcomes; and a shift in (ii) the balance of power.
(i) GDP outcomes
Taking a broader perspective, GSJBWere observed that employment rates differ from country to country, and low female participation rates are most evident in Europe (35 to 47%) and Japan (46%), while countries such as the Netherlands (64.5%), Canada (64.2%) and Australia (63.8%) have stronger levels of female participation. GSJBWere argued that closing the gender gap in employment rates would boost a country’s GDP substantially, and in Australia that could be by up to 11%. Noting the apparent preference amongst Australian women to work on a part-time basis after maternity leave, and accepting some overall decline in productivity (as new entrants gain skills), GSJBWere discounted this estimate to 8%.
(ii) Balance of power
Women continue to be significantly under-represented at Board level (eg 11% of US Fortune 1000 companies and 8% of the top 200 (Australian) ASX companies) as well as in senior executive roles. GSJBWere argued that this was inequitable and risky, both in terms of drawing on a diverse pool of market knowledge (as women play a key role in consumer decisions) and corporate governance. In regard to this latter point, GSJBWere identified a longitudinal study (19 years) of 215 Fortune 500 firms, by Roy Adler of Pepperdine University California, which found “a strong correlation between a strong record of promoting women into the executive suite and high profitability. Three measures of profitability were used to demonstrate that the 25 Fortune 500 firms with the best record of promoting women to high positions are between 18 and 69 percent more profitable than the median Fortune 500 firms in their industries.”
1.4. Recommendations
GSJBWere suggested a number of initiatives (for companies and government) to increase female participation and employment rates. These included to:
- Provide incentives to expand female participation into broader industries;
- Develop strategies to ensure employers maintain contact with female employees during parental leave;
- Provide incentives for the primary caregiver to return to the workforce through initiatives such as childcare and flexible working hours;
- Fund educational programs in schools to break stereotypes of gender-biased careers; and
- Set a timeframe to increase female participation in Australia’s top 200 boards and executive teams with a minimum quota of two female positions per board and an audit on female representation at executive level. For more information, please see article 4 below in the newsletter.
GSJBWere have developed a strong business case connecting gender equity to GDP and identified women as an under-utilised market resource. The drivers of inequity are manifested in lower female participation rates, and GSJBWere identified a range of initiatives to lift women’s labour force participation in term of the level, industry and role.
For more information about Australia’s Hidden Resource: The economic case for increasing female participation visit www.gsjbw.com.
2. USA research: The White House project report – Benchmarking women’s leadership
The White House Project is a non-partisan, non-profit organisation that aims to advance women’s leadership in all communities and sectors by filling the leadership pipeline with a richly diverse, critical mass of women.
The “White House Project Report: Benchmarking women’s leadership” was written to assess where the United States stands in terms of the balance of power between men and women. The report adds value to current literature by providing a clearer sense of “by how much” the gender gap in leadership varies in 10 nominated sectors, namely: academia; business; film; journalism; law; military; non-profit; politics; religion; and sports. In general, across all sectors, the wide leadership and wage gap between the female and male working population highlights the lack of progress for the advancement of women in recent years. As a result, the report recommends that a “critical mass” of women is required at senior levels “to start a chain reaction into a new situation or process.” The researchers recommended a range of remedial initiatives including the development of accountabilities; and educating on stereotypes.
2.1. Methodology
The researchers relied exclusively on data collected from previously published sources such as websites and archives of prominent and trusted organisational and individual sources within each field known to study women and leadership. In addition, the researchers sought secondary information through keyword searches via Internet search tools such as J-Stor and websites of well-known groups within each field. The researchers also derived the average percent of women in leadership positions in each of the 10 sectors in a clear and traceable manner to increase the data’s accessibility and transparency to the general public.
2.2. Background
According to the report, although the number of women exceeds men in achieving college degrees and holding positions at low to mid-levels in most sectors, the advancement of women and equality in the workplace is far from being realised. For example, females account for only 18% of top leaders and make 78.7 cents to every dollar earned by a man. As a result, the report proposes that a “critical mass” of diverse women is required in positions of leadership in order to boost equality, build a stronger economy and provide a more accurate representation that reflects the true female workforce population.
2.3. Findings
The researchers conceptualised their findings in terms of (i) why the time is now; (ii) the American people are ready for women to lead; (iii) current leadership and wage gaps; and (iv) levels of women’s leadership in the ten sectors.
(i) Why the time is now
Controversially the researchers argued that the characteristics of female’s “risk-smart” leadership style are crucial in this time of economic upheaval in order to ensure stability. “Risk-smart” refers to the female tendency to include diverse viewpoints in decision-making, have a broader conception of public policy and that women are more likely to work through differences to form coalitions and complete objectives. (Editorial note: We suggest that this is a controversial assumption, and being “risk smart” is not a gendered characteristic, but a characteristic of a broader pool of leadership talent which has been under-valued until the current economic crisis). In addition, the researchers argued that diversity provides financial advantages, for example, Fortune 500 companies with high percentages of women officers experienced a 35.1% higher return on equity and 34% higher return to shareholders than those with low percentages of women corporate officers. The researchers also cite a Harvard Business Review article which suggests that a female’s more responsive, accountable and ethical “transformative” leadership style (compared to the male “transactional” leadership) is effective in leading modern organisations.
The researchers suggest that the impetus for increasing the female participation rate and advancing women into leadership positions is given further weight by the need to address the gap filled by the looming retirement of the “baby boomer” generation. As a result, the report argues that it is important to incorporate talented and educated women into leadership positions in greater numbers or risk a dramatic drop in workforce quality when older generations enter retirement.
(ii) The American people are ready for women to lead
The research highlighted in the report indicates that more than 90% of the public was comfortable with women in most positions of leadership across different industries. For example, three-quarters of Americans said they would feel comfortable with a woman as President of the United States. In essence, the American public believes that women and men would make equally good leaders.
(iii) Current leadership and wage gaps
The report found that progression against key equity indicators concerning leadership and wage rates (such as pay, board seats and corporate officer posts) has ceased or reversed in recent years. The leadership and wage gaps between women and men persist at most levels of employment and across all sectors.
(iv) Levels of women’s leadership in ten major sectors
Currently women hold, on average, only 18% of top leadership positions and the report details more specifically the findings of female leadership participation in the ten nominated sectors. In general, there is a leadership pipeline which exists in most sectors as women comprise the majority of low to mid-level employment positions but numbers are substantially lower at senior levels. The wage gap also widens with increasing age and level of employment. Most noticeably, the researcher found that progress for the advancement of women has been slow or unchanged for the last few years.
2.4. Recommendations
Specific recommendations were made for each of the nominated sectors. The general trends which emerged in the sectors included: (i) implementing gender commitment benchmarks, accountabilities and policies; (ii) raising awareness of stereotypes; (iii) providing mentoring programs for females; and (iv) increasing access to flexible work arrangements.
2.5. Conclusion
In summary, the report argues that although women are as well-educated and as capable as men to be leaders, there is still a wide leadership and wage gap between female and male representation in the workforce. As a result, a “critical mass” of women is required at all levels, and in particular senior levels, to make a difference.
To download the copy of this White House Project Report, go to benchmarks.thewhitehouseproject.org Thanks to Niki Kesoglou (Regional Head of Diversity & Inclusion Asia Pacific at Credit-Suisse) for bringing this report to our attention.
3. AUS Government report: Making it Fair – Pay equity and associated issues related to increasing female participation in the workforce
3.1. Background
In mid-2008 the (Australian) Federal Minister for Workforce Participation requested that the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment and Workforce Participation inquire into women’s participation in the workforce, particularly in relation to pay equity.
The Committee sought submissions and received over 150 from councils, unions, government agencies, universities, research and not-for-profit centres, individuals, public and private organisations. In addition, public hearings were held in capital cities around Australia.
The Committee tabled its report into pay equity on 24 November, 2009. This note summarises the 63 recommendations which cover (i) industrial relations legislative reforms; (ii) anti-discrimination legislation; (iii) a pay equity unit; (iv) administrative approaches; (v) data collection and research; and (vi) work choices.
3.2. Overview of pay equity issues
Currently, the average industry pay gap in Australia is slightly more than 17%, with particular industries and locales faring much worse (eg finance 31.9% and Western Australia 35.7%). Many of the submissions highlighted the concern that a great number of Australians are unaware of the pay gap between men and women’s earnings, however once they were made aware of the gap there was strong community support for action to address it. Pay inequity was found at all levels, and there was evidence of professional women being paid less than male counterparts working for the same firm.
As identified by the 2008 Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency (EOWA) Census, in both the public and private sectors, women are under-represented at the senior level and the workforce is highly gender segmented with women predominating in a small number of industries and more likely to be in low paying jobs with limited career pathways. Women are also more likely to work on a casual or part-time basis and have interrupted work patterns. In summary, these conditions mean women are likely to have limited bargaining power to address pay inequity.
After reviewing previous strategies to address the pay gap, the Committee moved beyond an educational approach to recommend legislative reform which will ultimately increase women’s participation in the workforce, lead to increased productivity for the nation and benefit working women and their families.
3.3. Recommendations
In brief, the recommendations propose amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009, greater powers for the Sex Discrimination Commissioner and the establishment of a Pay Equity Unit within Fair Work Australia which has a broad mandate for change. The report also recommends the government lead by example by implementing pay equity in the Public Service, changing superannuation policies and conducting more research into pay equity to aid in decision-making.
In all, there are 63 recommendations in the report, and these are summarised below: (i) Industrial relations legislative reforms
These include amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 which will:
- define remuneration to broaden its meaning and confirm the concept of equal remuneration for dissimilar work of equal value;
- enunciate an equal remuneration principle;
- organise a fund to be administered for the pursuit of cases in relation to remuneration orders;
- ensure pay equity is included in modern awards;
- ensure individual flexibility arrangements are lodged with Fair Work Australia;
- broaden the “right to request flexibility” National Employment Standard to cover all employees;
- ensure that a significant proportion of an organisation’s employees are from a non-English speaking background; and
- ensure explicit statements in the Act give detailed direction on how equal remuneration is to be managed.
These include amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 which will:
- enable the Sex Discrimination Commissioner to launch legal action without the need for a complainant to come forward;
- enable the Australian Human Rights Commission to commence legal action for a breach of the Act; and
- require repeat offenders to attend counselling or a training course.
These recommendations propose that the Minister establish a specialist Pay Equity Unit within Fair Work Australia which will be a central point for monitoring, developing, planning and providing assistance. In brief, the Pay Equity Unit would:
- require all federal public sector organisations and those with 100+ employees to report biennially to the Unit on the implementation of their plans and duties to increase equity;
- be provided with access to wages and salary information from the Australian Taxation Office; and
- be given the functions of EOWA (including a recommended expansion of the Employer of Choice for Women Awards to include small and medium business categories).
These recommendations concern practical implications of pay equity changes and include that:
- organisations not compliant with relevant principles be excluded from Commonwealth contracts;
- industry assistance is only provided to firms that are compliant with pay equity principles;
- amendments be made to the Superannuation Guarantee Act 1992 which remove the charge applied to those earning less than $450 per month, ensure low income earners are included, and reduce multiple administration costs on low income earners;
- the Office for Women be centrally located within the Department of Prime Minster and Cabinet;
- the Minister for the Status of Women provide an annual statement to Parliament on Australia’s pay equity progress; and
- all government agencies be required to implement a gender equality scheme and report on progress.
These recommendations are designed to ensure greater ability to survey and research relevant groups on pay equity progress and include that:
- the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) review data for evidence of pay equity trends;
- the ABS introduce gender disaggregation into all surveys related to pay equity;
- a national pay equity workplace survey be developed and conducted biennially to investigate pay equity issues; and
- a workgroup be established in the Pay Equity Unit to progress compatibility of data.
These recommendations concern investigations into issues for women including culture, language, disability and caring responsibilities. In brief, that:
- information be collected on workforce participation of Indigenous women, those with disabilities, those with language needs to inform policy;
- accreditation of, and improved opportunities for, overseas migrants;
- employers are further assisted with the provision of child care facilities; and
- curriculum and course selection processes are reviewed in terms of gender stereotyping.
4. International change movement: Women on boards
4.1. Introduction
In recent months, countries around the world have been launching new initiatives aimed at improving the representation of women in senior management and on Boards. Some are looking at a quota system (eg France), whilst others are focusing on organisational targets (eg Australia). The debate concerning the benefits and limitations of a quota system remains heated, but it would appear that either way there is a strong move towards developing a transparent organisational accountability framework for gender equity. We scanned recent reports and media releases to bring you this update.
4.2. Quotas – France, Norway and Spain
This month French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s UMP party presented a bill to parliament which would compel all companies listed on the Paris Bourse Stock Exchange to ensure women comprise 50% of board seats by 2015. The proposed law will be debated in January 2010, and if successful it will revolutionalise the French corporate world. The legislation would also apply to state-owned and non-listed firms with supervisory boards.
“We want to create an electro-shock”, said Jean-Francois Cope, the parliamentary party leader of President Nicolas Sarkozy's UMP party, “We must do to companies what we did in the public domain a few years ago and impose parity”. If the bill becomes law, France will go further than even Norway, whose government legislated a 40% female quota on boards in 2003.
In Norway, there was a vigorous public debate about the law, however, companies have complied and Norway now has the highest proportion of women on boards in the world (44.2%, up from 6% in 2001). Similarly, the Spanish government has given companies listed on the IBEX until 2014 to ensure a 40% female representation on their boards.
The French bill specifies that all companies listed on the Paris Bourse Stock Exchange would be expected to have 20% of board seats reserved for women within 18 months of the law taking force, rising to 40% within 4 years and 50% by 2015. Currently women comprise 17% of all board positions in France, and this number falls to 10% of blue chip (CAC40) organisations. Despite historically entrenched resistance to quotas from business leaders, the president of the conservative French Institute of Directors (IFA) has reluctantly decided that they are the only way of encouraging progress, a view shared by the Secretary of State for Family and the President of Areva (a French multinational conglomerate).
For more information about the French bill, go to www.u-m-p.org/site/index.php.
For more information about the Norwegian quota system go to www.gender.no.
4.3. Targets: Hong Kong, and Australia
In Hong Kong a recent report Women on Boards: Hang Seng Index 2009 has revealed a low representation of women on listed companies, namely only 8.9% of positions are held by 47 women. This figure is comparable to Australia (8.3%) and lower than the UK (11.7%) and Canada (15%). Women interviewed as part of this research were opposed to the introduction of legislation or quotas and suggested that the drivers of inequity lie in a limited talent pool of senior women from which to draw directors; a corporate society dominated by a male work ideal; and “invisible filter” whereby women opt out of senior roles because of their caring obligations.
In Australia, recent developments towards setting targets has been energetic. The Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) Corporate Governance Council has released a range of draft recommendations about diversity to listed companies. The recommended activities do not carry penalties for compliance failures, however, companies will be required to explain why they have not met the five recommendations listed below (ie via an “if not, why not?” statement). The recommendations are that each listed entry on the ASX:
- should establish a diversity policy that includes measurable objectives relating to gender as set by the board. The policy must be disclosed to the market;
- should disclose in its annual report its achievement against the gender objectives set by the board;
- must also include the proportion of women employees in the organisation, in senior management and on the board; and
- must continuously review the proportion of women at all levels in the company.
- Finally the performance review of the board should include consideration of diversity criteria in addition to skills.
The Council’s chief executive has stated that the issue might be elevated to a listing rule status if enough companies fail to co-operate. This could mean potential suspension for a company if they do not comply with listing rules.
The Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) has also released its own range of measures to encourage board diversity which are consistent with those put forward by the ASX. The AICD measures include:
- recommendations for boards to report on their diversity policies;
- recommendations for greater transparency in board selection and reporting;
- the implementation of an AICD mentoring program to support emerging women directors;
- the provision of additional briefings, seminars and access to information for aspiring directors;
- the development of a publication providing guidance to boards on diversity; and
- recommendations that company boards identifying diversity goals and reporting on progress.
For more information on the Women on Boards: Hang Seng Index 2009 go to www.communitybusiness.org/images/cb/publications/2009/WOB.pdf.
Thanks to Kimberly Cole (Head of Marketing, Asia at Thomson Reuters) for bringing this report to our attention. For more information about the ASX proposals, go to www.asx.com.au/about/pdf/mr_071209_asx_cgc_communique.pdf.
For more information on the AICD, go to www.companydirectors.com.au.
Regards,
Juliet Bourke and Dr Graeme Russell
Partners
Aequus Partners
www.aequus.com.au
If you do not wish to receive information from Aequus Partners via email, please let us know by emailing Juliet Bourke.