Skip navigation
All Places > Keysight Blogs > Insights Unlocked > Blog > 2018 > February
2018

5G, the fifth-generation wireless network, made its global commercial debut at the Winter Olympics in PyeongChang. This year’s Games were a huge showcase for the technology across a range of applications: driverless buses transporting attendees around Olympic sites using 5G links to navigate roads, while beaming live streams of event coverage to interior video screens. 5G-linked cameras were attached to bobsleds to deliver live footage from the pilots’ point of view, while videos of figure-skating events allowed viewers to stop the action and see 360-degree views of every twist and turn on the ice.

 

The technology even protected farmland adjacent to the Winter Olympics sites against native wild boars which threatened crops and the safety of tourists. Setup to replace an existing 4G-powered network that proved inadequate at tracking the boars’ movements and keeping them away from fields of cash crops, the 5G-connected system highlighted the huge range of applications and use cases that 5G supports.

 

The showcase was engineered by South Korean telecom carrier KT Corp. using technology from Intel, Ericsson AB and Samsung Electronics Co. The technology is being brought offline after the event to enable developers to analyze data from the deployment and identify any issues to improve the service. This, before South Korea’s wireless carriers start a full commercial roll out of 5G in 2019. But even so, the Olympic 5G showcase has been billed as a success, and a major milestone for 5G – enabling reliable, high-capacity, low latency networks, and giving gigabit-speed connectivity. 

 

Testing matters

Even though the Olympics has shown how 5G can be deployed at scale, there’s still some way to go before the technology can be rolled out at a national, or international level. These large-scale services will go beyond the provision of faster mobile broadband –  they include wireless connections replacing fixed connections, and improvements in other existing technologies. And these new services will require new network architectures that are not only capable of supporting much greater data volumes than ever before, but are also secure, flexible enough to support billions of devices, and adaptable to different applications.

 

To ensure that 5G can deliver on its promises, these emerging infrastructures will need rigorous testing. And building test architectures capable of doing that will be challenging, because the use cases are hugely diverse. Endpoints will appear and disappear rapidly, cell-site complexity will grow with network sharing, and even the bandwidth required for the visibility traffic itself will require new ways of thinking – all while supporting data volumes that are orders of magnitude greater than those of today.

 

To meet these challenges, Keysight is leading the way in delivering first-to-market, next-generation 5G test solutions that will help both operators and their equipment suppliers validate their configurations and underlying hardware and software, ensuring that they perform as expected, and that they’re on the right track to 5G success.

 

We recently published a detailed white paper that describes the 5G technology roadmap, the implications of 5G for test architectures, and how the major 5G use cases can be tested – which can be downloaded here. Keysight is also exhibiting at the giant Mobile World Congress event in Barcelona, from 26 February to 1 March:  find out more about our presence at the show here.

The tables were turned on this well-documented “5G Symposium Critic” last month. This began last spring, when I am sure I visibly flinched when our group president said, “Let’s have a 5G Summit!”

 

Despite the risks of having YA5GE (Yet Another 5G Event), I was fortunate to host a very successful inaugural Keysight 5G Tech Connect event in which we drew on the best practices of the industry, and inserted a few of our own, novel ideas.

 

This post is a tribute to events and speakers who inspired us to throw an excellent technical party. We drew upon many best practices, and here are just a few that are noteworthy:

 

Best Practice 1: Bookend with Charisma and Competence

(Inspiration: 5G North American Workshop, hosted by Ericsson and Qualcomm, San Jose, Summer 2016)

 

Innovation happens when the unconstrained mind confronts the over-constrained problem. Making 5G real will require significant innovation and the keynote speakers highlighted innovative thinking. Maryam Rofougaran, co-founder of Movandi, opened the pre-event dinner with a description of how her organizations managed these processes through unprecedented mixed-signal IC integration in a previous role at Innovent and later with Broadcom, and now new phased array antenna technology for 5G.

 

Peter Rabbeni of Global Foundries further underscored the potential of silicon technologies even in our new mmW world during his opening Keynote the next morning. And Dr. Mischa Dohler of Kings College London closed the event with an optimistic and energetic talk on the inevitability of 5G combined, enabled, and even driven by profound changes coming to networks—changes that will disrupt that business so it will ultimately not look at all like it does today.

 

Best Practice 2: Stay Technical

(Inspiration: IWPC, pretty much any event Tom Watson and team do)

 

Recall my criticism of overtly or thinly veiled commercial presentations. The 5G Tech Connect avoided this by focusing not just on technology, but on technology for measurement. Professor Gabriel Rebeiz (UCSD), Dr. YiHong Qi (GTS), and Emil Olbrich (Signals Research) introduced and led discussions on phased-array antennas, over-the-air measurement, and 5G NR device validation respectively.

 

Notwithstanding a few pleasant (and unsolicited) plugs for Keysight by Gabriel and YiHong, the discussions remained focused on key challenges in the technology. Here are some of my insights:

  • Reinforcement of my prediction of mobile commercial mmWave coming only after 2022;
  • Renewed confidence in silicon technologies making headway in 5G mmWave; and,
  • The inevitability of the uncomfortable marriage of licensed and unlicensed spectrum — starting in Licensed Assisted Access (LAA) but moving full-force in 5G.

 

Others reached additional insights which means there was technical fodder for all involved.

 

Best Practice 3: Provide Fascinating Toys for Engineers to Play With

(Inspiration: Brooklyn 5G Summit, 2017)

 

One cannot host a proper 5G event without the “show floor/demo room.” It is on this real estate that the “overt commercial” behavior often becomes crushing. So, we adopted three rules:

  1. Keep our demonstrations constrained to very newly released and cutting-edge technology, or even capabilities that have yet to see commercial exposure;
  2. Only have our deepest technical experts available to discuss these technologies; and
  3. No lead sheets within 50 miles of the venue. We ran the risk of tipping our hand too soon on some of this capability, but the animated discussions in the crowded demo room were evidence that this recipe worked.

 

The Wrap Up

I walked away from that initial discussion on hosting a “5G Summit” with a feeling of dread. Those of you who have managed such things know the work involved—the planning, finding participants and speakers, last-minute changes, panic, elation, terror, anger. And finally, relief— relief followed by pride in managing a good use of time for all involved. But pride has again been unseated by dread; we had not yet opened the post-event cocktail bar when the group president shook my hand, thanked me for an excellent experience and said, “Let’s do one of these in Asia!”

 

 

This article is an adaptation of Roger's original post published in the Next Generation Wireless Communications Blog, where you can connect with our industry and solution experts as they share their experiences, opinions and measurement tips on a number of cellular and wireless design and test topics that matter to you.

In a previous post, Keysight’s Senior Vice President Corporate Services and CSR Executive Sponsor Hamish Gray discussed the six-step journey Keysight took to evolve our CSR program and to meet emerging trends. I’d like to take a deeper look at the step in our journey that really changed everything! And by “everything,” I mean solidifying the strategic role corporate social responsibility (CSR) plays in business success.

 

Seeing the Forest through the Trees

The benefit of CSR programs to the planet are obvious: supporting community growth, mitigating impact on the environment, and supporting basic human rights for all people to name a few. The benefits to the company, however, can be lost in the process itself.

 

Let’s face it, from a company and shareholder perspective, the most critical role of CSR is to ensure related programs meet stakeholder requirements:

  • The investment community wants to invest in sustainable companies with minimal risk.
  • Customers need suppliers that help them meet their own CSR commitments, strategy and vision.
  • Current, and prospective, employees want to work for sustainable and ethical companies.

 

To support these varied requirements, companies must develop associated programs and logistics that ensure appropriate data collection is in place, manage detailed processes that monitor and measure efforts, respond to various reporting mechanisms, and actively communicate actions and results. In a global company such as Keysight, this often occurs across myriad functions, organization levels and countries. The result is a lot of great work being done in pockets of the company to meet specific requirements, but its collective benefit to the business gets lost in the details.

 

Corporate citizenship experts often tout the critical role that a sound CSR program plays. As a recent BSR report noted, one way to build appreciation for CSR is to "establish a compelling long-term value creation story that asserts the central role that sustainability plays in business success."1 I completely agree! But when you are in the throes of meeting stakeholder reporting requirements and measuring key performance indicators (KPIs) on specific program elements, it is easy to miss the proverbial sustainable forest through the trees.

 

Connecting CSR Program Goals to Company Objectives … Really?

At Keysight, we took the opportunity of our company formation to align our CSR programs directly to our company commitments for revenue growth, profitability and shareholder value. At first there was apprehension, perhaps even a bit of skepticism, that our CSR programs could be directly linked to the core business objectives. But as we considered all our programs collectively, the connection became clear.

 

Let’s take revenue growth as an example any company can relate to. There are many strategies to meet this objective, but in the CSR space, related strategies include having the right employee skillset to meet demand and enable faster new or adjacent market entry.

 

Keysight Penang International Science Fair promoting STEMFirst and foremost, the needed skillset for growth must be available to hire in the community. At Keysight, our CSR efforts support future engineer development programs starting in grade school through university students. This provides a baseline of future worker skills. Since Keysight formed in November 2014, the company has engaged roughly 275,000 students and future engineers through various science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education events and programs.

 

From there, it is critical to attract and retain the needed talent for growth. At Keysight, we enable this through a broad range of benefits to support employee hiring and retention, including ethical governance policies, philanthropy and volunteerism programs that align with employees’ interests.

 

Key to new market entries that support growth are solid and consistent ethical governance policies that meet worldwide regulatory and legal requirements. At Keysight, our strict focus in these areas enables us to more quickly enter a new product or region market and to integrate acquisitions because we are not continually having to re-invent the process.

 

These are only a few examples. At Keysight there are roughly 50 programs tracked as part of CSR. Each is directly linked to one or more business objective. Separately, these efforts may seem to support isolated company commitments, but when considered collectively, they become a solid contributor for meeting near- and long-term business objectives.

 

The "Aha" Moment Revealed!

As I mentioned earlier, there was a healthy level of skepticism when we started down the path of connecting our CSR program to business objectives. While each of our CSR governance team members own or represent multiple and deep-level CSR programs in their functions, and each participated in this mapping exercise, no one except me had seen the consolidation and rollup across our company. So, I was excited to present the outcome of our due diligence in this area.

 

I literally heard gasps when our CSR program and business objectives alignment was revealed. It was clear that, while everyone understood their actions in this space supported business commitments, they only saw one piece of the puzzle. When viewing all program contributions holistically and aligned with our companywide objectives, it was a collective “Aha” moment.

 

Since then, this realization has helped:

  • Develop a clear understanding of where and specifically how individual CSR programs impact business commitments and thus contribute to business success.
  • Enable our CSR governance team to more strategically manage the program by considering company impact in the prioritization of new initiatives and emerging trends.
  • More easily gain alignment on resourcing and organizational support to meet program objectives across the company – functionally and globally.

 

Again, this is not a new concept. Many leading companies have heeded the advice of industry experts and done this exercise. For those that have not yet, or are new to this space, as a practitioner of this advice I can unequivocally say it is well worth the effort!

 

Has your company aligned CSR goals to business objectives? How has it changed the view of such programs in your company? Alternatively, was there a different, more profound “Aha” moment from your organization’s CSR program development? I’d love to hear what has helped highlight the strategic nature of CSR programs in your company!

 

Source:

1. "Redefining Sustainable Business," BSR (Aron Cramer, Dunstan Allison-Hope, Alison Taylor, Beth Richmond, and Charlotte Bancilhon), January 18, 2018

My first blog posts covering the myth and reality of 5G put everything in the framework of three intertwined drivers: Technology, Policy, and Business Model. If you ever had doubts about the impact of one of these elements on the other, consider what the ITU’s designation of the ISM bands, way back in the 1940’s, ultimately did for the microwave oven, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth.

 

Today’s 5G environment is filled with critical policy issues. Some, like national and international spectrum policy, are obvious to us in the radio world. Some are more indirect, but could have more impact—such as local and regional covenants and zoning for network elements. Test and measurement solutions providers, including Keysight, must pay strict attention to governmental regulations to enable our customers to validate compliance with regulation. But we also need to consider our role in ensuring our customers’ success in navigating the less-direct facets of policy. Here are a few of my direct, and not-so-direct, favorites:

 

Spectrum Band and Bandwidth are set nationally by the various government bodies around the world with acronyms like Ofcom, FCC, MIC, MIIT, etc. Another critical acronym is the ITU (International Telecommunications Union)—a branch of the United Nations (UN) that sets international treaties in the world of spectrum harmonization. Recent examples include November’s Report and Order (R&O) from the US’ FCC (regarding 24 and 47GHz bands) and MIIT’s (China) request for comment on plans to use 3.5GHz and 4.9GHz bands. Also, the ITU will meet at the World Radio Conference 2019 (WRC-19) to try and harmonize what is feasible.

 

Zoning and real-estate: The most important facet of addressing coverage gaps and spectral efficiency in 5G, is the reduction of cell size. There are three major policy hurdles to achieving 5G reality:

  1. Placement of small cells: Most operators must negotiate small-cell placement with each municipality and often with individual neighborhoods, resulting in lengthy and costly negotiations and re-negotiations with many local governments. Mobile operator coalitions are lobbying for nationally consistent legal frameworks. A proposed law for this framework was recently vetoed by the governor of California.
  2. Management of backhaul: Linking new small cells to the core network requires a cable, which are rarely installed without considering additional “dark capacity” to future proof the situation. Every cable needs a trench or a position on a standing pole. The negotiations for the rights-of-way are as traumatic as those for placement of the cell. A representative of one US operator told me that more than half of the US national average cost of $100/foot for laying fiber is for negotiation and retention of these rights-of-way.
  3. Radio flux density: The IWPC event in Bristol, held this past November, was an eye-opener for me. The sum of various operators’ radio energy in many public areas in Europe are at the legal limit for flux density (a measure of radio energy). One example was central Brussels, currently at the limit of 61V/m (~3V/m per operator) averaged over 6 minutes. Adding a cell or coverage at an additional frequency band requires the operator to reduce the average power output of their existing system.

 

National Commerce: Among the interesting examples of this are the management of inter-operator competition and related areas of managing spectrum allocation. The drastic differences in how nationalities manage these can be illustrated with a few key examples:

 

Operator-count, within the range of “Wikipedia error,” consider the following table:

Country / RegionPopulation (Millions)Number of Mobile Cellular Operators
USA3205
China14003
Japan1303
India13006
European Union500> 70

 

It may not be fair to group all the EU into one line on this table, but it does illustrate the vast difference in how EU policy has impacted the competitive landscape, which is a significant criticism from the major players in the industry.

 

Inter-operator spectrum allocation: The most impactful spectrum policy decision made in the mobile wireless industry was the FCC’s choice to auction the PCS spectrum in the early 2G days of the 1990’s. This approach, combined with “use it or lose it” policies, was copied in many nations resulting in legal and financial spectrum battles over the past 25 years. However, China and Japan have not implemented spectrum auction in any significant manner. But, while these governments apply other pressures to these entities, the operators do not have the “spectrum depreciation” line-item in their P&L statements.

 

The internet traffic generated by the leaked United States National Security Council document underscores the criticality of policy on our industry and how it impacts business management. Whether the US should nationalize its 5G network is up to the political pundits, but we at Keysight will carefully watch the discourse as we work with our customers and collaborators around the world to make 5G a global reality.

After the FCC announced the availability of a huge amount of 5G spectrum in 2016, I wrote about it in this blog posting. I was rather impressed with the amount of spectrum made available but I also identified three areas that needed breakthrough innovation for 5G to be successful:

  1. New channel models
  2. Beamforming
  3. New air interface

 

The industry is making progress in all three of these areas and there’s still more work to be done. For a good overview of 5G status, see this article on ElectronicDesign "5G—It’s Not Here Yet, But Closer Than You Think".

 

The 3GPP standards body has been working on the new air interface, now referred to as New Radio (NR). A major milestone was the release of the first NR standard, known as the Non-Standalone (NSA) Release 15 specification. “Non-Standalone” means that the 5G network is dependent upon the existing LTE evolved packet core (EPC) network and an LTE “anchor” carrier for control signaling aggregated with an NR carrier for data. Industry leaders pushed for and got the NSA early release to expedite their deployments. The full up (Stand Alone) Release 15 using the next generation (NG) core network and NR air interface is due out in June 2018. This phased approach makes a lot of sense for a complex system like 5G. 

 

The wireless network operators are already planning and doing 5G field trials of various forms, including proprietary pre-5G implementations. These early trials are mostly focused on delivering broadband wireless to fixed locations, called Fixed Wireless Access (FWA). These deployments not only deliver immediate value to customers but also allow the industry to gain experience with NR and the higher frequency bands.

 

The goals of the NR specification are very aggressive, and cover use cases including:

  • Very low to very high data rates
  • Low latency
  • Massive machine-to-machine communication
  • High reliability
  • Low power operation

 

Think about those requirements a bit and you’ll see that they are full of contradictions and engineering tradeoffs. But engineers do what they do and the NR spec handles these conflicting requirements via a new highly scalable orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) system. I won’t try to describe the complex system of variable subcarrier spacing, symbol length and timing but it is designed to be very flexible to cover all the desired use cases.

 

Up In Frequency

To achieve high data rates while supporting more users, the plan for 5G is to move up in channel bandwidth and frequency. There’s just more spectrum (as measured in Hz) at higher frequencies. These ranges are now referred to as Frequency Range 1 (FR1) and Frequency Range 2 (FR2).

 

Frequency range designationCorresponding frequency range
FR1450 MHz – 6,000 MHz
FR224,250 MHz – 52,600 MHz

 

FR1 extends somewhat higher than the existing LTE spectrum in use now and will require some incremental improvements in technology and approach for 5G, particularly for the much wider bands and channel bandwidths. FR2 is another ballgame, well into the mmWave range where signal power is more difficult to achieve and much easier to lose to propagation losses.

 

Throw Your Cables Away

With signal loss a problem, adding some additional antenna gain can certainly help. At these higher frequencies (shorter wavelengths), phased array antennas can be used to improve the gain and steer it to where we want it to go. To keep cost down and performance up, these compact phased-array antennas are being attached directly to the RF Integrated Circuit (RFIC). This tight integration into the system means the usual output connectors are not available for measurement use. All measurements must be made Over The Air (OTA). So, yes, it’s time to throw your cables away.

 

Accurate connected measurements at FR2 can be a challenge, but decades of measurement science work has made them commonplace. Making accurate OTA measurements is a lot harder, introducing a much larger measurement uncertainty. Think many dB of uncertainty instead of <1 dB for connected measurements! In other words, OTA measurements are going to be less accurate than we have become used to – making everything more difficult.


Enter the Spatial Domain

Mobile wireless devices have always operated in three dimensions…the world tends to be configured that way. When a 3G mobile phone changes location, the system just has to track signal strength and make a handover to the right base station at the right time. Now consider a 5G device working at FR2: the variables now include the base station antenna gain, pattern and direction; the behavior of the channel including fast fading and the mobile antenna gain, pattern and direction. We have moved into the spatial domain.

 

Let’s consider how the User Equipment (UE) makes and maintains a wireless connection. The UE and base station need to find each other by sweeping their antenna beams around in some organized fashion. Once they lock onto beam settings that work, they’ll need to keep updating the beam directions as the UE moves through the network or changes orientation. Especially at FR2 frequencies, shadowing and blocking can be severe. At some point, the UE will need to switch to another base station, causing the cycle to repeat. Beam management is the key, at the UE and at the base station.

 

The test challenge is made more difficult by this beamforming operation. How do we ensure that the UE can steer the beam appropriately so that the 5G devices will work? Do we need to test in all 3D directions? Or can we just rely on a few key samples to ensure proper operation?

 

At our recent 5G Tech Connect Conference, my colleague Moray Rumney spoke about these spatial challenges, "For FR1 the question being asked for the last 100 years was “How good is my signal?” But 5G NR at FR2 brings a new paradigm which is “Where is my signal?” since if it is pointing in the wrong direction its quality is no longer relevant."

 

 

FR1 cellular vs FR2 cellular requirements

 

These design and test challenges are being worked on every day by Keysight engineers and other technical experts in the industry. Learn more about Keysight 5G technology and solutions here.

As I mentioned in a recent post, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) – also referred to as corporate citizenship or sustainability – has morphed from the right thing to do several years ago to a business imperative today. This shift is driving new thinking in corporate governance models to ensure CSR strategies are aligned to industry trends, stakeholder requirements, and business success. Being in-line with, or even a step ahead of, this integration of CSR in corporate governance will save you and your company some grief. But how do you get there? And once you “get there”, how do you maintain momentum? At Keysight, we used our company formation as the impetus to embark on a 6-step journey to evolve our CSR program model to help get us “there” and position ourselves for continuous progress.

 

Importance of the Journey

Before I delve into the steps Keysight took to evolve our CSR program, I’d like to share how I was recently reminded about the importance of this journey. In a 2018 Annual Letter to CEOs, Larry Fink, Chairman and CEO of BlackRock, referenced the increasing importance of CSR in institutional investment decisions and corporate engagement strategies. “Society is demanding that companies, both public and private, serve a social purpose,” Mr. Fink wrote. “To prosper over time, every company must not only deliver financial performance, but also show how it makes a positive contribution to society.”1

 

That is a powerful statement. One that underscores how the investment community is signaling a move beyond just financial performance as an indicator of business value, to include societal impact and sustainable operations. As Mr. Fink stated, “a company’s ability to manage environmental, social, and governance matters demonstrates the leadership and good governance that is so essential to sustainable growth.”

 

This is not an isolated example. F. William McNabb III, Chairman and CEO of The Vanguard Group, Inc., noted last year in an open letter to directors of public companies worldwide that they “believe it is incumbent on all market participants—investors, boards, and management alike—to embrace the disclosure of sustainability risks that bear on a company’s long-term value creation prospects.”2

 

I couldn’t agree more! These messages are spot-on with the trends Keysight has experienced with our investment community as well as our customers and rating agencies as they request increasingly comprehensive social responsibility data. This reality, coinciding with our company formation, marked an opportune time to consider evolving our CSR program model to address these trends, and align it with our new brand and business strategy.

 

Six Steps to an Evolved CSR Program Model

Upon formation, Keysight had robust CSR programs with monitoring, reporting and functional accountability already in place. Many companies do, even if they don’t know it collectively. Keysight’s opportunity was to do a six-step, top-to-bottom review and assessment of our CSR program model and governance, to fine tune it and ensure ongoing success. Following was our journey:

 

  1. Defined Material CSR Topics – The base of any program starts with key stakeholder needs. So, as most new CSR organizations do, we first conducted a materiality assessment. This helped us identify and prioritize the topics most important to our investors, customers, employees, and the community, building on the trends we were seeing from these stakeholders. While the result did not note any significant difference from our previous approach, it helped ensure we were starting with a solid foundation based on issues important to our key stakeholders.
  2. Aligned Material Topics to Company Values – The purpose of this step was to align our stakeholders needs with our company’s core DNA. By reviewing the material CSR topics from the last step against our core company values, we ensured that the program tenets would be supported across the organization and deep within our employee base, all of whom have a part to play in our CSR success.
  3. Created/Modified CSR Vision – It is important for any program to have a vision statement, a beacon of sorts, that drives behavior and connects the program goal to the business strategy. At Keysight, we connected our top-level beacon, to “build a better planet,” with our business purpose of “accelerating innovation to connect and secure the world” all while “employing a global business framework of ethical, environmentally sustainable and socially responsible operations.” This comprehensive statement allows us to quickly frame the program tenets while testing that our efforts in this space support the program direction. If a CSR program or policy doesn’t support this vision, then why would we do it?
  4. Aligned Goals to Business Objectives – Along with supporting the broader global community, CSR programs must help the company meet its business commitments. As such, the goals of our CSR program were directly mapped to our business objectives in revenue growth, profitability and shareholder value creation. This step was critical to ensuring the company and the world is made better by our efforts, and also helped solidify the strategic nature of CSR in delivering business results.
  5. Developed Foundational Program Strategy – To achieve the vision and deliver to program goals, we defined a strategy that supports our business objectives while positively impacting the planet through a set of foundational pillars. Our six foundational CSR pillars provide a structure to which all programs are aligned and measured for company and global community benefit. They also compartmentalize a very wide-ranging set of functions to identify management accountability, helping to drive a governance structure … which was our final step!
  6. Engaged Governance Team – To drive accountabilities companywide and address emerging trends, we implemented a cross-functional governance team. With me as the executive sponsor and a set of executive colleagues as our steering committee, we ensured alignment at the root functional levels of the company. From there, a core team, led by a central program management team, manages the strategic planning and function-specific initiatives. The core team then relies on an extended support team within their respective functions to deliver to plan. This matrixed structure establishes ongoing alignment with executive leadership, puts in place a core accountability team to address cross-functional impacts and opportunities, and provides access to extended contacts across the company to meet program deliverables and goals.

 

Where to Next?

Evolve! Did I mention this is a journey? The end of the process is really just the beginning. The adventure continues. While we put much effort into these steps to get us to a point that addresses the emerging corporate governance reality, we will continue to review our programs and make progress while adjusting appropriately to meet changing needs.

 

Regardless of if your organization has long-entrenched programs or is new to CSR, you may find that our journey could also help your business develop and implement an evolved program model that is well-aligned to emerging trends and your corporate strategy. And of course, all while helping improve the planet!

 

Please feel free to share in comments how your company is addressing the evolving requirements and trends in this space. What has worked, not worked for your organization?

 

Sources:

1 "Larry Fink’s Annual Letter to CEOs: A Sense of Purpose," Larry Fink, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer BlackRock, January, 2018
2 "An open letter to directors of public companies worldwide", F. William McNabb III, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of The Vanguard Group, Inc. Aug 31, 2017