Search Results

Reimagining Leadership in a Hybrid World With work and workplaces going through drastic changes and transitioning to different modalities during the pandemic, leaders and organizations across the globe share varying experiences as they adapt to the transformations in the new world of work. The Center for Creative Leadership (CCL), in partnership with 15 organizations including the Institute of Corporate Directors PH (ICD Ph), has worked on “WORK 3.0: Reimagining Leadership in a Hybrid World” a research report which identify key skills, mindset and enabling factors leaders must have to be successful in a hybrid work environment. Current situation of Work 3.0 in Asia Pacific The report introduces an overview of the current landscape of the hybrid world in the Asia Pacific region. As countries strive to recover from the circumstances brought by the pandemic, it is shown that organizations prioritize different strategies to adapt to the new era. Organizations are also facing changes in societal expectations as they are demanded to be more responsible and purpose-driven and promote inclusivity and environmental friendliness in the post pandemic world. In addition, the expectations of employees now include work flexibility, meaningful work, and improvement in well-being. Meanwhile, a leap in the rate of remote job openings and interest of applicants in remote jobs and a significant decrease in the rate of expectation around time spent in the office lead to the fact that the majority of the organizations in the Asia Pacific are likely to adopt a hybrid model of work in the long run. With 39% of Filipino respondents preferring the hybrid - office first model, the Philippines is leaning towards a more flexible mode of work for the next three to five years. However, with 28% of respondents still preferring the fully onsite model, the leaders of organizations in the Philippines are less embracing of Work 3.0 compared to those of other countries in the region. Debunking myths about Work 3.0 To present important points about what leaders and organizations need to know about the hybrid work model, the study debunks myths about Work 3.0. It starts with pointing out that the hybrid work model is more than just a fusion of in-person and remote model and is therefore a unique plane with a character of its own. Furthermore, it is important to note that while leader support to their teams working in hybrid mode is at a considerably high rate of 51.7% and that 52.4% of leaders claim that they are thriving in the current hybrid work environment, more than half or 55.6% of the organizations in the Asia Pacific are still in the “no vision” and “still curating” stages in terms of their journey towards long term vision and associated processes/policies with respect to hybrid work. The study further discusses that despite having 8 in 10 employees favoring the work-from-home option in the Asia Pacific region and 9 in 10 specifically in the Philippines, the impact on their engagement and productivity varies depending on their performance. Below average performers are at the most serious risk of declining productivity and engagement, therefore leaving the organizations the challenge to strike a balance between the two. On the other hand, while technology is often deemed as the key driver of successful Work 3.0 model as it enables the hybrid workforce to perform and deliver at their peak capabilities, data suggests that people and teams and organization culture play the most vital role instead. Meanwhile, the promotion of diversity, equity, and inclusion is thriving in the hybrid world of work as more opportunities are now being opened for sectors often experiencing indifference when it comes to work. However, leaders and organizations must take serious action to address certain biases at play in the hybrid world which cause marginalization and disengagement among their employees. Successful leadership in Work 3.0 CCL’s study proceeds by elaborating how leaders should think about Work 3.0 by identifying the four key elements driving hybrid teams to flourish. These include core agreements about the team’s purpose, collective mindset on how they work together, cohesive relationships fostering inclusivity and high psychological safety, and connection across teams and organization. Tensions and polarities emerging in these elements are what leaders need to evaluate and navigate to deliver on business needs. CCL’s study proceeds by elaborating how leaders should think about Work 3.0 by identifying the four key elements driving hybrid teams to flourish. These include core agreements about the team’s purpose, collective mindset on how they work together, cohesive relationships fostering inclusivity and high psychological safety, and connection across teams and organization. Tensions and polarities emerging in these elements are what leaders need to evaluate and navigate to deliver on business needs. In the latter part of the study is an exhaustive discussion on who leaders need to be to succeed in Work 3.0. The researchers highlight mindsets and skill sets shifts necessary to spark collaboration among employees, to drive purpose, build a culture of trust and empowerment, and utilize technology to aid hybrid work. In addition, the study presents five roles that leaders need to play and embrace to help their organizations conquer challenges and attain prosperity in the hybrid world. Conclusion: Relevance to the Philippine setting To conclude, CCL's study provides a comprehensive examination on the hybrid work model in the Asia Pacific region by generating survey and interview responses from 2,200 leaders across 13 countries in the region. Future researchers may draw from the results of the study to have a closer look on Work 3.0 focused in the Philippine context. This can help Filipino leaders and organizations identify more appropriate interventions and strategies to thrive in the hybrid world of work. To read more about the research report, you may access this link: http://ccl.org/articles/research-reports/work-3.0-reimagining-leadership-hybrid-world

Published September 13, 2022, 5:54 AM by Dr. Bernardo M. Villegas Part 1 In a series of articles that appeared in this paper, I postulated that between 2040 and 2050, the Philippines will attain a per capita income of over $12,000 which in today’s prices according to the World Bank will entitle us to be considered a “high-income” economy, the last step after going through low-income, low-middle income and upper-middle income (which we are supposed to attain in the next two to three years when our per capita income crosses approximately $4,000). Can we assume that once we reach high-income status we can already expect to be considered a First World economy? This is whereas a typical economist, I have to hedge my bet. The answer will depend on whether or not, as our per capita income rises, we are able to establish more and more inclusive economic and political institutions. I have observed that until very recently, South Korea was always in the list of emerging markets and only in the last two or three years was this highly industrialized country that exceeded $20,000 of per capita income more than a decade ago admitted into the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Developmenth(OECD) of the advanced countries. I am theorizing that South Korea reached very high levels of per capita income through a great concentration of economic power and wealth in what they called a “chaebol” economy. Although when compared to its neighbor, North Korea, it has far more inclusive economic institutions that “allow and encourage participation by the great mass of people in economic activities that make best use of their talents and skills and that enable individuals to make the choices they wish” (from Why Nations Fail by Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson), South Korea had for a long time been ruled by dictatorial leaders that delayed the building up of inclusive political institutions. This political handicap to becoming a First World country was even more obvious in a number of Latin American countries like Argentina, Venezuela, Mexico and Brazil. These countries became upper-middle income countries more than a decade ago but have been caught in a middle-income trap because of lack of inclusive economic and political institutions. Although the U.S. economy is not perfect from the standpoint of inclusiveness (both economically and politically), it is far superior to its Latin American counterparts. As Acemoglu and Robinson wrote in their book, inclusive economic institutions foster economic activity, productivity growth, and economic prosperity. If private property rights are protected, then those with such rights will be willing to invest and increase the productivity of their properties. It stands to reason that a business man who frets that his production will be stolen, expropriated or entirely taxed away will have little incentive to work, let alone make any investments in new ventures. To attain economic prosperity, a society must give such rights to at least most, if not all its citizens.In a number of Latin American countries in which gross mismanagement of the macroeconomy led to inflation rates that could go as high as 1,000% or more annually, the irresponsible governments literally stole money from the private citizens whose hard-earned assets lost practically all their value in an instant. We can be grateful that at least in the last thirty years or so, we have enjoyed relative price stability, thanks to a Central Banks system whose management has been systematically ranked as one of the best in Asia. Our last Governor of the Central Bank, now the Secretary of Finance Benjamin Diokno, was named as the Best Central Bank Governor in the world by an international organization. According to Acemoglu and Robinson, inclusive economic institutions also pave the way for two other engines of prosperity: technology and education. All countries that have managed to become First World have experienced sustained economic growth almost always accompanied by technological improvements that enable the human resources (labor), land, and capital (buildings, machines, infrastructures, etc.) to be more productive. One of the greatest economists in my book is Joseph A.Schumpeter who coined the word “entrepreneur” to designate the prime mover in the process of economic development. The entrepreneur is the one who introduces innovations that improve the productivity of the factors of production. It is encouraging to note that President Marcos Jr. is giving the highest value to the advice being given him by some of the most successful entrepreneurs in the country. Technology, however, will have limited value without a high level of education, skills, competencies and know-how of the workforce, acquired at home, in school or on the job. All the technology of the world would be useless without workers who know how to operate it. Beyond technical skills to run machines, it is the know-how and education of the workforce that generate the scientific knowledge upon which economic progress is built and that enable the continuing adaption and adoption of technologies in the various areas of business. In the modern economy of today, technological change requires education both for the innovator and the worker. Despite the imperfections of the political system in the United States, it still has the best working model of a market economy that can produce, or attract from foreign lands the likes of Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Sergey Brin, Larry Page, Jeff Bezos, and the hundreds of scientists who made path-breaking discoveries in information technology, nuclear power, biotech, and other fields in which entrepreneurs build their businesses. The supply of talent exists in the U.S. because most American teenagers have access to as much schooling as they wish or are capable of attaining. It is unfortunate, however, that our youth are not getting the quality of education that is required for sustainable economic development in an increasing technologically demanding work environment. What can be done in the next five years or so to make sure that whatever low quality output our educational and other human resource development institutions can produce in the intermediate term can still enable the country to transition from an upper-middle income to a high-income economy with a per capita income of more than $12,000. This is where we can bring in what Max Weber, the German sociologist, referred to as the “monopoly of legitimate violence.” Here he is referring to the indispensable role played by the State in sustainable and equitable development. As Acemuglo and Robinson wrote, “Without such a monopoly and the degree of centralization that it entails, the state cannot play its role as enforcer of law and order, let along provide public services and encourage and regulate economic activity.” Here, we are reminded that the two indispensable institutions in society are the family and the State. They proceed from the nature of human beings. All other human institutions are dispensable. That is why, we should expect the present Administration, despite lingering fears that President Marcos Jr. may turn out to be an authoritarian ruler like his father, to exercise the “monopoly of legitimate violence,” i.e. to exercise enough authority to resolve the many conflicts that arise in any society. Again, to quote Acemoglu and Robinson, “When the State fails to achieve almost any political centralization, society sooner or later descends into chaos…” It is in this light that I appreciate his decision to take over the post of Secretary of Agriculture. There is a great deal of central decision making that is required to address the underdevelopment of that sector. There are at least three departments whose functions have to be coordinated to address the long-standing backwardness of our agricultural sector, especially as compared with those of our ASEAN neighbors like Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia. In an analogous way, the Department of Education has a lot to do with the Department of Labor and the Department of Migrant Workers. Some centralization of power in the hands of the Vice-President who is concurrently Secretary of Education may lead to a better coordination of the way Philippine society educates and deploys its human resources. There must, however, be a way that we can prevent the centralization of power from spawning extractive political institutions. There is strong synergy between economic and political institutions. Following the analysis of Acemoglu and Robinson, extractive political institutions tend to concentrate power in the hands of a narrow elite and place few constraints on the exercise of this power. There is always a danger that this elite will structure economic institutions in such a way as to unfairly extract resources from the rest of society. This is where the very concept of good governance comes in. We must constantly strive to achieve good governance in the public sector. To be continued.

Published September 20, 2022, 5:31 AM by Dr. Bernardo M. Villegas Part 2 Our bad experiences with authoritarian leaders should not lead to the extreme of believing that the best government is the least government. As we saw in the last article, the famous German sociologist, Max Weber,provided the most famous and widely accepted definition of the state, identifying it with the “monopoly of legitimate violence.” Without such a monopoly and the necessary degree of centralization of power itentails, the state can hardly play its role of law and order. That is why, even from the point of view of Christian social doctrine, the State—together with the family—are the only two institutions in society that proceed from the very nature of man. They are natural institutions. All other institutions are “artificial” and are not inherent to the nature of human beings Because the authority of the state is indispensable in the achievement of the goals of any nation, it is imperative that there be good governance. It is my intention here to examine the role of good governance in our common desire to attain First World status in the decade spanning 2040 to 2050. Here, I will depend a great deal on a pamphlet recently written by Dr. Jesus Estanislao on what he refers to as Dream Philippines 2046. Jess, who was the primary founder (I was a co-founder) of the Center for Research and Communication (CRC) that eventually evolved into what is now the University of Asia and the Pacific, is also the founder of the Institute of Corporate Directors (ICD) and the Institute for Solidarity Asia (ISA). He has occupied some top positions in Government, notably that of the Secretary of Finance under the Administration of the late Corazon C. Aquino. True to the principle of subsidiarity which dictates that progress and development must be initiated from below, the ICD fosters good corporate governance in the private sector. In the website of ICD, we read that good corporate governance is critical to a country’s global competitiveness and has been shown to have a direct correlation with corporate profitability and growth. Government regulations require it. Companies of all sizes need it. It is at the level of the corporation that the varying and sometimes conflicting interests of the various stakeholders are balanced and protected.ICD is a non-stock, not-for-profit organization working in close partnership with other business, government and civil society organizations. As an independent and autonomous institute, it is open to working with others in the pursuit of systemic corporate governance reforms by networking with various institutes all over East Asia to enrich Director Education and share best practices in corporate governance. ICD is a major player in Philippine corporate governance reform initiatives working closely with the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the Global Corporate Governance Forum, and the International Corporate Governance Network on improving actual boardroom practices, moving away from mere principles to actual practices. More importantly, as regards contributing to good governance in the public sector, it works closely with key regulators with direct immediate interest in corporate governance such as the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Insurance Commission. In fact, recent good news from the Bureau of Customs reflects some of the accomplishments of the work of ICD and the related NGO Institute of Solidarity Asia (ISA) with public agencies like the Bureau of Customs. After years of engaging the management and staff of the BoC in good governance reforms, ICD and ISA can boast of very concrete results of improved collections. In August 2022, the Bureau of Customs exceeded its collection target by a whopping 34.1 %, thanks to digitalization and streamlining of processes which have significantly cut corruption for which this government agency has been notorious in the past. In his capacity as Chairman Emeritus of ICD, Jess wrote a pamphlet entitled “A Perspective on Dream PH: Philippines 2040s, Let Us Get There.” In this publication, he offers clearcut solutions in addressing the challenge of lifting what economists call the “production possibility curve” in various sectors of the Philippine economy. He rejects the usual defeatist solution given by some people in the private sector, “Let the Government do it.” He takes a very balanced view. He is by no means a “minimalist”, the less Government the better. He makes it clear that we cannot give up on government, that the government authority is indispensable in attaining the common good of society. He cites the special role of the Government in setting clear strategic priorities for the country and in mobilizing resources to provide critically needed public facilities and other much needed infrastructure. In his own words, he emphasizes, “The list of essential government functions is a long one, and there can be no substitute for government.” He is quick to point out, though, that the Government is not a monolith nor does it function in a vacuum. There is need, therefore, to come down from a too “macro” or aggregate view of government, recognizing that other than the President, Congress and the Supreme Court, there are many other different government agencies and instrumentalities, especially at the local government level. The Government does not work in a vacuum. It has to interact with numerous non-governmental players in various sectors of society and the economy and even ordinary citizens who represent the grass roots. Attaining Dream 2046 (the centennial of Philippine democracy) would require all stakeholders in society to work with the many instrumentalities of government and the public sector. Having worked with national economic planning agencies, such as the Program Implementation Agency (PIA) and the Presidential Economic Staff (PES) during the time of President Diosdado Macapagal, Jess saw the limits of macroeconomic analysis and planning. Although it is necessary to make forecasts of GDP, population, labor force, prices, and other aggregate economic data, there is even greater need to delve into the microeconomic world of sectors, regions, industries and enterprises. That is why after leaving the Government, Jess established the now famous Center for Research and Communication (CRC) which started out as a think tank doing abundant research on industrial and business economics. Realizing that the findings of research, no matter how thorough and scientific, would be useless if they are not communicated to the policy and decision makers, Jess added the word “Communication” in labeling the think tank he started with a group of young economists. Thus, the name Center for Research and Communication. Since 1967, CRC has been a source of well analyzed data on the economics of sectors, regions and industries that have fed both the government and private business sector with valuable microeconomic information necessary for decision making at the regional, sectoral, industrial or firm levels. In his Dream PH pamphlet, Jess suggests a list of critical steps that have to be taken to improve the productivity of Philippine institutions at all levels of the value chain. The transformation process of the institution must be for real. It must be substantive. The transformative outcomes must show that the institution has become stronger; and those outcomes are noticed and felt (as well as appreciated) by the constituencies that the institution serves. There must be a way of cascading the strategic mindset and best practices of transformation down to the individual person within each institution. It is only at this level that a culture of good governance can be installed and nurtured. It is then the responsibility of each individual person in the organization to radiate the culture of good governance to his family and social network. In this way, the positive impact of the transformation can touch the lives and work of many more people, multiplying the impact of the cultural transformation to possibly thousands or even hundreds of thousands of individuals. It is important to keep the process open. Experiences from other parts of the world can enrich the process of transformation. Benchmarking against external (regional and global) standards can open minds, broaden horizons , and provide a sustained push towards ever-higher levels of quality in doing things and in introducing innovations for greater efficiency. The culture of “Never Tama Na” is especially important to overcome a weakness in Filipino work ethic. One must always keep in mind that transformation is systemic. It spreads out by affecting all facets and levels of institutional operations and decision-making; it forges links and strengthens linkages; it banks on multi-sector consortia (such as the Philippine Business for Education or the Makati Business Club, a business organization of which Jess was one of the founders) to positively influence external value chains and proactively promote the further development of a whole area, even an entire region, and possibly a broader sector of an economy or even the entire society. The institution would need to reach out to schools, faith groups, civil society or nongovernmental organizations, media and key institutional partners from both the private and public sectors. By reaching out to many sectors of society, it is possible to broaden and deepen the socio-economic impact of a few, strategically selected “social responsibility” initiatives it undertakes in close partnership with key sectors of the community. Jess has no illusion that this transformation process will be sustained unless we have what Max Weber called the“monopoly of legitimate violence. He makes it a conditio sine qua non that Government (and in particular the top leadership of the Administration) adopts it and operationalizes it, as mandated by our current Constitution. Given the target date of 2046, this burden and responsibility will lie on President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and at least three more future Presidents. Their work is cut out for them: they must arrange for all government instrumentalities to work in close coordination and cooperation with all key sectors of the economy and society. Together, they must formulate the strategic vision for the country. Every six years, such a vision would need to be refreshed, considering developments that may have affected each of our economic resource bases (human, natural, and strategic location given the dynamics of the broader global environment). Jess is realistic enough, however, to state that if we are not so luckyas to elect as the nation’s chief executive the best possible candidate (as happens in many democratic countries), we can still attain our Dream PH 2046 vision. We just have to ensure that the best and brightest will lead most of our government economic agencies as we have already experienced in at least the last thirty years (with special mention of the present Administration). Despite our having witnessed different qualities of political leadership since at least the EDSA revolution, we have been fortunate enough to have enjoyed consistent high-quality leadership among our economic agencies. Needless to say, these competent and honest heads of the leading government economic agencies need, as Jess postulates, a “deeply committed leadership in other critical components of government and in other sectors of the economy and society.” It is the responsibility of every concerned citizen to contribute to a culture of excellence and good governance in as many sectors of society as possible to ensure that Philippine society will survive any future wrong choice of a President. This choice of the best and brightest to aid the Chief Executive must be cascaded to the Local Government levels. It is notable that the ICD and ISA that Jess founded and whose leadership was in the hands up to recently of now DTI Secretary Alfredo Pascual have devoted a great deal of time and effort to improve governance in a good number of cities and provinces that can now be considered as role models for other LGU units to emulate. For comments, my email address is bernardo.villegas@uap.asia https://mb.com.ph/2022/09/20/inclusive-economic-and-political-institutions-2/

Governance Commission for GOCCs: Restructuring of the Development Bank of the Philippines o July 25, 2022 o Memorandum Order No. 2022-03 o https://gcg.gov.ph/files/BVSfQxRjJXvFtDazRm6U.pdf Marcos appoints three more officials to key admin posts o “According to separate appointment letters from Marcos, Geraldine Marie Berberabe Martinez and Gideon de Villa Mortel were appointed as members of the Governance Commission for Government-Owned or Controlled Corporations (GOCC)” o September 16, 2022 o Inquirer.net: https://news info.inquirer.net/1665142/marcos-appoints-three-more- officials-to-key-admin-posts Securities and Exchange Commission: Guidelines on Arbitration of Intra-Corporate Disputes for Corporations o September 19, 2022 o Memorandum Circular No. 08 s. of 2022 o https://www.sec.gov.ph/mc-2022/mc-no-08-s-of-2022/ Rules on Qualified and/or Eligible Personal Equity and Retirement Account (PERA) Investment Products o August 26, 2022 o Memorandum Circular No. 07 s. of 2022 o https://www.sec.gov.ph/mc-2022/mc-no-07-s-of-2022/ Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas: Guidance on the Implementation of the Environmental and Social Risk Management (ESRM) System o September 29, 2022 o Memorandum No. M-2022-042 o https://www.bsp.gov.ph/Regulations/Issuances/2022/M-2022-042.pdf 2022 Guidance Paper on Targeted Financial Sanctions (TFS) Implementation Proprietary & Confidential o September 5, 2022 o Memorandum Circular No. M-2022-038 o https://www.bsp.gov.ph/Regulations/Issuances/2022/M-2022-038.pdf Guidelines on the Integration of Sustainability Principles in Investment Activities of Banks o August 23, 2022 o Circular 1149 o https://www.bsp.gov.ph/SitePages/Regulations/RegulationDisp.aspx?ItemId=477 Insurance Commission Adoption of Own Risk and Solvency Assessment Framework o August 26, 2022 o Advisory No. RS-2022-036 o https://www.insurance.gov.ph /advisory-no-rs-2022-036-adoption-of-own-risk-and- solvency-assessment-framework/ Compliance with the Banko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP)’s Memorandum No. M-2021-068 dated 20 December 2021, Enjoining all Banks to Comply with the Requests, Orders and Directives of the Insurance Commission o July 25, 2022 o Advisory No. RS-2022-031 o https: //www.insurance.gov.ph/advisory-no-rs-2022-031-compliance-with-the- banko-sentral-ng-pilipinas-bsps-memorandum-no-m-2021-068-dated-20- december-2021-enjoining-all-banks-to-comply-with-the-requests-orders-and- directi/ Participation to AMLC Webinars for Covered Entities o July 13, 2022 o Advisory No. RS-2022-024 o https://www.insurance.gov.ph /advisory-no-rs-2022-024-participation-to-amlc- webinars-for-covered-entities/

Strategy Execution Pathway (StEP) Essentials official banner (edited by: Rolyn May R. Galvez) Last September 13-14, the Institute of Corporate Directors conducted a meaningful and fruitful virtual event called the ‘Strategy Execution Pathway (StEP) Essentials’ with Mr. Rex C. Drilon II, FICD, and Mr. Geocel D. Olanday, FICD as the facilitators. The virtual event had an enriching exchange between Board Directors, Executives, and Senior and Junior Management from diverse backgrounds such as Government Owned and Controlled Corporations (GOCCs), Publicly Listed Companies, private companies, family-owned companies, and start-up Companies. On the first day, Mr. Rex Drilon II gave a lecture on corporate governance and shared his knowledge on developing a governance charter, and the value of reviewing a company’s strategy. In turn, the participants were given the opportunity to craft or re-visit existing governance charters. Mr. Rex Drilon II observed the breakout sessions and guided the participants on how to review and propose possible changes to their chosen governance charter and the identification of strategic objectives. After which, the workshop outputs of the breakout groups were given objective feedback from Mr. Drilon in which participants were imparted with the importance of good corporate governance and a better understanding of a governance charter. "How to realize that vision? We need to formulate a strategy." - Mr. Rex Drilon II On day two, Mr. Geocel Olanday shared the fundamentals of crafting a Balanced Scorecard and identifying strategic measures. The participants built on the work done on the first day with the governance charter by formulating a Balanced Scorecard including the setting of strategic measures and strategic initiatives. Mr. Geocel Olanday assisted participants during the breakout sessions to help frame their strategic measures with the yearly targets in mind leading up to the vision year. After the breakout sessions, the participants presented and received feedback from Mr. Geocel Olanday and had enlightening realizations on strategic outlooks which are measurable. “Setting measures, we believe here in ICD, can create a system of accountability.” - Mr. Geocel Olanday What are the Strategy Execution Pathway (StEP) Essentials all about? • An opportunity to learn about strategy design and execution based on the Balanced Scorecard. • An avenue to learn, gain insight, and feedback from facilitators well-experienced in the field. • A space to connect with like-minded people and collaborate during the workshops. Here are some testimonials from the participants who attended the two-day virtual event through Zoom: What did our participants share about our speakers? • The speaker is effective in helping the participants lay the foundation of corporate governance for both experts and newbies alike! • The speaker was able to convey his knowledge and ideas clearly, as well as in giving suggestions/comments on the presentation of participants. • Beautiful insights. Appreciated his joining the breakout groups to provide guidance. • Very informative. Kept the lecture so interesting. • The speaker is very knowledgeable about the topic and very engaging. How about the sessions? • I was able to improve my learning about the formulation of Corporate Mission, Vision, and Core Values as well as in crafting corporate strategic objectives which I can use and apply in my current work. About the facilitators Authors:

By: Senen Matoto June 12, 2022 1. The prospects for the recovery of the Philippines rests largely on the strength of the bounceback of businesses, large and small, from the ravages of the covid pandemic which forced the closures or slowdown of practically all of the approximately one million establishments in the country. Small businesses (MSMEs) in particular which comprise 99.5% of all enterprises and account for about 62% of total employment have been particularly hard hit. According to a 2021 ADB report, as much as 73% of MSMEs closed down barely a few weeks into the pandemic. To survive the ensuing liquidity crunch, MSMEs have either had to dip into their savings, borrow from informal 5/6 lenders or, for the fortunate few that had bank support, seek restructuring of their loans courtesy of the government mandated Barangay 1 & 2 economic relief legislation. The majority however had no savings or bank loans to lean on as even prior to the pandemic, the lack of financing has been cited as the major concern of MSMEs in the same ADB study 2. So why is this the case? Undoubtedly, it is already a given that banks are naturally risk averse because of their fiduciary responsibility to their depositors and would typically require hard collaterals like a real estate mortgage for a prospective borrower with no credit history particularly for a small business owner. Unsecured loans based primarily on established cash flows arising out of trade transactions is not a reality as far as MSMEs are concerned. Banks will always gravitate to safer risk assets such as big business lending, collateralized loans or government securities. Part of the problem rests with the entrepreneurs who likely run their businesses typical of most family owned enterprises with scant regard for proper governance and transparent financial reporting. 3. The government has long recognized this dilemma and has in fact instituted various measures in an attempt to provide support to MSMEs. The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) has various programs such as Go Negosyo for MSME training in product development and management and the MSME lending window of the Small Business Corporation. The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) in turn has issued circulars to encourage banks to lend to MSMEs by allowing these loans to be used as an alternative compliance to reserve requirements and has even mandated that at least 10% of the industry’s loan portfolio should be allocated to MSME borrowers failure of which will result in monetary penalties for the erring banks. Government’s primary credit institutions (DBP, Landbank and PhilGuarantee) also have their respective MSME programs. But unfortunately the banking industry has still fallen short of the apparent needs of the MSMEs. Of the total banking industry’s loan portfolio of P8.7 Trillion as of end 2021 only P463 Billion was lent out to MSMEs way below what should be at P857 Billion. This number however is of course much lower than the MSMEs actual funding needs. Not finding any data on this number, but to have a ballpark estimate of this segment’s total requirements, by inference, if MSMEs contribute about 35% (DTI 2020 data) of the country’s GDP then it probably should be reasonable to assume that their share of the country’s total funding needs is about the same. This comes out to about P4.7 trillion or about 10x more than actual loans extended by the banking industry to MSMEs. 4. But until such time that the MSMEs can demonstrate their adherence to good governance practices and proper financial reporting to provide comfort to prospective creditors, the banking industry will always be guarded as far as MSME loans are concerned. Private sector industry associations such as FINEX, MAP and ICD stand ready to provide support to improve governance through seminars, periodicals and coaching. Banks on the other hand must resort more aggressively to be comfortable with the use of technology to have a better grip on the merits of algorithmic digitally based micro lending. Apart from significant investments in technology, this suggests a high degree of systems interoperability among the market players to enable tracking and monitoring of retail and MSME commercial transactions. This kind of cooperation will probably be a challenging proposition as banks will be loath to share valuable client data to competitors. But certainly the BSP might be able to pry loose this self-serving industry constraint with properly timed circulars mandating gradual interoperability among the players. 5. However, a hopeful development that could accelerate MSME financing is the use of financial technology (fintech). Judging from the slew of digital banks and fintech companies (about 220 fintechs and six digital banks) which have recently opened up shop and have openly advocated financial inclusiveness, the only way their bricks-and-mortarless but technology powered (cloud data and big data analytics) business model could be competitive to the bigger banks and thrive is to focus on unsecured small ticket lending based on algorithmically established cash flows. This translates to MSME financing. Small business owners who buy and sell and transfer payments via the digital portals of these digital banks and fintechs will be able to build a history of their transactions that could give confidence to lenders in possession of such data. We need not look too far to see clear examples that attest to the viability of microlending via this mode. Our regional neighbor, Indonesia, whose demographics (significant underbanked population), widespread geographical features (17,508 islands), internet penetration (74% of population) and social aspirations for greater financial inclusion are very similar to ours. The fintech industry of Indonesia has been growing in leaps and bounds according to a 2021 ADB report which noted that as of end 2nd quarter 2020 there were already about 362 fintechs of which a handful have already reached unicorn status, i,e, $1Billion in market capitalization. 6. This business model could very well prosper in the Philippines. But to scale up, apart from investing in technology driven risk management systems, a major impediment will be funding for these digital banks and fintechs. Other than securing loans from the big banks which are likely eventually to be their competitors, as this source dries up, the capital markets could very much be a viable alternate source for the digital banks and fintechs. The capital market continues to be liquid with both retail and institutional investors eager to invest in safe but more attractively priced instruments other than just bank deposits. 7. Just how big is the capital market? As of second quarter 2021, the bond market reached P9.35 Trillion which is much larger than the entire banking industry loan portfolio of P8.7 Trillion as of end 2021. This means a liquidity of invested and loanable funds of about P18 Trillion.Total assets of the banking industry however for the same period was at P20.83 Trillion which suggests that another P2.8 Trillion are just in deposits. On the other hand, the outstanding MSME loans of P463 Billion end 2021 implies that access of small business borrowers is approximately only about 2% of the total financial system’s available liquidity. 8. So how can MSMEs tap this huge liquidity? Lenders and capital market investors are primarily concerned with Credit Risk, Yields and Liquidity which any funding scheme for MSMEs will need to address. On credit risk: what is perhaps not generally known by the market players is that the government has a formidable credit guarantee capacity in PhilGuarantee due largely to the government’s economic recovery response to the pandemic by significantly boosting its capitalization. Furthermore what is probably equally not appreciated is that a credit guarantee extended by PhilGuarantee is considered a sovereign risk exposure which means a zero risk rating, a valuable commodity for regulated financial institutions. And finally, perhaps the various primary microlenders such as rural banks, cooperatives and now digital banks and fintechs are not too fully aware that PhilGuarantee has a special window for MSME loans and that availing of its guarantee facility will ease up capital risks reserve requirements. 9. Currently, the allowable mode of accessing PhilGuarantee is via a guarantee facility for lenders under the supervision of the BSP to cover its exposure in government’s priority programs such as housing, agri-modernization, tourism, infrastructure, telecommunications and, renewable power and energy distribution. The coverage is premised on credit risk sharing with the private bank loan originators. PhilGuarantee can cover anywhere from 50% to 80% of the credit exposure in exchange for the private banks assigning and sharing pro-rata any collections or any credit support for the loans. The private banks should also have satisfactory CAMELS ratings with the BSP and acceptable credit risk taking process in place. 10. Other than the direct bond issuances of digital banks and fintechs in the capital market as well as other lending entities traditionally focused on MSMEs such as thrift, rural banks, microfinance entities and cooperatives that do not have the funding base of the banking behemoths, securitization of their loans is another mode of raising funding from the capital market. I believe the Securitization Act of 2004 which was enacted into law primarily to support the housing sector can also be applied to any other form of receivables including MSME loans. Securitization is essentially the assignment and pooling of loans and other receivables without recourse to the assignor (the originating lenders) into a Special Purpose Entity (SPE) which could be either a Special Purpose Corporation or a Special Purpose Trust (trust entity supervised by BSP). The SPE in turn can issue Asset Backed Securities (ABS) which have ownership over the underlying pool of receivables. These ABS will have to be credit rated and can be enhanced with structures such as a Senior Tranche which enables market investors to receive initial cash flows from collections and Subordinated Tranche held by the originator which provides a buffer for the senior tranche ABS investors since subordinated tranche holders only receive the residual cash flows after the senior tranche holders are repaid. 11. Other parties involved are: a servicing agent which shall collect, manage and administer all collections from the pool on behalf of the investors; and a secondary mortgage institution (SMI) which essentially is the SPE which can be the pooling entity purchasing receivables from any originators and also serve to provide a secondary market for the ABS. The Securitization Act provides various benefits such as tax exemptions from VAT, DST, and capital gains tax for any asset transfers into the SPE. For ABS of low income and socialized housing receivables, the interest income of these receivables are tax exempt for the investors. It also entitles the SPE to issue ABS and its own notes for the purpose of pooling receivables and not be subject to quasi- banking regulations such as reserve requirements and GRT. The act provides room for a government entity to participate in its ownership which presently is limited to not more than 30% of the SPE. Perhaps the incoming administration can evaluate the possibility of using any of the government financial institutions such as DBP or the Small Business Corporation to consider investing in an SPE dedicated primarily to promote greater MSME funding access from the capital market. 12. Another mode of enhancing the credit is to cover the ABS with a PhilGuarantee guarantee which essentially converts the exposure into a sovereign risk. Currently the limitation is that the investors of such PhilGuarantee enhanced ABS will have to also be financial institutions under the supervision of the BSP and insurance companies supervised by the Insurance Commissioner. This coverage I believe will include the trust departments which of course manage Unit Investment Trust Funds (UITFs) under a full discretionary structure that cater to the retail market. The securitization of a PhilGuarantee enhanced MSME ABS which is a sovereign risk exposure should prove to be an acceptable credit risk to capital market investors. 13. And in so far as distribution and liquidity issues are concerned, there will be no need for bricks-and-mortars branches to reach investors as digital banks and fintechs could now digitally issue bonds and ABS which the Philippine Dealing System Holdings (PDS Group) has recently made possible. Furthermore the listing of such instruments in the bond exchange of PDS will facilitate the secondary trading for any investor seeking an exit. 14. Finally, the yield of an enhanced MSME ABS will likely be attractive as the underlying MSME loan receivables carry generally a much higher yield compared to corporate issuances. Current corporate bond issues are typically priced at anywhere from 50 bps to 200 bps over the BVAL rates whereas MSME loans are probably priced easily at low double digit rates, providing a comfortable leeway for the primary lenders to sell at a premium to an SPE. For the primary lenders assigning a portion of their receivables to an SPE, other than recognizing upfront a premium, this will provide additional liquidity to enable additional loans to be generated. 15. There are however other issues to contend with such as the interoperability challenge and disinclination of the banking industry to share access to client information limiting the information flow to the digital banks and fintechs. There is also the Data Privacy law which is surely a formidable hurdle to overcome as customers may generally be reluctant to authorize sharing of their transactions data. But on the other hand, we have the Credit Information Corporation (CIC) which is the country’s sole public credit registry and sole repository of credit information. The law actually mandates submission by BSP supervised lenders of credit data which is a valuable tool for any lender serious about MSME lending. Interestingly, based on CIC’s April 2022 press release, their database already contains credit data on 33 million unique individuals. Then there is the enhanced Personal Property Act which provides legal protection to creditors holding on to assignment of personal properties such as purchase orders, trade receivables and the like further strengthening the credibility of the ABS. Bottomline, stimulating greater credit access to MSMEs can be formidable but with a concerted multisectoral effort and a proactive executive and legislative support, any hurdle can be overcome.

The Institute of Corporate Directors, in partnership with the Insurance Commission, will be holding the 2022 Annual Golden Arrow Awards for Insurance Companies. The GOLDEN ARROW is awarded to Insurance Commission Regulated Companies (ICRCs) that achieved a score of at least 80 points in the 2021 Corporate Governance Scorecard (CGS) Assessment. Five (5) levels of performance in corporate governance will be bestowed. Each ascending level is depicted by an increasing number of golden arrows, as follows: ACGS score of 80 to 89 points 1-arrow recognition ACGS score of 90 to 99 points 2-arrow recognition ACGS score of 100 to 109 points 3-arrow recognition ACGS score of 110 to 119 points 4-arrow recognition ACGS score of 120 to 130 points 5-arrow recognition The golden upward-pointing arrow symbolizes the continuing efforts of the Philippine companies to raise the level of compliance with the ASEAN corporate governance principles. This is a hybrid event. The awardees are invited to send at most two (2) representatives onsite. The ceremony will also be live-streamed via Zoom. To attend online, kindly send to cga@icd.ph your representatives' names and email addresses for the login credentials. PROGRAM When: 23 September 2022 (Friday), 2:00-4:00 pm Where: IIAP Main Function Hall, 26th floor of BPI-Philam Life Makati, 6811 Ayala Avenue, Salcedo Village, Bel-Air, Makati City (Live-streamed via Zoom) 2:00 - 2:05 Invocation & National Anthem 2:05 - 2:15 Message from the Insurance Commission Atty. Dennis B. Funa, FICD Insurance Commissioner 2:15 - 2:25 Message from the Institute of Corporate Directors Atty. Cesar L. Villanueva, FICD Chairman 2:25 - 2:40 Presentation of the 2021 CGS Results Ms. Rebecca G. Sarmenta, FICD Chair, CG Standards Committee 2:40 - 3:10 Recognition of Awardees 3:10 - 3:15 ICD & IC Commercial 3:15 - 3:45 Message from the 3-Golden Arrow Awardees 3:45 - 3:50 Message from the Most Improved Company 3:50 - 4:00 Closing Remarks Mr. Carlos Jose P. Gatmaitan, PhD, FICD Chief Executive Officer, ICD

Investing in the stock market, particularly for the ordinary Juan, is to a great extent akin to a leap of blind faith in the prospects of a publicly listed corporation. With limited information to rely on, you part with your hard earned money, expecting that the company you bet on has controlling shareholders and management who will always have your best interests at heart, even if you are merely a miniscule shareholder. And you pin your hopes on their integrity and expertise that every corporate decision made will redound to the benefit of all stakeholders and not just for a limited few. History, unfortunately, is replete with failures of publicly listed businesses that have cost investors plenty, caused by a myriad of factors. These include an incompetent management, lack of transparency, self-serving decisions, or just plain inability to promptly respond to adverse industry developments. Consequently, for most investors, stock market investing is tantamount to taking your chances at the casino. And yet, Capital Markets 101 teaches us how crucial the development of the stock market is to businesses, which need not debt but equity to fund growth in order to deliver attractive returns for the shareholders, to employ more people and to fuel the economic and social well-being of a country. Government regulators, multilateral organizations and institutional investors have long recognized this dilemma and have jointly encouraged the development of corporate governance tools to address these concerns. One such initiative is the ASEAN Corporate Governance Scorecard, a joint project of the Asian Development Bank and the ASEAN Capital Markets Forum. This provides guidance to PLCs across the region on international corporate governance best practices, and publicizes the metrics of these corporations’ adherence to such practices. The ACGS was formulated based on the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s Five Principles of the hallmarks of good corporate governance. These are: Rights of shareholders; equitable treatment of shareholders; role of stakeholders; disclosure and transparency; and, board responsibility. For the Philippines, these OECD governance principles are integrated with our country’s unique circumstances and articulated in detail in the Security and Exchange Commission’s Code of Corporate Governance, which mandates compliance (or an explanation, if not compliant) and annual reporting of PLCs and public companies (unlisted firms with assets of P50 million, but with 200 shareholders owning at least 100 equity securities). These submissions are publicly available, but I would imagine hardly any investor, much less an ordinary Juan, would bother wading into the websites of these PLCs or the SEC to check to what extent are the compliances. A much more convenient reference for investors would be a scorecard that rates the different PLCs based on publicly available data, such as annual reports and corporate websites, announcements and minutes of shareholders’ meetings. In this regard, since 2015, six participating countries, namely the Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam, have been biennially assessed, compared with its regional peers, and publicized the scorecards of the top 50 PLCs in the region. Based on market capitalization, the largest 100 PLCs of each country are initially selected for assessments by the respective domestic ranking bodies of the six participating countries. For the Philippines, this is the Institute of Corporate Directors, the country’s pioneer non-profit organization advocating good corporate governance by raising the standards of Philippine corporates to conform with international best practices and to enhance the level of good governance expertise of board directors and senior management. The results of the DRBs assessments are then validated by regional peers to ensure objectivity and faithful conformance to the ACGS scoring matrix. How did the Philippines fare compared to our neighbors? (To be continued) Until next week, OBF! *** For comments, email bing_matoto@yahoo.com. Published on 13 September 2022 10:00 PM via https://tribune.net.ph/2022/09/13/scorecard-for-publicly-listed-firms-1/?amp=1 By Bing Matoto

Good day! We are pleased to announce that we will be having our 2022 ICD Invitational Golf Tournament In Honor of Amb. Cesar B. Bautista on 28 October 2022 at the Manila Golf and Country Club. The tournament is a fund-raising event to bolster ICD’s Research and Development capability to compile best corporate governance practices and statistics for the benefit of our members and stakeholders. After the two-year hiatus caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, we aim to make this golf tournament really enjoyable to all participants. The tournament shall be open to all ICD members and their guests. Each participant will be treated to food, drinks, entertainment, giveaways and raffle prizes. Tourney winners will receive attractive trophies and special prizes. Be a Sponsor Please see our sponsorship packages by clicking here. You may select the sponsorship package most suitable to your needs in the attached list. We look forward to your participation and sponsorship to ensure that the resumption of our golf tournament will be a huge success. Please get in touch with Zy Mendoza at via email at zmendoza@icd.ph if you need more information. We look forward to your participation in the 2022 ICD Invitational Golf Tournament.

On August 31, 2022, Dream Philippines 2046, a proposed roadmap for the Philippines and the Filipino up to the year 2046 was presented to an online audience via Zoom by Founder and Chairman Emeritus of Institute of Corporate Directors (ICD) and Institute of Solidarity of Asia (ISA), Dr. Jesus P. Estanislao, FICD, and Former ICD Chairman Mr. Rex C. Drilon II, FICD Dr. Estanislao, introduced Our Dream Philippines 2046 (Dream PH) as an action-oriented roadmap wherein the Filipino people would holistically contribute to the betterment of the country through good governance. Since the roadmap spans over two decades, Dr. Estanislao indicated that base camps have been established to track the progress of this long-term plan. Furthermore, he also enumerated eight facets of national governance which the public could contribute to through joining the initiatives of ICD and ISA. In addition, Mr. Drilon II, FICD first contextualized Dream PH by illustrating the state of the nation in terms of the country’s economic environment, political environment, and social environment. He also expounded on Dream PH by presenting its values, vision, and mission, detailing the milestones that must be achieved for each of the indicated base camps, and enumerating the strategic objectives that could be developed under each of the facets listed by Dr. Estanislao. Finally, he presented how the roadmaps could be transformed into actions aimed towards achieving measurable goals and discussed the next steps to be taken in launching Dream PH. Overall, Dream Philippines 2046 showed that the attempts to change the state of the Philippines is a long-term endeavor. Apart from the aspect of time, this roadmap is even more daunting to accomplish because it is a large-scale project that targets the improvement of the whole nation. Given its challenging nature, both Dr. Estanislao and Mr. Drilon II strongly emphasized the importance of all Filipinos’ efforts so that the Philippines that we dream of could become a reality. Key points: ● The eight facets of national governance, as listed by Dr. Estanislao, are the following: (1) moral-spiritual, (2) political, (3) socio-cultural, (4) human resources, (5) natural resources, (6) physical infrastructure, (7) digital infrastructure, and (8) financial-economic infrastructure. ● Both ICD and ISA provide avenues for Filipinos to contribute to the project through the eight facets of national governance. ● The Center for Excellence in Governance has a personal governance paradigm that they advocate for. Everyone is encouraged to “learn, adopt, and observe” this paradigm as it may be beneficial to the country. Click Here to watch the event's recording

Published February 25, 2022, 12:51 AM by James A. Loyola The Institute of Corporate Directors has inducted Ayala Corporation Chairman Jaime Augusto Zobel de Ayala as Honorary Fellow for his “lifelong commitment to promoting the highest standards of governance among Philippine corporations.” “JAZA has shown the light to all the governance principles with their associated best practices demanded by the imperative of attaining the aspirations of Filipinos under Dream Philippines by 2040,” said ICD Founder and Chairman Emeritus Dr. Jesus Estanislao. He added that, “We are gathered here this morning to say: we wish to be guided by such light, and by the lifelong example Mr. Jaime Augusto Zobel de Ayala has been giving us.” The Honorary Fellow is the highest conferment that the ICD gives. It is bestowed by the ICD Board to distinguished personalities, in recognition of their significant contributions to corporate governance advocacy. Ayala Corporation has two out of five honorary fellows in ICD. Zobel is joined by Antonino Aquino, former President and CEO of Ayala Land. Aquino is a Director of ALI since April 2009 and Manila Water Company since 1998. The other three ICD honorary fellows are Amb. Jose L. Cuisia Jr., Dr. Cesar Saldaña, and former Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Governor Amando Tetangco Jr. In his remarks, Zobel vowed to continue implementing and promoting the highest standard of governance across the Ayala group. Now more than ever, Zobel added, private companies play a huge role in building a more equitable and truly progressive capitalist system for the greater good. “I believe that corporate directors and the boards are in the forefront of this campaign for an improved system,” he said. Zobel noted that, “Corporate directors have tremendous power to reshape the capitalist system through their companies. And I believe that we currently have a golden opportunity here in the Philippines to accelerate this movement.” He cited the success of Ayala Land in expanding its product lines from mainly luxury offerings to more diverse residential portfolio, more accessible commercial spaces, and more sustainable mixed-use and tourism districts. “Our younger companies are already embracing this thinking. ACEN is leading the shift towards a fully renewable portfolio, while conserving and supporting the surrounding communities in its facilities,” Zobel said. The Ayala Chair also pointed out that, “AC Health continues to be a vital part of the COVID-19 campaign, and also in the advocacy to make healthcare accessible for all. The IFC’s recent investment in Ayala’s first social bond – which is centered around healthcare – is a testament that perhaps we are on the right track in integrating social outcomes and creating value.” Last year, Ayala committed to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, aligning its business strategy with the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C compared to pre-industrial levels. Ayala is the first Philippine company to make such a commitment. Ayala is also the only Filipino company-member of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, an international coalition of businesses aiming to create a world where “more than 9 billion people are able to live well within planetary boundaries, by 2050.” Meanwhile, last year, Zobel was appointed as part of the board of Singapore-based firm Temasek Holdings Ltd. – a global investment company owned by the Singaporean government. He also joined the Council for Inclusive Capitalism with the Vatican, a global nonprofit coalition of business and public sector leaders working to build a “more trusted, fair, responsible, dynamic, and sustainable economic system that addresses the needs of people and planet.” Photos during the event

ICD’s Courtesy Call with the Insurance Commission and Presentation of 2021 ACGS Results Last March 28, 2022, the Institute of Corporate Directors Philippines had a courtesy call with the Insurance Commission. ICD’s Atty. Cesar L. Villanueva, FICD, Chairman, Dr. Carlos Jose P. Gatmaitan, FICD, CEO, Cathyrine Perez, Director for Corporate Governance Advocacy, Roberto T. Bascon, Jr., AICD, Director for Faculty, Research and Development, Mariella Racxine Ramintas, Corporate Governance Assessment Lead, and JB Emmanuel De Guzman, Corporate Governance Assessment Lead for Insurance Companies visited the Commission’s office. IC’s Atty. Dennis Funa, FICD, Commissioner, Atty. Albert Lawrence Vinzon, Division Manager, Anti-Money Laundering and Corporate Governance Division, Atty. Randy G. Serrano, Deputy Insurance Commissioner, Legal Services Group, Arturo S. Trinidad II, Officer In-Charge/IC Director II, Technical Services Group, Mr. Ferdinand George A. Florendo, Deputy Insurance Commissioner, Financial Examination Group, Atty. Czarina Pablo- Nepomuceno, Division Manager (Chief-of-Staff), were present during the meeting. The insurance industry has been subjected to an annual assessment of its covered companies’ corporate governance practices since its adoption of the ASEAN Corporate Governance Scorecard (ACGS) in 2015. Ms. Perez presented to the Commission the 2021 ACGS performance results of the insurance industry. There were 112 Insurance Companies and MBAs assessed using the ASEAN Corporate Governance Scorecard in 2021. Majority of the assessed companies belongs to the non-life sector with 52 companies, followed by the life sector with 30 companies, and the MBAs with 30 companies. This year’s assessment also included 2 companies whose websites were inaccessible or is under construction on the date of the assessment. In the last six years, the industry has continuously improved its performance with the average score of 45.9 points in the 2020 assessment. For this year’s assessment, the average score of 112 companies is 51.56 points, a 5.66 increase from last year’s average score. In general, almost all sections for this year’s assessment improved in their scores, except for the Part C, Roles of Stakeholders. The industry performed well on the Rights of Shareholders, Equitable Treatment of Shareholders, and Responsibilities of the Board. However, the industry still needs to improve in the rest of the sections of the scorecard. Disclosure of corporate governance-related documents should be given special attention. Due to the lockdowns, quarantines, and new infections everyday caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the assessment observed many companies have not made available the 2020 Annual Report, Notice and the Minutes of the most recent Annual Stockholders/General Meeting, and their Board Charter or the Manual of Corporate Governance on their websites. These documents are critical to all areas for the ACGS assessment. Information on the companies’ policies and activities relating to other stakeholders especially those mentioned in the ACGS i.e., customers, suppliers, environment, community, government, creditors, and employees are still lacking for this year. Conducting such activity or event for the companies’ stakeholders’ might be a little risky due to the infectious disease that is spreading in the country. Disclosure and transparency are two major demands of corporate governance and are deterrents of corporate fraud and malpractice. Many company websites do not have sufficient disclosure on the company’s corporate governance practices. Few companies have published an Annual Report. For this assessment year, the insurance companies are now required by the Insurance Commission to disclose and present their Annual Corporate Governance Report or the ACGR. The assessment observed that this presentation of the ACGR helped the whole sector to improve and increase their average score. ACGS Workshop for Insurance Companies Considering these results, the Institute of Corporate Directors (ICD), in partnership with the Insurance Commission conducted three sessions of workshop on June 21, 22 and July 29, about the ASEAN Corporate Governance Scorecard (ACGS) items and how to respond to recommendations in the Annual Corporate Governance Report (ACGR) as mandated by the Insurance Commission to be submitted by Insurance Companies on or before May 30 th of each year. This was attended by a total of 128 companies with a total of 145 participants. Atty. Atty. Albert Lawrence A. Vinzon, Division Manager, Anti-Money Laundering and Corporate Governance Division of Insurance Commission gave his opening remarks. Atty. Juan Sotero Roman of FWD Life Insurance Corporation, Ms. Jennifer O. Redublo of CARD Mutual Benefit Association, Inc., Mr. Raul Tumangday & Ms. Regina Ramos of National Reinsurance Corporation of the Philippines, and Ms. Mary Magdalene Flores of Knights of Columbus Fraternal Association of the Philippines shared their respective corporate governance journeys. The workshop was hosted by Ms. Cathyrine P. Perez, Director of Corporate Governance Advocacy Department of ICD. Atty. Albert Lawrence Vinzon started off the event by mentioning that the Insurance Commission aims to have all its regulated entities are committed to good corporate governance and should ensure that the needs and interests of all stakeholders are met in a balanced and transparent manner. He also pointed out that the ACGS and ACGR results are aimed to enhance the competitiveness of the Insurance Industry in the region, improve public perception towards the industry and increase the industry’s penetration rate. Lastly, Atty. Vinzon acknowledged that participating in this workshop is a huge step in or corporate governance principles and practices as well being updated to latest news and regulatory compliance issued by the Insurance Commission. For the main course of the workshop, Director of ICD's Faculty, Research & Development Department Mr. Roberto T. Bascon, Jr. contributed as the resource speaker tackled about the ACGS and ACGR items, but he initially noted what OECD claimed that the poor corporate governance has been the major culprit for the Asian financial crisis and for the Global financial crisis in 2008. In addition to this, having good corporate governance is for the protection of stakeholder interests and to generate sustainable high-level performance. Mr. Bascon then showcased an ACGS Correlation Study of 2018 having a positive and statistically significant relationship between corporate governance and a couple of variables such as market capitalization, Tobin’s Q Ratio, and profitability as measured by return on equity. Next to this is the Philippine Insurance Industry’s penetration rate compared to other ASEAN countries having 1.67% in 2020 against 1.60% from Indonesia, 5% from Malaysia, and 10.90% from Singapore. Clearly, there is a need to improve and that is through improvement in the perception of the public to insurance companies, as per Mr. Bascon. Corporate Social Responsibility commitments by the companies also adds up to the trust put by the public to them as presented in the workshop. Legal documents were then presented to the audience such as CL No. 31-2005, CL No. 2020-71, and CL No. 2020-72. Key items of ACGS were highlighted by Mr. Robert Bascon starting off with the introduction of what is a CG Scorecard, which is a developmental tool to measure the observance of Standards of Corporate Governance by the companies and presenting that the ASEAN Corporate Governance Scorecard (ACGS) is based on OECD principles and practices. Key documents were also presented to be noted by the insurance companies prior to the beginning of annual assessment together with the assessment methodology. From thereon, the main purpose of the workshop commenced as Mr. Bascon lectured about the items of ACGS and have a question-and-answer portions as the workshop continues. First to digest in was the Insurance Industry performance and its ACGS results for the past several years. Followed by general findings and observations regarding the improvement in some sectors as well as the reasons for the decrease in scores of other companies. In every end of section in ACGS, there was a summary of items which needs to be addressed in relation to ACGR having the highest number of companies who did not comply for the 2020 operations. Some notable ideas Mr. Bascon shared was in terms of environmental issues wherein humans are now consuming at a rate of 1.8 of the Planet Earth just to provide the resources that we need and to absorb our wastes and by 2030, it will be at a rate of 2x of the Planet Earth as scientists says. And the question is, where can we find the second Planet Earth? And so, the main concern here was to address environmental issues and adopt sustainable development as what ACGS is assessing in an urgent manner. The next thing pointed out in the workshop was the challenges encountered in the assessment such as unavailability of key documents, company websites’ not working, outdated disclosures, etc. In relation to ACGS, ACGR was also a key document in assessing CG performance of each Insurance Company, therefore, it was also the main highlight of the workshop on how to properly accomplish the said document and it was then distinguished the difference between ACGS and ACGR. Having said that the ACGS is a developmental tool to measure the CG performance of companies while ACGR is the medium to disclose Insurance Commission Regulated Companies’ (ICRCs) compliance or non-compliance with the recommendations provided under Revised Code of Corporate Governance for ICRCs. General findings and observation were also presented regarding the 2020 ACGR results in Insurance industry. The workshop was followed by insightful sharing of some Insurance Companies and Mutual Benefit Associations. Atty. Juan Sotero Roman of FWD Life Insurance Corporation pointed out that the main challenge in complying with the ACGS and ACGR items comes down to the technological matters such as maintenance of company website. The next company to present was one from MBA sector who was CARD Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. represented by Ms. Jennifer Redublo sharing their corporate governance journey as they strive for better performance even having experienced technological challenges as well. Mr. Raul Tumangday & Ms. Regina Ramos of National Reinsurance Corporation of the Philippines showcased their achievements and on how good corporate governance impacted their journey to success and translate it to good business. They were then followed by Ms. Mary Magdalene Flores of Knights of Columbus Fraternal Association of the Philippines showcasing their good performance for the past couple of years and on how they practice good corporate governance. In closing, Dr. Carlos Jose P. Gatmaitan, FICD, CEO of Institute of Corporate Directors, acknowledged the presence of all insurance companies who attended the workshop and sincerely thanked the speakers especially Mr. Robert Bascon of ICD and the presence of Atty. Albert Lawrence Vinzon of Insurance Commission. Also, he thanked the efforts of insurance companies and MBAs who shared their corporate governance journeys and challenges which gave a more meaningful workshop. He then reiterated that good corporate governance is very highly correlated to sustainability as well as market capitalization, market value, and even income profitability of companies. Dr. Gatmaitan ended with the quote that this workshop is not the end but rather the start and it takes years through consistent participation in sessions for the continuous improvement of company’s [corporate governance] performance in coordination with Insurance Commission and going beyond just being satisfied with compliance but applying the best practices for performance, sustainability, and all. The Institute of Corporate Directors Philippines and the Insurance Commission are hoping that through this workshop, the companies will be equipped for the next assessment and will see improvements in their corporate governance performance. They are also currently in the process of preparing for the 2021 ACGS Assessment Golden Arrow Recognition to be held on September 23, 2022 to recognize the companies’ efforts in the most recent assessment and to encourage better performance for the insurance companies. Photos during the event