We permit the publication of our auditors’ report, provided the report is published in full only and is accompanied by the full financial statements to which our auditors’ report relates, and is only published on an access-controlled page on your website, to enable users to verify that an auditors’ report by independent accountants has been commissioned by the directors and issued. Such permission to publish is given by us without accepting or assuming any responsibility or liability to any third party users save where we have agreed terms with them in writing.

Our consent is given on condition that before any third party accesses our auditors’ report via the webpage they first document their agreement to the following terms of access to our report via a click-through webpage with an 'I accept' button. The terms to be included on your website are as follows:

I accept and agree for and on behalf of myself and the Trust I represent (each a "recipient") that:

  1. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) accepts no liability (including liability for negligence) to each recipient in relation to PwC’s report. The report is provided to each recipient for information purposes only. If a recipient relies on PwC’s report, it does so entirely at its own risk;
  2. No recipient will bring a claim against PwC which relates to the access to the report by a recipient;
  3. Neither PwC’s report, nor information obtained from it, may be made available to anyone else without PwC’s prior written consent, except where required by law or regulation; and
  4. PwC’s report was prepared with Hermes Property Unit Trust's interests in mind. It was not prepared with any recipient's interests in mind or for its use. PwC’s report is not a substitute for any enquiries that a recipient should make. The financial statements are as at 25 March 2017, and thus PwC’s auditors’ report is based on historical information. Any projection of such information or PwC’s opinion thereon to future periods is subject to the risk that changes may occur after the reports are issued and the description of controls may no longer accurately portray the system of internal control. For these reasons, such projection of information to future periods would be inappropriate.
  5. PwC will be entitled to the benefit of and to enforce these terms.
I accept

1. Select your country

  • United Kingdom
  • Austria
  • Australia
  • Belgium
  • Denmark
  • Finland
  • France
  • Germany
  • Iceland
  • Ireland
  • Italy
  • Luxembourg
  • Netherlands
  • Norway
  • Singapore
  • Spain
  • Sweden
  • Switzerland
  • USA
  • Other

2. Select your investor type

  • Financial Advisor
  • Discretionary Investment Manager
  • Wealth Manager
  • Family Office
  • Institutional Investor
  • Investment Consultant
  • Charity, Foundation & Endowment Investor
  • Retail Investor
  • Press
  • None of the above

3. Accept our terms and conditions

By clicking Proceed I confirm I have read the important information and agree to the terms of use.


The Hermes Investment Management website uses cookies to remember your preferences and help us improve the site.
By proceeding, you agree to cookies being placed on your computer.
Read our privacy and cookie notices.

Diversity requires quotas

Part 1 of the Alastair Ross Goobey Debate

Home / EOS Blog / Diversity requires quotas – Part 1 of the Alastair Ross Goobey Debate

On 11 April 2016, we hosted the Alastair Ross Goobey Debate in honour of the former CEO of Hermes Investment Management who played a leading role in establishing stewardship practices in UK companies. This year, we debated divestment of fossil fuels and diversity and quotas. I took part in the latter and outlined why in my view quotas are necessary to increase diversity in the boardroom of companies, at senior management levels and beyond.

So why does diversity require quotas? Why does change need to be imposed?  Can it not occur naturally?

Addressing groupthink
I believe that quotas are one of the most effective ways to address a weakness that has significant impact on the performance of companies – groupthink. This practice may lead to a lack of support for innovative ideas, disregard for demanding analyses and decisions being taken without challenge. The situation is particularly worrying when groupthink takes place at the board level, which is at the heart of a company’s corporate governance.

Conditions for change
Despite numerous studies showing that diversity leads to better performance[1], scepticism about diversity has remained.

Change does not happen on its own, and if it ever does, it takes a long time, like evolution. Therefore, we need to create the conditions for change to take place swiftly. Even then, the way to diversity may be long and windy.

For example, Denmark granted women suffrage in 1915, followed by Canada in 1915, the UK and Ireland in 1918 and Japan in 1947. This movement culminated in 1948 with the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the UN, which stated that The will of the people shall be expressed in elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage." Still, Switzerland only granted women the right to vote in 1971 after rejecting it in a referendum 12 years earlier. It took the country 23 years to come to terms with universal suffrage.

Creating momentum
However, quotas challenge the status quo. They serve to create momentum for change in our lifetime.

But quotas are a means and not an end. They are an external force and attempt to create momentum even when there is resistance to change, something we have observed at some company boards.

Initially, I was against quotas. However, I changed my mind at an event at the Bombay Stock Exchange earlier this year.

In 2013, the Indian Parliament enacted a new Companies Act requiring all listed companies to have at least one woman on the board. However, that just prompted some companies to appoint the nearest woman in sight. My reaction was that quotas are bad because we end up having unsuitable people in the job.

But I was enlightened by a number of experts at the conference. They said that without this change in law, no one would even think about what type of skill sets are required at boards, let alone take action. So sometimes there is a need for what can be perceived as an extreme push to affect change.

Quotas create the necessary momentum for the destruction of the status quo to allow a new environment to rise from the ashes of the old system, one that suits the ethos and values of the 21st century.

The motion again quotas will be published shortly.



[1] McKinsey (2007) Women Matters

Credit Suisse (2012) Does Gender Diversity Improve Performance?

Thomson Reuters (2013) Mining the metrics of board diversity

Grant Thornton (2014) Women in Business: From Classroom to Boardroom

MSCI (2014) Survey of Women on Boards

Cumming, Leung and Rui (2014) Gender diversity and securities fraud

Morgan Stanley (2016) A Framework for Gender Diversity in the Workplace

Virgin Money (2016) Empowering productivity

    Share this post:
    Christine Chow Dr Christine Chow manages the team of engagement associates at Hermes EOS and is responsible for the financial services, technology and extractive sectors in Asia ex-Japan. She has over 20 years of experience in portfolio management, research and investment consulting. Christine's PhD thesis on shareholder engagement for responsible investment was short-listed for a UN award in Sweden for industry relevance and academic excellence. Christine is a member of the Court of Governors of the London School of Economics and a member of the School’s Investment Sub-Committee.  She was an adjunct associate professor in the Department of Finance at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. She was also a member of the greater China committee of the Hong Kong Retirement Funds Association between 2014-2016. Christine has worked at a number of multinational corporations such as Merrill Lynch, Schroders and Hewitt. In the 1990s, she was responsible for establishing strategic partnerships in fund management for the Schroders Group, especially in Mainland China. Christine is a graduate of the London School of Economics and the University of Melbourne. She also completed an executive education course on financial engineering at Stanford University.
    Read all articles by Christine Chow

    Find posts by author

    • Alex Knox, ACA
    • Andrew Jackson
    • Bill Mackenzie
    • Bruce Duguid
    • Christine Chow
    • Claire Gavini
    • Colin Melvin
    • Darren Brady
    • Dominic Burke
    • Dr Michael Viehs
    • Emeric Chenebaux
    • Emma Hunt
    • Geoffrey Wan, CFA
    • Hans-Christoph Hirt
    • Harriet Steel
    • Ilana Elbim
    • Jaime Gornsztejn
    • Jonathan Pines, CFA
    • Joseph Buckley
    • Justine Lutterodt
    • Leon Kamhi
    • Louise Dudley
    • Mark Sherlock, CFA
    • Maxine Wille
    • Michael Russell, CFA
    • Michael Vaughan
    • Michael Viehs
    • Natacha Dimitrijevic
    • Nick Spooner
    • Nina Röhrbein
    • Peter Hofbauer
    • Philip Nell
    • Rochelle Giugni
    • Roland Bosch
    • Sachi Suzuki
    • Saker Nusseibeh
    • Silvia Dall’Angelo
    • Tatiana Bosteels
    • Tim Goodman
    • Tommaso Mancuso
    • Yasmin Chowdhury

    Find posts by category

    • eos
    • governance
    • social
    • stewardship