The recent story out of the ANZ regarding David Hisco, the NZ CEO, is extraordinary. Over his 9-year tenure it cannot be denied that Hisco has done a fantastic job for his shareholders delivering over $13B in dividends during his tenure.
So, on the face of it, it doesn’t seem like he has committed the crime of the century. Does he deserve this public humiliation? Especially given that no ANZ customer has been directly affected by his actions?
In the past, relocation and other monetary support was the norm. Incentives to attract talent. However, perhaps after 9 years, and with a call for major changes in culture and conduct in the banking sector (which he has not acted on), it was time for him to change his own mindset. And, ANZ, and the media, certainly are making an example of him and his decisions. It’s a disappointing way to end a 30-year career. But, it appears that the excesses of the past were not challenged in this current environment.
One thing is for certain, Hisco was not leading by example. I’m sure ANZ staff are also disappointed with him. I wonder if he would have found it acceptable behaviour if it had been a member of staff at the ANZ and whether it would have been deemed as misappropriating company money. This would surely have been met with instant dismissal. Bottom line, it appears that ANZ treats its staff and executives differently. But is this right in today’s environment?
Are you challenging yourself on some of the outdated mindsets and behaviours of the past, even when it might mean you have to give up some of those ‘perks’?
Simon Sinek (particularly around 25 minutes):