MALTA for EU companies, a place to be

MALTA for EU companies, a place to be

4 of every 5 companies plan to still be in Malta 10 years from now

A total 79 per cent of companies currently operating in Malta predict they will still be on the island in 10 years time, EY’s Malta Attractiveness Survey 2016 has found.

This was an eight per cent increase over last year’s figure.

Trasferire a Malta la residenza, la tua vita, i tuoi familiari, il tuo business, il tuo patrimonio, significa migliorare la gestione del tuo rischio

Corporate & Assets Governance, World Class, MALTA, Worldwide


“The ability to commit to Malta over such a time frame is considered to be the successful direct result of Malta’s consistently positive performance over a number of years in various areas,” the report says.

But EY’s report also found that business confidence in the stability and transparency of Malta’s political, legal and regulatory environment has plummeted by 15 per cent since last year.

EY’s report found that:

  • 87 per cent of investors find Malta to be an attractive location to do business in.
  • 58 per cent believe Malta will remain attractive in three years’ time. 39 per cent were non-committal on the issue.
  • More than half of those surveyed said they intended to expand their operations in Malta within a year.

The report found that Malta’s corporate taxation structure continues to be the most attractive parameter to attract Foreign Direct Investment. The country’s social climate was also a significant draw, as was its political stability and transparency, despite the aforementioned 15 per cent drop.

On the other hand, Malta’s domestic market, its underdeveloped research & development and innovation market and transport infrastructure were the three key areas highlighted as weaknesses in attracting FDI.

iGaming continues to be the business sector most respondents believed would dominate the local market (71 per cent), followed by ICT and telecoms (50 per cent), fund administration (46 per cent), and asset management (46 per cent).

All respondents from the banking sector believe that asset management will be the sector leader in the near future.

Even though the property and real estate sector is widely thought of as an economic driver, few foreign direct investors thought so

Even though the property and real estate sector is widely thought of as an economic driver, few foreign direct investors thought so.

This sector was ranked third-from-last (with 29 per cent of mentions), followed by pensions (28 per cent) and trust administration (23 per cent).

Although iGaming continued to top the list of sectors (an increase of 11 points over last year’s results) respondents believe it will drive Malta’s growth into the future, but was still considered to be relatively easy for the sector to leave Malta’s jurisdiction.

On the other hand, the regulatory stability and competitive legislative framework, as well as additional inter-linkages being built with locally-based companies providing services to such iGaming companies, make it more attractive to remain and continue to invest in Malta.

Similarly, ICT and telecoms were seen by existing investors to be important for Malta in the future, as are areas in the wider financial services field.

Malta’s experience in these areas had to be emulated in the new sectors, which had been on the radar for the last few years, including FinTech, commodities trading, logistics, other ancillary offerings for Asian e-commerce, and sustainable transport solutions.

The majority of surveyed investors thought Malta would still be attractive for FDI in three years’ time. Those holding the opposite view were relatively small (four per cent).

Sixty-six per cent of the financial services and 56 per cent of manufacturing respondents believed Malta would still be an attractive destination for investment in three years’ time.

Greater uncertainty was present in other sectors, such as iGaming, telecoms and ICT with half the respondents from sectors not able to reply to this question.

Although this lack of certainty might be of concern, there was an increase of six points in the yes responses for these industries when compared to last year’s results.

Investor concerns were mainly focused on Malta’s ability to retain its fiscal independence in setting tax legislation and the availability of skilled human resources in certain industries.

 From Times of Malta


Index Funds Are Fueling Out-of-Whack CEO Pay Packages

Index Funds Are Fueling Out-of-Whack CEO Pay Packages

CEOs get paid handsomely. The pay of top managers has risen faster than those of other star earners. Often they’re paid generously even as the firms they head underperform relative to their peers.

Such performance-insensitive pay packages seem to defy both common sense and established economic theory on optimal incentives. Top management compensation packages guarantee a high level of pay, but are often only weakly linked to the performance of the firm relative to its industry competitors. Why, then, do company boards and shareholders of most firms approve those packages?

maltaway_balattiboardmember_USD death



Transfer to Malta your residence, your life, your family, your business, your wealth and assets, means improving your risk mitigation strategy

Corporate & Assets Governance, World Class, MALTA, Worldwide

We propose an answer to that question in our new research paper. By endorsing performance-insensitive compensation packages, broadly diversified investors are indeed incentivizing CEOs for good performance. Except that the performance that they’re rewarding is industry performance, not company performance. Why? These days, most firms’ most powerful shareholders tend to benefit more from the performance of the entire industry than the performance of an individual firm.

To understand this new explanation for seemingly exorbitant CEO pay, it’s important to understand a recent, fundamental shift in the ownership of U.S. public companies. Nowadays, the same handful of large, diversified asset management companies controls a significant proportion of US corporations.

For example, BlackRock is the largest shareholder of about one in five publicly-listed US corporations, often including the largest competitors in the same industry. Similarly, Fidelity is the largest shareholder of one in ten public companies and frequently owns stakes of 10-15% or more. Even Bill Gates’ ownership of about 5% of Microsoft’s stock is small compared to the top five diversified institutional owners’ holdings, which amount to more than 23%.

Magnifying their already large individual power, large asset managers also appear to coordinate many corporate governance activities, including those regarding compensation. The potential of coordination among BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street is particularly potent given that their combined power makes themthe largest shareholder of 88% of all S&P 500 firms.

This sweeping development known as “common ownership” – the same firms owning the competing firms in the same industry – is relatively new. Twenty years ago, BlackRock and Vanguard were only very rarely among the top ten shareholders of any firm. On average, common ownership concentration has almost doubled in the last 20 years in the construction, manufacturing, finance, and services sectors.

Our research reveals that common ownership has had a significant impact on the structure of executive compensation. In industries with high common ownership concentration, top executives are rewarded less for the performance of their own firm but rewarded more just for general industry performance.

To understand the effect of common ownership on CEO pay packages, we analyzed total pay (including the value of stock and option grants) of the top five executives of S&P 1500 firms (which cover 90% of U.S. market capitalization) and 500 additional public companies. We studied those pay packages in relation to the firm’s performance, rival firms’ performance, measures of market concentration, and common ownership of the industry. We also examined interactions of profit, concentration, and common ownership variables. This allowed us to estimate both the sensitivity of CEO compensation to the performance of their own firm and of the industry’s other firms, as well the impact that common ownership has on these sensitivities. (We used a variation in ownership caused by a mutual fund trading scandal in 2003 to strengthen a causal interpretation of the link between common ownership concentration and top management incentives.)

We found that when firms in an industry are more commonly owned, top managers receive pay packages that are much less performance-sensitive. In other words, these managers are rewarded less for outperforming their competitors. This difference in compensation has a sizeable effect. In industries with little common ownership, executive pay is about 50% more responsive to changes in their own firm’s shareholder wealth than in industries with high common ownership.

What’s more, in industries with high common ownership, top managers receive almost twice as much pay for the good performance of their competitors as managers do in industries with low common ownership. This effect is even more pronounced for CEOs alone. Essentially, CEOs are rewarded more for the good performance of their competitors than they are for the performance of the company they run.

It’s not just the incentive package. The base pay reflects this, too. Our research shows that top managers’ base pay – the part of pay that does not depend on firm or industry performance – is also higher in industries with high common ownership.

In short, our research suggests that BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street, and other large asset management companies may be endorsing high, performance-insensitive compensation packages, because those don’t encourage competition among portfolio firms. These packages may be inducing managers to carefully consider the impact of their strategic choices on other portfolio firms.

Large asset managers have economic reasons not to incentivize competition among firms they own. After all, their revenue and their investors’ wealth depend on the total value of the portfolios they hold. As a result, it is not in their interest that one portfolio firm competes vigorously against another firm in their portfolio, such as engaging in a price war.

It is not clear that large, diversified shareholders such as BlackRock intentionally choose performance-insensitive CEO compensation for the explicit goal of discouraging intra-industry competition. They may choose it for other reasons, for example, to encourage cooperation or innovation. Maybe it’s not a conscious choice at all. It could simply be that large, diversified investors let performance-insensitive executive compensation slide because their corporate governance efforts are more passive than those of undiversified activist investors.

Still, other empirical studies have identified anti-competitive effects of common ownership. It has resulted in higher prices in the airline and banking industries. The underlying economic rationale is quite simple: if shareholders own not only one, but two or more firms competing in the same industry, these shareholders reap larger gains if the firms they own cooperate rather than compete aggressivelyagainst each other.

A question left open by the previous research is exactly how investors manage to convince the top executives of portfolio firms not to engage in costly price wars against each other, and instead to practice restraint when it comes to competitive strategy. One way to induce managers to act in their investors’ economic interest is executive pay.

But paying executives more when they outperform a competitor (academics call such a reward scheme “relative performance evaluation”) would have the effect of pitting one firm’s CEO against the other and of inducing such costly price wars.

There’s evidence of this dynamic in the tension between smaller undiversified investors (such as hedge funds) and large asset management companies. Whereas the former fight for more performance-sensitive pay that is benchmarked against competitors, the latter vote against them, instead often passing high and performance-insensitive pay that discourages competition between firms in the same industry.

This is an issue – and a tension – that we expect to grow as the trend toward common ownership continues. Our research sheds light on the changing nature of executive compensation, and apparent negative effects of weaker competition and more performance-insensitive pay. However, there may also be positive effects to common ownership. It’s possible that increased cooperation between firms benefits consumers. Certainly, people have benefited from the low-cost, diversified exposure to the stock market that large asset managers offer.

We hope our findings will lead to a better understanding of the effects of common ownership. Shareholders appear to benefit from diversification and higher industry profitability, and there are potential benefits to society from greater cooperation between firms. However, there is a negative impact on consumers due to reduced competition. Ultimately, we hope effective solutions can be reached to resolve the growing tension between shareholders, consumers, and society.

MALTA rate A- by Standard & Poor’s

MALTA rate A- by Standard & Poor’s

Malta has been given its first credit upgrade by Standard & Poor’s in 20 years

2016-2019 risultati economici straordinari e economia a gonfie vele, il meglio in Europa, grazie alla capacità competitiva e di attrazione dei migliori cervelli e capitali, numeri reali e non parole, questa è la forza del MALTA way

  • Deficit inferiore all’1%
  • Debito sul PIL al 53%
  • Crescita PIL reale (al netto inflazione) +3%
  • Surplus partite correnti sul PIL al 1,9%
  • Una crescita del PIL dal pre-2009 del 25%
  • Uno sviluppo economico e sociale non spinto da fattori finanziari ma da una crescita occupazionale straordinaria in particolare per le donne


Trasferire a Malta la residenza, la tua vita, i tuoi familiari, il tuo business, il tuo patrimonio, significa migliorare la gestione del tuo rischio
Corporate & Assets Governance, World Class, MALTA, Worldwide

maltaway valletta malta

Consistent improvement in qualitative and quantitative fiscal performance, with general government deficits below 1% in 2016-2019 and tighter management of contingent liabilities; and durable current account surpluses–at 1.9% of GDP on average in 2016-2019– reflecting an improvement in Malta’s fundamental external position.

  • The Maltese economy will expand in real terms by 3% a year on average in 2016-2019, while running consistent current account surpluses with only modest credit growth.
  • Budgetary consolidation expected to continue gradually, reducing net general government debt to 53% of GDP in 2019 from 58% in 2015.
  • Long-term sovereign credit ratings on Malta raised to ‘A-‘ from ‘BBB+’.
  • The outlook is stable, reflecting S&P’s view that the upside potential of Malta’s economic and fiscal performance is counterbalanced by downside risks related to Brexit, external flows, and the structure of the financial sector.

S&P described Malta as being in the midst of one of the strongest medium-term economic expansions in the eurozone, with the second-highest average GDP growth rate in 2010-2015 (after Ireland) and the third-highest expected real GDP growth in 2016-2019. By the end of this year, S&P anticipate that Malta’s economy will exceed pre-2009 levels by more than 25%.

“We also consider that most of the rise in Maltese incomes since 2009 reflects genuine expansion of the domestic economy’s capital base, particularly in services, rather than accounting effects based on tax-motivated changes in the residency of productive assets.”

One of the key drivers of Malta’s solid economic performance is the expansion of the labor supply, on the back of net migration (which added 1% to the population in 2015 alone) and the accompanying increase in employment, especially of women.

Over the past 10 years, the employment rate for those aged between 20 and 64 years has increased to 68% from 58%, fueled by rapid growth in the employment of women to 54% from 36%.

Another major factor is investment growth, mainly comprising large-scale projects in education, healthcare, tourism, and transport industries, as well as energy projects, including the conversion of power stations to cheaper energy sources and the gradual integration of Malta’s power system into the European grid.

As a result, electricity prices now resemble EU averages, and new businesses have easier access to electricity.

Malta has a very open economy, with exports in excess of 140% of GDP, of which more than three-quarters are service exports, such as tourism, e-gaming, and logistics.

Brexit and its implications

Being open and small, the Maltese economy is exposed to potential external shocks, the largest being the possible disruption to trade and financial markets from a U.K. Brexit or departure from the EU as a result of the June 23 referendum.

“In our base case, we project that the medium-term consequences of Brexit will be contained. U.K. arrivals generate almost 30% of Malta’s tourism receipts, and the weaker sterling is likely to drag on services exports to the U.K. “However, given that it is already facing supply constraints, the tourism sector can, in our view, easily fill the gap from other markets. The implications of Brexit for Malta’s financial services are less clear cut and would mostly occur through financial institutions other than domestic banks.

“If the asset management industry in the U.K. slows, Malta-based investment funds may generate fewer services exports, which would cut export growth, but this, in and of itself, is unlikely to create balance-of-payments risks.”

Overall, S&P considers the financial services industry to be sufficiently diversified to contain the risks related to Brexit.

Judicial framework constraints business environment

Malta’s tax regime has been an important factor in attracting investment in some sectors, but initiatives such as the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD) may challenge some aspects of the regime. In addition, despite ongoing reforms, the business environment in Malta is still constrained by Malta’s judicial framework, leading to slow contract enforcement. Nevertheless, we see Malta’s overall political and institutional framework as broadly supportive of creditworthiness, demonstrated, for example, by structural reforms that generated the employment increase mentioned above and lifted potential economic growth.

“We believe that Malta’s favorable economic growth prospects support further budgetary consolidation.

S&P forecasts that the general government deficit will decline gradually through 2019, and it expects net general government debt will decrease to 53% of GDP by the end of 2019, from 56% in 2016.

This excludes the guarantees related to the European Financial Stability.

“We forecast general government interest payments will average under 6% of general government revenues per year in 2016-2019.”

Malta’s contingent fiscal liabilities, stemming from government-guaranteed debt of nonfinancial public enterprises (NFPEs), will likely total about 16% of GDP in 2016.

La Bussola del Successo: le regole per essere vincenti, restando liberi

La Bussola del Successo: le regole per essere vincenti, restando liberi – Paolo Gallo

Rizzoli-Etas, disponibile dal 1 Settembre 2016

« Il Viaggio più importante della nostra vita non è quello in terre lontane ma quello dentro di noi »

Nel mio passato professionale ho ricoperto ruoli similari a quelli dell’autore ed ho sperimentato modelli di Leadership, Organizzativi e di Governance differenti, non rimasti sulla carta e nei codici etici o nelle interviste alla stampa, ma applicati realmente in alcune organizzazioni perchè gli stakeholders, che a partire dagli azionisti sono persone reali, le condividevano, rispettavano e promuovevano

Raramente in Europa mi sono trovato così allineato con il pensiero e l’azione che questa bussola rappresenta, questo è il motivo per cui lo condivido … libertà e responsabilità, la mia esperienza evidenzia che i piccoli e quasi innocui compromessi portano alla rovina delle organizzazioni (a parte quelle protette dagli oligopoli) e alla disfatta della libertà degli individui

Vi invito a guardare ad esempio il caso recente di Wells Fargo (Wells Fargo and the Slippery Slope of Sales Incentives, even a strong compliance function can’t counteract a compromised culture), la piú grande banca retail americana, dove il modello di compensation e la cultura aziendale stanno impattando pesantemente sul suo vertice (dimissioni di ieri) e sul suo business (interi stati americani che ritirano i mandati per centinaia di milioni di dollari).

…. “Ma così i peggiori selezionano i peggiori. Non esiste speranza di miglioramento, per le organizzazioni che non funzionano. Sta dicendo, in pratica, che Diego Piacentini di Amazon avrebbe fatto bene a restarsene lì, invece che accettare la missione di digitalizzare la pubblica amministrazione italiana…
Dal punto di vista dell’organizzazione è un bene che ci sia gente che prova a cambiare i contesti che non funzionano. Ma io guardo agli individui. A un giovane consiglierei tutta la vita di evitare di fare Don Chisciotte con i mulini a vento” ….

A questo proposito e per confronto, vi invito a leggere, osservare e capire, il caso dell’Estonia, un piccolo paese parte dell’Europa dove per necessità e volontà condivisa dalla maggioranza del paese, anche contro gli interessi di albi professionali, dipendenti pubblici ecc., è stato messo al vertice dei processi della pubblica amministrazione un CIO (Taavi Kotka) con pieni poteri e deleghe che ha saputo dare una svolta alla digitalizzazione del paese… i risultati sono visibili a tutti e reali (a ‘country as a service’), oppure a vedere i successi di Malta dove ora vivo nelle practice di e-Government. Insomma, ci sono gli individui e le tribù … la loro relazione con l’ambiente è il cambiamento, ci si attrae per valori comuni e ci si allontana per comportamenti non condivisi



Siamo agli inizi della quarta rivoluzione industriale, in un’epoca veloce, alle volte brutale e di radicale trasformazione, non solo tecnologica. Abbiamo bisogno di ancorare la nostra vita di lavoro con i nostri valori. Il libro “La bussola del successo” ridefinisce il concetto di “avere una carriera di successo”. Non una corsa forsennata, tutti contro tutti, in cui pochi eletti vincono – alcuni imbrogliando – ma qualcosa di più profondo, significativo e rilevante, possibile per tutti noi. Sono pagine ed insegnamenti che ci aiuteranno a ragionare, basati su studi, ricerche e storie vere, collezionate in 25 anni di esperienza dell’autore. Questo libro aiuta a fermarsi a riflettere su chi siamo, cosa rappresentiamo e come possiamo avere una carriera di successo autentico con la nostra integrità, passione e talento. Tutti noi possiamo avere una carriera di successo e sviluppare il nostro talento. Tutti noi possiamo diventare eroi positivi, imparare le regole per essere vincenti, rimanendo liberi.

Paolo Gallo è Chief Human Resources Officer al World Economic Forum dal 2014. E’ stato Chief Learning Officer presso la Banca Mondiale a Washington DC e per sei anni come Direttore delle Risorse Umane presso la BERS a Londra. Paolo Gallo ha lavorato alla International Finance Corporation a Washington DC e all’inizio della sua carriera presso Citigroup Investment Banking a Milano, Londra e New York. Paolo Gallo è un coach certificato presso la Georgetown University, laureato presso l’Università Bocconi di Milano e Chartered Fellow FCIPD, Regno Unito, collabora con l’Università Bocconi e Hult-Ashridge Business School UK

Intervista all’autore pubblicata su LINKIESTA «Le regole per lavorare felici? Seguite il talento, non la passione. E non sacrificate la libertà per il successo»

Amazon (carta)

Kobo (ebook)

Anteprima del Libro:



Mio padre aveva fatto una promessa impegnativa a me e a mia sorella gemella: sarebbe stato presente per il nostro primo giorno di scuola. Lavorava in Brasile e ritornava in Italia solo due volte all’anno, in agosto e a Natale. Giunto finalmente il fatidico giorno, quando ci svegliammo nostro padre non era a casa. Provammo una grande delusione, stemperata però dall’eccitazione di cominciare la scuola. Il primo giorno passò velocemente; quando squillò la campanella d’uscita, mio padre ci stava aspettando ai cancelli. Vederlo fu per me una gioia incontenibile e, insieme a mia sorella, gli saltai in braccio. Durante il tragitto per tornare a casa, lo inondammo con le nostre storie: cosa avevamo fatto, i nomi dei nuovi compagni di scuola, la maestra, la lavagna con tutti i gessetti colorati, la mappa dell’Italia sulla parete. A casa, durante il pranzo continuammo a raccontare. Alla fine del pasto mio padre volle parlare prima con mia sorella e poi con me; quindi lo seguii in salotto, dove mi invitò a sedermi di fronte a lui. Restò in silenzio alcuni secondi, poi mi guardò negli occhi e mi disse: “Paolo”, era la prima volta che mi chiamava con il mio nome, in famiglia per tutti ero sempre Paolino. “Paolo, da domani non dire che cosa hai fatto, ma chiediti se ami quello che fai, che cosa hai imparato e se sei riuscito ad aiutare gli altri: il resto non conta.” Mi mise una mano sulla spalla, mi guardò ancora negli occhi, come se fossi un adulto, e si alzò. Poche ore dopo, riprese l’aereo per tornare in Brasile: aveva mantenuto la sua promessa. Tra i milioni di parole che ho ascoltato e letto nel tempo, quella frase di mio padre, pronunciata il 1° ottobre 1969, è quella che ha maggiormente influenzato la mia vita. Cosa ho appreso da quella frase? Ho imparato a non pensare alle risposte corrette se non ho formulato le giuste domande: amo quello che faccio? Sto imparando qualcosa? Sto aiutando qualcuno? Il resto non conta. Lavoro da molti anni come responsabile della funzione del personale, chiamata anche Human Resources: nello svolgere il mio lavoro, ho potuto verificare quanto sia più importante partire dalle domande giuste, piuttosto che cercare di indovinare le risposte. Albert Einstein disse: “Se avessi solo un’ora per risolvere un problema e la mia vita dipendesse dalla soluzione, passerei i primi 55 minuti a capire quale sia la domanda giusta da porsi”. Ho potuto osservare centinaia di carriere e mi sono chiesto: “Come mai solo alcuni di noi hanno successo, molti si limitano a sopravvivere e tanti, troppi, falliscono?”. Abbiamo scelto un lavoro in base alla nostra passione e al nostro talento? Abbiamo capito le regole del gioco, la cultura organizzativa, per evitare di essere lost in translation, perduti nella traduzione? Siamo riusciti a costruire la fiducia, di chi ci possiamo fidare? Che prezzo siamo disposti a pagare per far carriera? Quando è il momento giusto di andarsene? Come valutiamo il successo professionale? Come rimanere liberi? Cosa conta veramente? Questo libro cerca, sempre partendo da domande, di fornire spunti di riflessione, strumenti e suggerimenti pratici per avere, o per meglio dire, essere una carriera di successo definita però secondo parametri decisi da noi stessi, non da altri e certamente non impostati solo sul profitto e su come fare carriera a tutti i costi, senza riflettere sulle conseguenze. Lo so, alcuni mi prenderanno per matto o anche peggio, mi considereranno una persona viziata e choosy e mi ricorderanno che è già un miracolo avere un lavoro. Sono argomenti comprensibili: anche solo ipotizzare di scegliere un lavoro, considerati i tassi di disoccupazione altissimi, può sembrare un’utopistica via di mezzo tra un lusso di altri tempi e un sogno poco realistico, se non addirittura irrealizzabile. Invece io sono convinto dell’esatto contrario. Solamente scegliendo e costruendo una carriera allineata ai nostri valori, ai nostri scopi e alle nostre motivazioni profonde, saremo in grado di fare un ottimo lavoro e di conseguenza avremo successo e gratificazioni. In questo piccolo gioco di parole, si cela uno dei segreti: se scegliamo consapevolmente la professione e la cultura giusta per noi stessi, non faremo un lavoro ma saremo il lavoro che facciamo. Parlo di autenticità, di essere ciò che facciamo, di non recitare per otto ore al giorno. Ho partecipato alla festa di pensionamento di una persona che aveva passato 28 anni nella stessa organizzazione. La sua ultima frase è stata: “Sono venuta in ufficio per quasi trent’anni, ma ho sempre lasciato il cuore a casa mia”. Una tristezza infinita, una vita professionale buttata al vento, un talento sprecato, tanti anni di recite mediocri, per giunta pagata maluccio. Ne valeva la pena? Se scegliamo una carriera sulla base di criteri erronei o stabiliti da altri, saremo eventualmente costretti a recitare in una squallida commedia scritta da altri in cui abbiamo solo una particina insignificante. Quando andiamo al ristorante chi sceglie cosa mangiamo? Noi vero? Bene, se siamo perfettamente capaci di scegliere in autonomia su questioni marginali come un piatto al ristorante, a maggior ragione abbiamo il dovere di farlo riguardo alla nostra carriera, perché siamo noi gli autori delle nostre scelte professionali. A questo proposito, Viktor E. Frankl, autore del libro Uno psicologo nei lager, ci ha lasciato un insegnamento fondamentale: ci possono portare via tutto ma non la possibilità di compiere scelte autonome, anche nelle situazioni più disperate. Il volume è composto da storytelling, storie tratte da varie fonti, come la mitologia greca, lo sport, la politica statunitense, la storia, brevi casi aziendali e personali, fatti di cronaca e alcuni concetti e teorie di management e coaching, insieme a molte citazioni di libri, film, canzoni, articoli, video, discorsi, pagine web che hanno contribuito alla narrativa. Mi rendo conto di aver sempre giocato in trasferta, trascorrendo 23 anni all’estero: 12 a Washington, nove a Londra e due a Ginevra, dove vivo adesso. Ho avuto la fortuna di lavorare con persone straordinarie, in più di 60 nazioni diverse. Questa esperienza ha certamente contribuito a offrirmi una prospettiva particolare, incluse le lenti attraverso le quali osservo l’Italia, che, come disse Leonardo Sciascia, “da lontano duole di meno”. La mia vicenda professionale e soprattutto quella umana mi hanno convinto che tutte le persone hanno almeno un talento particolare che aspetta solo di essere scoperto, incoraggiato e utilizzato. Sono convinto di poter essere d’aiuto, di poter dare una mano e di convincervi non solo a non arrendervi ma a utilizzare strategie e sentieri che non pensavate esistessero. Le storie che leggerete sono tutte vere: svelerò segreti, mostrerò trucchi, offrirò strumenti, sperando possano essere utili, pragmatici e anche divertenti. Allo stesso tempo vorrei chiarire che non sarò certo io a fornirvi la Risposta che state cercando né tantomeno a dirvi cosa dovete o non dovete fare. Che titolo avrei per farlo? Il mio ruolo sarà quello di aiutarvi a formulare la domanda giusta e di accompagnarvi nel viaggio. Infatti, nessuno può fornirci le risposte corrette, dobbiamo trovarle dentro di noi. Il successo professionale non è un miracolo o un colpo di fortuna; se non riusciamo a ottenere questo successo, non possiamo incolpare qualcun altro: siamo noi a guidare la nostra vita, abbiamo sempre scelte da compiere, da persone libere, sapendo che la felicità consiste nel viaggio, non nell’arrivare. Nel viaggio non saremo mai soli, starà a noi scegliere i compagni di ventura. Il libro è diviso in tre parti: Passione, La bussola, Libertà. La domanda che caratterizza il Capitolo 1 è: “Come scoprire qual è la nostra Passione?”. Io lo imparai da un artista di strada, Gerardo, che dipingeva acquerelli nella via principale di Antigua, uno stupendo villaggio coloniale negli altipiani del Guatemala. Su questa strada c’erano moltissimi artisti che disegnavano paesaggi, ma le opere di Gerardo mi colpirono molto: avevano una luce particolare. Durante una giornata di pioggia torrenziale, notai che sulla via non c’erano artisti eccetto Gerardo che, sotto un ombrellone, continuava imperterrito a disegnare. Lo raggiunsi per acquistare un suo acquerello, ma aveva a disposizione solo quello che stava ultimando. Gli chiesi il prezzo per quella sua opera, mi rispose: “50 dollari”. Cercai di ottenere uno sconto perché non era terminata. Gerardo mi rispose che abitualmente vendeva i suoi acquerelli a 25 dollari, ma per quello che volevo comperare dovevo pagarne 50. Non capivo. Gerardo mi disse: “Ti faccio pagare il doppio perché tu mi neghi la gioia che provo nel terminare un lavoro che amo”. Gli diedi 50 dollari, felice di aver imparato una lezione indimenticabile, senza prezzo. La seconda parte del libro, La bussola, ci aiuterà a orientarci e si sviluppa in vari capitoli basati su una serie di domande. Nel Capitolo 2 ci chiederemo: “Come capire quale sia il Villaggio, la cultura giusta per noi?”. Dopo un’introduzione teorica su cosa sia la cultura, avrete a disposizione strumenti pratici per capire la cultura di un’organizzazione. Nel Capitolo 3 risponderemo alla domanda: “Come facciamo ad arrivare dove vogliamo, farci assumere dall’organizzazione che fa per noi?”. In questo capitolo otterrete molti suggerimenti pratici e utili come, per esempio, scrivere un curriculum, affrontare un colloquio, sapere se le organizzazioni vi dicono la verità. Il Capitolo 4 risponde a un interrogativo chiave: “Come ottenere fiducia, sapendo che questa è l’ingrediente più importante in ogni relazione?”. Qui troverete una formula con tutti gli elementi che contribuiscono a creare, o distruggere, la fiducia. Il Capitolo 5 sarà dedicato alle domande: “Di chi ci possiamo fidare? Come capire le regole del gioco?”. Entreremo in uno zoo – o forse dovrei scrivere in una giungla – dove troveremo vari tipi di animali che dobbiamo assolutamente imparare a distinguere. Vi sorprenderò dimostrandovi che siamo circondati da eroi invisibili o abbiamo, ora e qui, la possibilità di diventarlo anche noi. Il Capitolo 6 ci porrà di fronte a un quesito fondamentale, che ci costringerà a scavare profondamente nella nostra anima: “Quale prezzo siamo disposti a pagare per far carriera?”. Condividerò con voi storie di persone che hanno fatto un “patto con il diavolo”. Anche la terza parte del libro, Libertà, sarà caratterizzata da domande. I temi del Capitolo 7 saranno: “Come fare carriera? Cosa ci può aiutare? Quali errori dobbiamo evitare?”. “Should I stay or should I go?” scandisce il Capitolo 8: quando è il momento giusto di andarsene da un’organizzazione? Come veniamo veramente valutati? L’ultima parte del libro viene sviluppata nel Capitolo 9: “Cosa conta davvero? Cosa vuol dire avere successo secondo i nostri valori come persone, non in base a criteri stabiliti da altri? Qual è il vero capitale di cui noi siamo responsabili?”. Buona lettura, buon divertimento e buon viaggio.

Did Quantitative Easing Only Inflate Stock Prices? Macroeconomic Evidence from the US and UK

Check out my new working paper co-authored with: Chris Brooks Henley Business School – ICMA Centre Michael P. Clements Henley Business School – ICMA Centre and Institute for New Economi…

Sorgente: Did Quantitative Easing Only Inflate Stock Prices? Macroeconomic Evidence from the US and UK

The over-representation of the top executives inside the Board need a rebalance with Shareholders Independent Directors

The over-representation of the top executives inside the Board need a rebalance with Shareholders Independent Directors

Worker-directors are no governance panacea


MALTAWAY BOARD GOVERNANCE AND NON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (NED) …. NED with international experience in the BOARD, reinforce widely the diversity, independence and compliance requirements for a better Corporate Governance, Leadership and Business results

30+ years Board, Governance, Investment’s  experience and practice for YOUR BOARD needs and solutions

Adopting German-style system requires changes to UK corporate culture

The question of why the UK economy cannot be more like Germany’s has been a perennial concern of British policymakers down the decades. Where, they ask, are the indigenous high-productivity companies? Where is the spirit of co-operation rather than confrontation in industrial relations?

A solution often mooted is to adopt the German practice of worker-directors — members of boards elected by the employees. This has popped up again as part of the changes to corporate governance mooted by Theresa May’s government, backed by the Trades Union Congress.

Worker-directors can fulfil useful functions, have played a supporting role in the success of some German corporations, and indeed of companies in other European countries. Yet airlifting them into the UK’s very different institutional context is only likely to work if it is part of a bigger shift in employee and corporate culture.

German “co-determination” is an idea deeply embedded into the country’s corporate tradition. The idea is that by making trade unions — and workers — partners rather than adversaries, companies can improve information flow and productivity, and avoid strikes. Worker-directors are often credited with having helped in Germany’s postwar economic miracle, providing a wider range of perspectives and binding the workforce more closely to management decisions.

They may be less useful in today’s business environment. Most growth in modern economies is driven by small and medium-sized companies where the co-determination rules do not apply, usually in the service sector. Germany has retained a cohort of highly successful export-oriented manufacturers, but has been less impressive at creating dynamic service companies.

Whether or not they are the future for Germany, implanting worker-directors into a British corporate context will be intrinsically tricky. German companies have a two-tier structure with a management and a supervisory board, with the legally mandated worker-directors sitting on the latter.

This does not translate directly into the UK practice of a unitary board, whose members are charged with pursuing the interests of the company as a whole. The governance of UK companies could certainly do with improvement. If worker-directors turned employees into partners rather than adversaries or widened the range of perspectives around the board table on issues such as executive pay, that would be progress. But making the board a collection of individual representatives of different interests within the company is not the way to do it.

The principle of worker-directors also requires a degree of co-operation from employees and unions. Where a workforce is unionised, it seems likely that the worker-directors will be union officials. But unlike its German counterpart, the British trade union movement has traditionally operated on the principle of free collective bargaining rather than corporatist co-operation.

Effecting a culture change within unions to make them part of the management process is unlikely to be straightforward. In parts of the economy where there is still an antagonistic relationship between unions and management, such as the rail sector, putting an employee representative on the board is more likely to result in stasis or conflict than co-operation.

If worker-directors could form part of a shift towards co-operation in the mindset of employees, they could play a useful role. But it is optimistic to imagine that a governance function can cross borders without requiring wider changes in practice along the way. via @FT

MALTA il paese leader in Europa nei servizi di eGovernment per cittadini e imprese

MALTA il paese leader in Europa nei servizi di #eGovernment per cittadini e imprese … come il Sud del Mediterraneo batte il Centro e Nord Europa

Fatti non parole, noi lo abbiamo capito e provato prima di te e siamo pronti a guidarti per una tua scelta di vita, di investimento, di impresa. Il mondo corre , se tu cammini resti indietro, ci sono giurisdizioni e sistemi paese più competitivi del tuo e capaci di attrarre capitali, investimenti e persone …MALTA per voi con


Trasferire a Malta la residenza, la tua vita, i tuoi familiari, il tuo business, il tuo patrimonio, significa migliorare la gestione del tuo rischio

Corporate & Assets Governance, World Class, MALTA, Worldwide

Malta has been reconfirmed as leader in the delivery and performance of eGovernment services amongst 34 countries, namely the 28 European Union member states together with Iceland, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Turkey and Montenegro.

Malta has just been reconfirmed as leader in the delivery and performance of eGovernment services amongst 34 countries (28 European Union member states together with Iceland, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Turkey and Montenegro).  The results were published in the eGovernment Benchmark Report 2016 issued earlier today by the European Commission. (
The benchmarking study carried out by Capgemini, Sogeti, IDC, and the Politecnico di Milano measures four top-level indicators as well as compares the performance of eGovernment services between the participating countries.  As in last year, Malta has again attained an exceptional result by leading in all the top-level indicators and ranking first in the overall results.
The first indicator is User Centricity, where the report measures the online ‘availability’ and ‘usability’ of eGovernment services.  Malta has ranked first in both measurements and also in the overall indicator, with a score of 95%, 18 percentage points more than the EU average.
The second indicator, Transparency, examines the extent to which governments are transparent about their own responsibilities and performance, the service delivery process, and the personal data involved.  The EU average score in this indicator is 55%; Malta is clearly ahead of all other participating countries with a score of 97%.
Figure 1 – Transparency
(Source: European Commission (2016), A turning point for eGovernment 
development in Europe? – Background Report, p.31)
The third indicator, Cross Border Mobility, assesses governments’ ability to provide businesses and citizens seamless access to online public services when they are away from their home country.  Once again, Malta leads the rankings with an overall score of 89%, 34 percentage points more than the EU average.
Malta is also leading in the fourth indicator Key Enablers which measures the availability of a number of technical elements which are deemed important for the delivery of eGovernment services.  Malta achieved an overall score of 98%, 44 percentage points more than the EU average.
Figure 2 – Key Enablers
(Source: European Commission (2016), A turning point for eGovernment 
development in Europe? – Background Report, p.39)
Hon Emmanuel Mallia, Minister for Competitiveness and Digital, Maritime and Services Economy welcomed these excellent results.  Hon Mallia reaffirmed the Government’s support towards the implementation of the Digital Single Market Strategy, which was launched by the European Commission in 2015.  “The Government is committed to deliver innovative and secure eGovernment services aimed at opening up digital opportunities for both citizens and businesses alike and enhance Malta’s position as a leader in the digital economy.” added Hon Mallia.
Mr Tony Sultana, Executive Chairman of the Malta Information Technology Agency (MITA), said that such positive results reflect the incessant drive of the Agency to produce secure, transparent and user centric online services.  “This year, the Office of the Principal Permanent Secretary has increased impetus to make online services accessible through mobile devices.  In collaboration with the Office of the Prime Minister, MITA and various Ministries, are developing a number of mServices thus paving the way towards achieving Government’s commitment to reach out to a wider spectrum of audiences through different channels.” concluded Mr Sultana.
The eGovernment Benchmark 2016 Insight Report is available at:
The eGovernment Benchmark 2016 Background Report is available at: