[Hilary Waterman specialises in communications and is an avid traveller who enjoys exploring new cities. She was a student on the City, University of London Writing for Business short course in January-March 2020. Hilary wrote this blog as part of a homework/in-class exercise on that course.]
Author’s note: The views expressed in this piece reflect those of the author, not Savills Investment Management.
In a letter to investors in 2018, Laurence D. Fink, CEO of BlackRock – the world’s largest asset manager – wrote:
Society is demanding that companies, both public and private, serve a social purpose. … To prosper over time, every company must not only deliver financial performance, but also show how it makes a positive contribution to society.
Laurence D Fink, BlackRock CEO, January 2018
We are in the midst of a sea change in how companies conduct business and plan for long-term growth. ‘Doing good’ may have been an activity conventionally pursued by nonprofits looking to better the world. But due to a confluence of factors including globalisation, socially conscious Millennials and the ever-increasing gulf between the haves and have-nots, impact-driven investment has landed squarely on the agenda of profit-driven businesses too. As much as personal values are fuelling this behaviour, society and the environment are demanding it.
Welcome to the latest Prism-Clarity round-up of key announcements and developments in UK financial risk and regulation.
This time I didn’t wait a whole year before penning an update. Still, six months is a fair stint to cover. As promised last time, in future we are aiming to resume doing this update quarterly – or at least more frequently than six monthly.
As last time, given the long coverage period the reporting is selective and summarised. So I present the usual curated links to underlying source stories or documents for the reader who wants more detail; including publications and announcements from individual regulators’ websites.
Also please note: I am not ignoring the virus, but trying to abstract from it, so far as possible, and look beyond it to take into account topics and concerns that there were there before it – and will still be here after it.
*** Note: The articles in this blog do not constitute advice, but please contact me here for further information, including where to get the best advice. ***
Only last year, debates over the correctness or incorrectness of written language use made front page news.
Jacob Rees-Mogg’s style guide for his staff prompted more column inches than most linguists, grammarians or copy editors would have thought possible on such a dry topic. Including some from this commentator. Not all the opinions were complimentary.
And I don’t really like adding to the tally of column inches on JRM.
But the debate prompted me to revisit a visual tool I use in my shortcourse classes at City, University of London to try to help students conceptualise the idea of correctness.
When is it legitimate to challenge something on grounds that it’s incorrect? And when is it not?
Prism-Clarity provides high-quality professional writing, editorial and training services for financial sector and other clients