Sergio Caredda, an HR Professional that believes in the human side of HR. Sergio Caredda currently works for OVS SpA as Chief People Officer and has substantial experience in HR across multiple functions, both in business and in consulting. He recently launched a page to collaboratively collect resources that, from an HR perspective, can support the people of Ukraine.
If you’d like to learn more about Sergio Caredda, you can do so here
Thank you for listening to another International Risk Podcast.
The International Risk Podcast interview transcript with Sergio Caredda
Dominic Bowen – 01:14
Good morning. My name is Dominic, and I’m the host of the International risk Podcast. Today we’re joined by Sergio Kurita. He’s an experienced and very innovative HR professional, who’s dedicated to improving the way organisations achieve results through their people. He recently created an initiative about HR for Ukraine. And I’m keen to learn more about the human risks that companies face, both in Russia, in Ukraine and across Europe as the war in Ukraine continues. We know that human resource leaders play a key role in building and sustaining risk resilient organisations that ensure employees physical, mental, and emotional safety, as well as monitoring and mitigating talent related risks, and assisting at all times with crisis management and communications. So I think there’ll be a lot of really important risk discussions we have today with Sergio, Sergio, welcome to the podcast.
Sergio Caredda – 02:10
Thank you, Dominic, for inviting me over to this podcast.
Dominic Bowen – 02:12
Sergio, I’ve heard different figures between 280,000 and up to 500,000 employees in Russia, affected by companies closing and suspending operations. I know that Russian law requires companies to give three months notice before mass layoffs occur, and then even negotiations with the unions also need to occur as well. And those are just some of the considerations including the risks of a sudden cessation or suspension of operations in Russia. At the same time, the Russian invasion of Ukraine continues to escalate and shows no signs of conclusion in the near future. Can you talk to us about how the war is affecting businesses and workers? And what role how HR plays in this geopolitical disruption?
Sergio Caredda – 02:50
It is a complex rule, because you mentioned something that, you know, the reaction about companies that are at the moment pulling off Russia, in terms of their operation is a kind of a side effect of the war itself, because the primary focus has been for most of the companies that were active in Ukraine, to pull off from the region. 550,000, that’s what I have accounted looking at the list of the more than 600 companies that pulled off that Yale University is continuously updating. What is noticeable is that many companies have announced to pull off from Russia but they have not yet made action exactly for what you mentioned. There are many legal constraints that the Russian government is putting into the way of pulling off from the country. Many companies are operating also with local business agreement partnerships, franchising agreement, you name it. So, it is actually also difficult to pull off from the country in a clean way. One of the aspects that many are not considering is one of the area where companies have been faster at moving out of Russia has been legal firms, most of them have been ever avacuating their employees to neighbouring countries. But this also means that support in Russia at the moment is more difficult to have. I’ve been speaking recently with a couple of Western companies that would like to accelerate the exit from Russia, but they can’t because they don’t have at the moment available local presence of their lawyers. From our accounts there are more than 40 of the largest legal firms that have announced already closure in Russia. So, this is also contributing to that. And you also have to add one other aspect; there is a lot of pressure sometimes also in different ways from the Russian government on the companies that are operating in Russia that announced moving out of Russia in the form sometime of tax investigation or other forms of pressure that is coming along, which is of course also jeopardising a little bit that the way that the companies can operate, there is intellectual property that needs to be managed, there are risk associated with data that you might have in the country, okay, servers, etc. So, there is a whole of aspects which go beyond the pure employees. On the employee side, I think that most companies have resorted to essentially furloughing employees at this stage, especially when they’re closed-I’m thinking retail when they close large operation. And here comes one of the additional layer of risk which is happening. Companies cannot really communicate what is happening and the basis for this decision. You know that at the moment talking about the war-known as a special operation-you cannot comment on the situation in Ukraine. So this is adding a layer of complexity with companies that are not really able also to communicate properly of the reason of the decision, in many ways. And this is also creating a lot of problem. And this is also explaining why some companies are officially announcing the closure of some of their plants, for example, because of logistic disruptions or other reasons that are a side effect, let’s say of the war and not the main political reason for why they would probably suspend operations there.
Dominic Bowen – 06:15
Thanks very much, Sergio, you made a lot of great points that I really want to unpack. And maybe we’ll start with the communication. How is communication between international headquartered companies and employees that are based in Russia complicated by the restrictions on communications, and the fact that they can’t reference the ongoing war in Ukraine?
Sergio Caredda – 06:30
Yes. So the communication is complex. First of all, it’s complex from a technical point of view, because there have been limits in the way internet is operating, especially certain companies have also been having to harden the security from an IT point of view, and this is creating some technical problems. The other element is, there is a safety concerns for the employees, and especially I’m referring to management, but the the broader employee population. The problem is that if a company is stating, for example, the obvious that we are taking action because of the war in Ukraine, the problem is, if this message is present on, let’s imagine, a mobile device of one employer, Russian employee, and that Russian employee gets stopped by the police and the look at the mobile phone, he could actually have consequences from a legal point of view. So, the safety risk is what is holding a lot of companies also in on one side having to use tools, which are not normally used in corporate world, like telegram or other safe channels are used. I’ve heard several companies using satellite phones now. And to have communication, which is a little bit harder to be intercepted. And especially using communication that does not leave traces on the personal devices of the employees, because this has becoming one of the issue. A lot of people that have left the country have reported that their mobile phone, their personal computer have been inspected, and sometimes also seized. Sometimes people have not been able to leave the country because of some kind of content which was present there. So this aspect is really being critical at the moment.
Dominic Bowen – 08:27
I mean, as you said, safety concerns especially for management, IT risks are increasing. Legal Advice is limited, and communication is sensitive. It highlights the reasons why I think some of the best companies are forming their crisis management teams to respond to and manage this crisis, because it is exactly that; it is a crisis. This is an issue and an event that requires resources and attention far beyond regular business operations. And so, businesses that are trying to deal with this as though it is business as usual, really missing the key message. This is a crisis and it should be responded to as such and bringing in the experts like the head of HR head of legal head of compliance, head of marketing, communications, you know, these need you need to have this team which is sometimes called the Crisis Management Team to respond to this in an appropriate way.
Sergio Caredda – 09:13
Most of the companies I’ve been speaking with have exactly formed this, in in different shapes the form crisis response team. I think COVID has already taught a lesson to certain way of how to handle crisis of course, we are talking of different crisis. But companies had already from that lesson learned how important is to pull different also expertise together, and also to pull where necessary expertise from outside the company. Because again, I was just making the example of security. A lot of companies have minimum security level from an IT perspective. I mean, the basic stuff, and here we’re talking beyond that other elements around the question of employees, a lot of companies are not prepared for something like this. And they had to really rush it at the beginning in Ukraine, now, of course, in Russia, and things are getting more complicated by the day. There are a lot of practical elements from how do I pay employees, in the country, to elements, which are, standard company would not be equipped to know how to handle a repatriation of the number of people from a remote area in Russia. Especially when airlines are not flying anymore, etcetera. So, there are a lot of tales that I’ve been recording over the past weeks with a lot of companies, that kind of resemble a bit a little bit cold war stories, when people were moved out of Russia into Finland, or meeting into that forest, etc. But it is happening. And it’s unfortunately happening also, almost daily, because there are several of these providers which are really helping to get people out of the countries, which are working 24 hours a day at the moment. A lot of companies have been a little bit too slow in reacting to some of these aspects and this, of course, created delays and more risk for the people.
Dominic Bowen – 11:04
Yeah, it certainly It certainly does. And I think I’m spending most of my days, for the last couple of months, literally just going from one client to the other working with their crisis management team, and then go to the next crisis management team. And it’s really interesting to see the way that organisations are much more advanced and more mature in their risk management processes and their risk maturity, and how they’re really managing this crisis quite well. But what about employees that are inside Russia? What insights can you share about how employees that are still in Russia are responding to the crisis and what Russian employees actually want from their international employers?
Sergio Caredda – 11:40
Well, this is an interesting aspect, because these companies have been careful in managing the communication both towards the employees, but also from the employees. On one side, it’s very difficult for employees to speak freely into this context. Several of the companies that we’ve been spoken with are trying to create some type of communication, channels, whether through platforms, or through what the preference is. At the moment really people speaking to each other, in one-to-one conversation, which are, of course, the one that might be less risky, but it is complicated to have. And here, I think that what we need to consider is that the average Russian employee that is working from a Western company, probably already has a number of information that are broader than an average Russian public, in terms of what the international situation is. I don’t want to make this rule of thumb, but a lot of the companies that I’ve been speaking with tell me that their employees in Russia are understanding the situation. And you also notice it. I mean, there have been also some vocal employees on LinkedIn, for example, looking at some of these elements. We’ve had the story of some Russian employees, asking their company to close in Russia. So, there have also been a little bit of this sensibility in some of the employees. And I think that a lot of the people that are more educated from an international point of view are keen on understanding this. The problem is also that a lot of the people working for Western companies know that they are a little bit at risk of being under investigation. And this is one of the areas where a lot of companies had to rethink their strategy. Initially, many companies have been pulling off their foreign citizens, of course, from Russia, but now, they have to reevaluate some of these aspects. I have been speaking, for example, with one company that ultimately has offered expatriation essentially, to its a middle management team. We’re talking about 25 people with their families, that are in Russia, because what they noticed that there was an increased pressure on them by the Russian authorities.
Dominic Bowen – 14:05
I understand that the payment of staff that are based in Russia is not prohibited. But when bank transactions are made more difficult, the mechanism of financial flows, of course, is hindered. And this scares many companies. And I’ve spoken to several crisis management teams who are asking me, but what if we breach the sanctions and that they’re really worried about the risks of breaching sanctions. But when companies only have limited cash in Russia, the payment of severance packages might be more difficult, especially if operations have ceased, and cash flows have come to a complete standstill. So how significant is the impact of sanctions and restrictions on international transactions, and the banking sector actually impacting employee payroll in Russia?
Sergio Caredda – 14:46
I mean, the regulation around sanctions is very complicated. As you mentioned, technically, it’s not forbidden to have the money flow for employee payment. But the reality is that with most of Russian banks being pulled off Swift. Also the technicality of running a sending a payment to Russia is becoming more and more complex. I know that a few companies have been able to block the payments, a first bunch of real money to be sent for employee payments this week. That’s already six weeks after the first embargo, some interest from a banking perspective has been put in place.
It took a lot of time to really find the best route, from this point of view, and also, a few of the companies I’ve been speaking with have preferred to go on direct route, meaning that they’re paying, let’s say, their payroll provider in the country that then pays off instead of sending money to their own subsidiary in the country. So there are ways of doing it, but you’re right, it’s important to be very careful around that.
A lot of companies in terms of struggle to look for these, and they opted from some ways which can be a little bit greyish, like sending money from their Chinese subsidiary. Now, this is what is very dangerous, because this is looking to circumvent this type of sanctions. So here it’s very important not to look at that. What I had been suggesting, and speaking with some companies, that was one company specifically that was running a financial operation in the country in January, so they literally didn’t have cash in the country anymore. With 500 employees in the country, they could you know, the idea was to pay in advance three months of salary so that they could manage the situation but they didn’t have the cash there. So, they had to undergo really the hurdles of asking to loan to a partner company-the partner organisation that they had in the country. But you see here it goes far beyond the pure HR topic.
What is more problematic I think is also the fact that for many Western company, paying employee in Russia (of course, I’m not speaking of blue-collar workers or normal retail workers, but then speaking of technician, it worker etc.), many had part of their salary in dollars or in euros. Now, this is not possible anymore because they need to obtain their salaries in their local currency. Some companies have started to do arrangement like “Okay, we keep them on an account here, it’s available for you when these things roll out”, but then their investigation from the Russian organisation are you paying the full salary in the local currency.
One of the things that many are under estimating is also what is the impact of this flow of money that goes to Russia for paying the salary for the 500,000 employees, we were mentioning. It is an important element, especially for the higher paid portion of the companies where there was normally a transfer from abroad. And this is also an important element in terms of the global macroeconomic stability that Russia is seeking, so there is a lot of attention there.
Dominic Bowen – 18:00
It’s very, very complicated. I think an important point to make now is that having to come up with a plan in April, for a war that had a high probability in October, November, December of last year, is perhaps a little bit too late. Now that’s fine, if you’re in that position, now there’s things you can do. And as we spoke about earlier, financial crisis management team, bringing in consultants like me, like you to sort of advise and walk through the process. But ahead of the next crisis, this is a great opportunity to learn, what could we be doing today to prepare for a crisis that we can see for emerging risks that are coming so that we don’t have to come up with plans, after the banks are closed, after the sanctions are in place, after we’ve made this decision. This is why we do contingency planning before the crisis. We’re knee deep into the crisis. What are some of the greatest risks that employees in Russia are facing today? And how can human resource teams contribute to establishing risk resilient activities in Russia that is respectful to the employees, and also complying with International and Russian laws?
Sergio Caredda – 19:12
At the moment, the biggest risk that of course employees are facing in Russia is to lose their job, plain and simple. I’ve been speaking with an economist of a Russian Institute -I cannot name him for obvious reason. He has made an estimate of about a million, a million and a half employees that are working in all of the kind of areas that are impacted by sanctions directly. An example that has been also widely reported is that all of the airports in in Russia have been following employees. Only in Moscow, they are talking of about 500,000 people that are losing their job or are at risk of losing their job.
So this is, of course, a race that is wide with all of the social aspect that this can bring. If we think about the employees, I’m thinking especially of companies that have not decided to pull off completely from the country, but that have suspended the business at the moment, one element is “For how much longer the companies can be paying”?
The second element is: “what if the government starts putting pressure on some of these employees”? I’m thinking in many different ways – like nationalisation, which means kind of obliging middle management to take the reign of end and also operating beyond legal aspect, or in terms of intellectual property. One of the question mark that we also have is, “can then the Western company ensure work for them abroad”? There are complexities here, because we need to consider that at the moment Ukrainian employees have a lot of access to move to other countries and be protected. But there are no specific actions for Russian employees from this point of view. So I think that the key element that companies need to ensure is continuous flow of information. I understand that sometimes it needs to be continuous flow of information on other activities on other aspects. A lot of companies are trying, for example, to mundane welfare activities in the country, whether it’s counselling activities, whether it’s coaching, whether it’s support for the children. Trying to bring a lot of contact across the employees in Russia with employees in the other countries, what many companies are facing is also a risk that… I don’t want to call it “Russiaphobia”, but there is a general sense of negativity now. And of course, if you’re in a company, and you have always had Russian colleagues, the idea is that they’re trying to keep a flow of information somehow working. Which is not easy, again, because there are certain topics that cannot be discussed. I was speaking with one company where they really have been running focus group, to train Western employees not to talk about certain subjects, because they’re dangerous for the Russian counterparts, but also to keep the dialogue open with the Russian employees
Dominic Bowen – Dominic 22:13
So Joe, if we look at the Ukrainian side, and all of the International risks influencing personnel and activities, can you tell us about how the idea of HR for Ukraine came about? And what HR for Ukraine actually is today?
Sergio Caredda – 22:28
On the day when the war started, you know, I was thinking, “What can I do to help and support?”. I thought; “we need to start looking at what we can do”, and from an HR professional community, COVID has been a big learning about one of the duties that HR has, which is this duty of care for their employees. And one of the points that I was also thinking is that a lot of companies were operating in Ukraine, there are a lot of Ukrainian companies operating out of Ukraine and also in other countries, but there are often young companies, midsize companies, etc, which probably did not have all of the resources to actually manage the situation.
So what I tried to do was simply assembling resources because one of the things that COVID has taught is that HR, compared to other family, is very willing to share good practice, share resources, etc. And I try to listen to them. You notice that a lot of activities went immediately in on focusing on how to hire Ukrainian talent out of the country how to support them. This area, I think we have overinvested at the moment, there is really a high focus on offering jobs to Ukrainian employees. But many people have not focused on the harsh reality that most of the talent is now in the country and fighting, as male could not leave the country, it was only female that could leave the country, with their children.
Very often, that bulk of technological talent that was in Ukraine and was limited in terms of number, and many have decided to stay in the country. It’s very important that many organisations went into that direction, but I think we need to look also at other aspects, at how we can support the refugees in other countries, but also how we can help rebuild the country, which is of course the next step. And HR can play an important role here.
And also, because beyond the first wave, where it was really about how you communicate with employee in the country, how do you help people expatriate, how do you help relocate also there, you know, around Maripol and around Kharkiv, there were a lot of outsourcer that had to move their intellectual property outside. And a lot of support came also in the form of technology support for these companies. The idea of HR for Ukraine was building a location where there was support for these where people could find answers, very often individual actions that people took, and many companies then got in touch with me exactly out of this website. I’m trying to connect with other good practices that other companies have been doing. I think, for example, a lot of companies have been asking me why our providers to help me get people out of the country who are provider that can help me with payments in such situation, who are provided it can help me do psychological support for the people that I still have in the country and so on.
Dominic 25:30
And how can organisations make sure that their employees that are still based in Ukraine are as safe as they can reasonably do? And what should HR teams be doing to make sure they’re doing everything reasonable to mitigate their employees risk exposure when they’re working in, as you said, a war zone?
Sergio Caredda – 25:49
This is, of course a complex question to answer. And I just want to give you two examples around this. I’ve been speaking with a company which is an IT provider, they develop an app, which is widely used in the West. One of the elements that they had is that their support team will sit in Ukraine. On one side, they had to create a second support team, which is now sitting in Poland, partly made of volunteers from other organisations that are supporting, so that they can answer questions. Because most of their support team was in Kharkiv, which is an area that is badly hit by the war. And even if not all of them were compelled to actually join the army, a lot did. I’ve been seeing videos of people in their uniform, answering emails of support in a trench area.
When you actually have this situation, the entire concept of how as HR you ensure safety is going to become a little bit fuzzy. What you can do is keeping this connection open, because one of the question that many HR I’ve been speaking about it with said exactly this, “how do we keep these people working”. Because they need it, they need to keep the contact. It is also what somehow they’re fighting for.
The other example that I had was I spoke with one of the Ukrainian telecommunication companies. Their teams are literally in the areas of war, ensuring that mobile communication is working. And they’ve already had more than 28 casualties into these, as bombing shelling happened around that. This is an area where we also as HR are very often not prepared to, managing casualties in the war. If you work in the army it’s something you relegate, but they had to learn very quickly how these things can affect an organisation.
We need to put a concept on how people are taking seriously their job in many of these situations. Very often, we HR talk about passion, engagement, etc. And then you see people in the ground literally putting in question their lives to support basic services, water, gas, basic plumbing. The Ukrainian companies that are working in this area really showed a lot of resilience. It is something that we’ve also seen in many other countries in other crisis situations-earthquakes, etcetera-that a lot of these people really put their heart on top of the situation that is around them. So in this case, the role of HR, from my point of view is really adopting a care element explaining the risk in a lot of these cases. Of course, they’re not imposing shift, but it is more like on a voluntary basis, keeping the communication open.
This is the big the single, big point that everybody’s doing. Every HR person in Ukraine that I’ve spoken to, they’re doing twice a day, these contacts trying to contact every employee that they have. And every day of this war, they have had one person to person, one person, an accountant, and they’re always hoping it is just for technical reason for one, for some time, which often is the case, luckily, but unfortunately, in some cases, it’s not.
Dominic Bowen – 28:18
And can you walk us through the difficulty Sergio associated with relocating employees out of Ukraine? And what are some of the risks associated with this manoeuvring especially considering that sometimes it’s only women and children allowed to leave, so there could be your female employees with children, and they’ve left their husband behind perhaps, that have relocated? Or it could be the wives and children of some of your employees that have been relocated? Whatever it is, can you walk us through some of the risks and challenges associated with this?
Sergio Caredda – 29:45
We need to consider there have been a couple of phases in terms of the relocation is the first phase, which was up until the war started. It is a question of “whom do you choose to relocate” and from an HR point of view is how much you can force the people to relocate.
As soon as the war started, the biggest element there came is of course, the law that regulates the fact that male up until the age of 55 cannot leave the country. So at that point, the question is; “what do I have?” “Do I have just the female employees leaving?” “Do I relocate the families of the employees that are staying in the country?”
There is also the question about the people that get conscript so that they need to enroll in the army. Technically, if you’re working, you’re not obliged to enter the army unless in you are in a number of sectors that are not considered vital for Ukrainian economy. The complexity today is when you really need to still relocate some of your key personnel that is in the war zone at the moment, or in the area that are more involved in the fight. Many people have been enrolled in the military, but doing logistic support or medical support. And when the war is arriving, when the military operation or event arriving in the area, then you’re still trying to relocate.
Dominic Bowen – 31:13
Many companies have pre existing teams and long term business operations in neighbouring countries like Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. What does duty of care and HR risk management look like in neighbouring countries? And what should business leaders and risk managers be considering for these countries that are on the border of a war zone?
Sergio Caredda – 31:34
I’ve been looking at a couple of companies. It’s interesting because Polish companies, and a few of the Baltic state companies, their risk management team is already discussing “what do we do with the war zone?” “What do we do with Russia taxes?” “What do we do if NATO retaliates?”; there are a number of different scenarios that can happen around this.
It is not a secret that many companies-for example Poland-have been a big centre of outsourcing for many Western companies, especially in the eastern part of the country. There are a lot of companies that from a risk mitigation perspective are moving some of their operation to the western side of the country. The risk, we all know it, it happened before, is just a simple missile that hits the wrong side of the border by a few meters and can create brother issues.I think particularly the Baltic states were a lot worried around this and a lot of their companies have been doing this risk mitigation action, probably not on the people side yet.
But you’re right, and this is also coming to the logic of what risk management is also from an HR perspective, and how do you do contingency planning, because again, a small company cannot duplicate itself infinitely. But you need to start thinking and covering for this aspect.
We also have to consider that there are some practical aspects for just that you that we need to consider around in this from a risk management perspective. In Poland, there are millions of refugees now coming from from Ukraine. At the moment, they have been welcomed by country, their hospitals, hosted by Polish citizens, etc. But if this lasts longer, this can create social issues in the country. There is for example, an oversupply of work. This is also an aspect that as a company, you need to start considering. A lot of companies especially in Poland have been hiring Ukrainian employees to keep them with the idea that it’s for a couple of months, but if this becomes one year or two, we all need to remember that needs to be economically viable.
So I think all of the bordering countries need also support on this and together with a couple of organisations design expert like Nami Stamford, we have put together (published on the HR for Ukraine website) a crisis toolkit of organisation design tools that can be used to start thinking, “what are these larger impact on organisation?”
We have all run now in emergency mode, but how do we start planning for the facts that are mid to long term.
Dominic Bowen – 34:48
There certainly is so many things to consider. A critical component of building risk resilient organisations and strong crisis management teams is creating cultures of continual improvement and a deliberate act of learning. So in pursuit of that, Sergio, What lessons do you think HR professionals and risk managers can be drawing from the current crisis in Ukraine?
Sergio Caredda – 35:12
The key lesson is that we need to start working in terms of scenarios. We are so stuck on looking at short term planning, thinking that whether it’s a budget or one company strategy we tend to overlook alternatives to what is happening. COVID has illustrated one possibility of different scenarios and moving around. But let’s just think about small examples: how just one a ship stuck in the Suez Canal created a big issues on supply chain?
We live into this interconnected world where as more things can have big impact. And I think that as a profession, HR is well placed not to just do it for ourselves inside the organisation, but to start developing a kind of “what if” mentality.
Which also means that from an HR perspective, we need to look at staffing, how we staff our organization. We don’t need to staff them just for the business as usual, but we need to build a little bit of slack for emergency situation. And you hit the point; “how do we make sure that people have the time for learning?” When you have your workforce that is overstretched on doing their daily job, they will not have the time to look around and see also the weak signals of something that is happening. One of the things that I’m hearing now is that a lot of companies have learned this now with the Ukrainian crisis. I’ve been already in at least five companies in the workshop where they are examining scenario; “what if China starts serving it (the invasion of Taiwan)?” You can play with what the case can be.
But what if something wrong gets there? What if India goes also into a rocky situation? Or another country? You know, there are many ways you can actually go around and look atit. And it’s not just a macro economical element, we have so many scenarios about micro, macro economy.
Dominic Bowen – 37:20
Yeah, you’re totally you’re totally right, Sergio. Yesterday, I was working with a board and we’re looking at their enterprise risk management and their risk registers for 2021 and comparing it to 2022. And I was just flabbergasted at how many of their emerging risks around geopolitics as though geopolitics was a new thing. So that was a that was an emerging risk. So you’re right, I really wish more organisations would consider the impact at the geopolitical level and how that’s going to impact them at the operational level.
Well, thank you very much for coming on the podcast today. Sergio, it was great to have you here today.
Sergio Caredda – 37:56
Thank you very much, Dominic for inviting and hope it was useful also for the listeners.
Dominic Bowen – 38:00
Well, I think it was. And that was a very interesting conversation with Sergio Caredda. About the international risks associated with the current war in Ukraine, as well as the opportunities for leaders the value of contingency planning ahead of a crisis, the need to respond to crisis holistically and some of the key aspects to consider for our employees that are still based in Ukraine, Russia, and neighbouring countries.
Thank you for listening to the international Risk podcast today. Please rate this podcast. Your online reviews are critical for our success.
Pingback: The War in Ukraine: Over 100 Days On – The International Risk Podcast