 We have a very interesting panel discussion now, a very important panel discussion, because one of the key elements of this annual meeting of this 50th anniversary is to take up again and to promote the notion of stakeholder capitalism. But of course there are a number of issues related to stakeholder capitalism, which we want to discuss this evening. And I'm very pleased to have a very powerful panel. I'm not going necessarily in the seating order, but I welcome Jim Hageman Snabes, the chairman of Siemens and of MERSC. He's also a member of the Board of Trustees of the World Economic Forum, Ficus, Ibesma, also a member of the Board. He's Chief Executive and Chairman of the Managing Board of Royal DSM, then we have Mark Benioff, Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer of Salesforce, member of the Board of the World Economic Forum, Brian Monion, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Bank of America, and Chair of the International Business Council of the World Economic Forum, and Jeannie Rometti, Chairman and President and Chief Executive Officer of IBM, also a member of the International Business Council. And Jeannie, I would like to use this opportunity to express a special thanks to you. Because coming here to the 50th anniversary, I was looking again at our program, which we had when we had the first meeting in 71. And actually, your company is the first member of the forum and was represented already at the first meeting by one of its leading executives. And thank you for 50 years of loyalty. I highly appreciate it. You're welcome. Thank you. Congratulations to you. Let me start with Brian. You had this afternoon, we had our meeting of the International Business Council, which you are chairing. And what is the outcome? You discussed very much how we can create a credible ESC system around the stakeholder captains. So I think, Klaus, we had a session with the community of chair persons this morning and then with the International Business Council today, really talking about two topics, which the simplest way to think about them, one is about what have we been doing to help make progress in SDGs and that's the lighthouse projects, which are examples of what the companies have done under your leadership the last 50 years to drive change. And the second is metrics to measure what we're going to do in the future. So what are we going to do in the future is companies to continue to drive stakeholder capitalism. And I think the idea here is to develop actual metrics that we could get the companies to agree to, meaning the operating companies, the investors who invest in us to agree to, and the owners who give them the assets to invest. So a pension fund giving an asset to an asset manager who then gives an asset to an operator and get a set of metrics we can all agree to that are defining what stakeholder capitalism is and importantly progress on it. And so the hundred or so CEOs were there and the hundred or so companies represented a group of us have been working on this. We are now pushing it forward to syndicate it through the entire population for people to sign on. The context is 50 years ago, the class referenced 50 plus years ago, the concept of stakeholder capitalism leading to 2017, the International Business Council, most of the members signing the compact, then leading to the next step, which was the things like the BRT and the purpose of the corporation. What is it? And on top of that, the IBC saying that we have to make progress on the SDGs, because if we don't, charity can't solve these problems. Governments can't solve these problems alone. It will take the money from companies to generate the $6 trillion in investment to get the SDGs implemented. And the way companies are going to do that is by changing their operations and the way society will measure them is by metrics. And so this virtuous circle of operations to metrics to investors to owners and back to the metrics will allow us to demonstrate what stakeholder capitalism is effectively. And the group is very enthusiastic and we use the top four accounting firms to help us drive it, to have the integrity and auditability and we'll push it through in the next summer's meeting. So while it was the beginning of a process, when do you feel we have a generally accepted comprehensive measurement system in place? The goal is to do it between now and August. We started last, we started somewhat before last August, but really got into it last August in earnest with your team from the WEF helping them drive through the industry and I think, so the engagement, hopefully by the time we meet in Geneva in a wonderful location at the WEF headquarters, we'll have a degree two set of metrics and that way we can start publishing them as part of our annual reporting by the next subsequent year in 2021. And we will present it and try to integrate everybody on the occasion of the next standard meeting in hours. And so that'd be the arc to do it and then thereafter people can report and I think you have simply this good life to how to measure companies' progress towards serving all stakeholders, doing a great job for its customers and clients and teammates and Sheryls and doing a great job for society and it's that and that's critical. So we move relatively fast because it's a complicated matter. May I just ask, as a panelist, the sense of urgency, why is it necessary? Well, maybe I can add a comment there. I think it's key. I mean, we are very good at measuring a shareholder value and we've done that for many, many years and as CEOs and chairman, we think that is an important role. Now, if you want to go to stakeholder capitalism, we do need to make sure that we can measure the value we create for all stakeholders and there's so many measurements out there. So I'm very excited about the effort that Brian and the team has been doing. It nails it down to 22 measurements that everyone could implement and I can say as a chairman of Siemens, we have committed to engage in this project, help out, make sure that these metrics are relevant and we're even putting our remuneration system for the CEO and then the executive team on an ESG base, so stakeholder management and its core. And to add to Jim, we should not only measure, of course, the different things on sustainability but it is clear that we are not adding enough value in the area of sustainability. If we look what's happening to the oceans, if we look what's happening to the climate, if it's looking happening to our scarce raw materials, it's clear that we need to measure but it's also clear that the measurements will show that we're not doing enough yet. Jeannie, we are living now in a very, I'm sorry. That's part of bringing the investment rate up to the need to actually get the SDGs implemented is if we all commit to these commitments, it will require more investment by Mark's company, by Jim's company, by Jeannie's company and that's how we get there. That creates the urgency, the amount of commitment we make. Right now it's just about a third of what we need. Jeannie, we are living in a new age, the age of the forced industrial revolution and actually you are one of the pioneers, IBM of this age. Now, since those new technologies bring new challenges like platform companies and so on and so on, how does the forced industrial revolution actually affect stakeholder capitalism? Yes. Does it make it easier or more difficult? If you look at data, I think for some companies it's going to make it more difficult and for others it will rely on the values they've held for a long time and the reason I say that is in some ways you'd say would the forced industrial revolution change what we do, some ways you'd say no because when it comes to long term and managing for the long term and shareholder value, you'd say I've always put an and between every constituent. I do think there's a difference though with the forced industrial revolution and that it changes the nature of what we do and I would boil it down to one word and that's trust and in fact in many ways I think this is going to be a decade of trust and if you think about the technology, as you mentioned way back when we started all of this, even in the beginnings of AI you could see the world would compete on data and there would be good uses and bad uses of data and then you would say to yourself, okay, if this era is going to thrive people have to trust the technology but one more thing they have to trust that the era will be inclusive for them as well and so I think this industrial revolution and everything about it bases itself in data and it calls the question then of trust at an individual level, about the data, at a company level, at a nation level and then does everyone feel the future is better or worse in this era and that leads to you to change things if you focus on that point. So what's the suggestion made that actually it should not be ESG, it should be ESGD? With data playing such an important role, data responsibility should be emphasized. Well look I think for all of us and Brian had four categories today as he went through on the metrics. One of them was around principles and governance and I think everybody could say, class I go back when you had me out here four or five years ago together we introduced our, I shouldn't say introduced but we wrote them down our principles about data and data management years ago around this to be clear that people knew that technology should augment man that the data belong to the owner you had to be transparent no bias etc. So some of the things Brian is calling out to be measured on you should be audited against those things if you believe them. The other big pillar you have is around people and so if I can just kind of digress one second I do think this era means 100% of jobs will change. We've been doing work with MIT and looking at how do job roles change and you can already see tasks are moving to high end and low end and some people will call that hollowing out the middle and so it does call for massive retraining and so I would just add if I can on this point to the fourth industrial revolution the biggest thing that I think it requires is a change of paradigm around skills for one it's moving so quickly you have to value skills not just degrees you have to have new education models and then new pathways to get people retrained and back into the workforce so maybe we'll talk more about those programs but those are very concrete actions that have to be taken. But what is the responsibility of a company like yours? Well act upon those necessities. This is very this is where I think there's this intersection between business and what is good for the shareholder what's good for me what's good for the community because if this it is not good for anyone if people do not find the digital era to be an inclusive era where they see a better future for themselves. No one is going to buy new technologies no one's going to want to go down these roads if the world becomes more have and have not that is a horrible thing I believe both and so therefore for us I also need great employees and so that's part of my job and I think because of the speed I make this technology I should usher it safely into the world part of ushering safely means I have to help the world prepare for it in society prepare and that means skills and that's a public-private partnership I mean I was just sharing with the IBC earlier today one of the ones we've been passionate about for seven years was everyone can't have a college degree so could you work with high schools around the world and turn them into with a community college or an apprenticeship as others would call it a vocational school a six-year technology degree a high school and an associate degree to make a long story short seven years later 600 companies 150,000 kids coming through and they've got two degrees they're employable and the results show so I would report on these metrics last year 15 1 5% of my hiring in the United States was these kids and they're great employees by the way and they go back and get more education and so I but if we don't all participate it's too much for government and the speed it's moving at us too fast and you've got to build trust in this era any comment on this issue of skills and the need for public-private cooperation I'll just relate it back to the in the metrics the people metric requires you to declare how you're handling this question of what's industrial revolution so Ginny mentioned it but this is the alignment of these issues that my other colleagues will talk about and the fact that we can then commit to society will make progress now factor there is quite some interrelationship between one issue we discussed with great urgency here which is environmental challenge which we have and see stakeholder capitalism do you see any any interconnection or does it provide a special sense of urgency right thanks class and congratulations with 50 years stakeholder model but after 50 years take hold the model we still need to discuss this area of sustainability and then I asked myself the question are we all serving our economic model or did we develop the economic model which is serving mankind and I think the economy ever started in a very simple sustainable model which bar to trade one specializes in this the other specialized in this any exchange goods and later on we made the economic model more complicated with money and gold and etc and maybe somewhere we derailed a little bit that result making money is the real goal of the economy where the real goal is to live happily here all together and if we see how much problems we create with the oceans without climate with our scarce raw materials we are somewhere derailing and it is just good business sense as well to take care of your environment because nobody will remain successful in a world that falls apart society and environmentally so I think we can develop the products as businesses we can develop the innovations to address the issues on climate and that means also that we need to take bigger steps we need to be more clear as businesses what is our derivative of the Paris goals so-called science-based targets to set our emission targets maybe to put a price on carbon also internally in companies at least to disclosure the climate-related financial risks we are taking all kinds of things which the three of us put in the letter to all the participants of the forum and I think there are many many things is there which you can do as business to step up in order also to guarantee your own business model so I would like to say there to think long-term there to address the SDGs there to take care of all the different stakeholders on the long run otherwise you will not remain successful and do you think that the environmental concerns have been sufficiently provocative questions sufficiently integrated into the scheme which we have now as a base I think if you look one of the four pillows earth and it has all the SDGs around environment the clean water sanitation the oceans are life below water and the words they use the planet etc so they're all in there the metrics we're using are really geared at showing how companies are managing their scope one scope to scope to emissions one they're going to be carbon-free by and the letter that you wrote with if you can I ask people to make that come about 20 odd percent of the 25 percent or so the companies have already made a commitment so I think they're sufficiently detailed that they'll give measurements and frankly the good relative measurements so one of the things will happen within an industry if my company is doing X and another company is doing better than X there'll be a natural competition to make sure I'm competitive which will then cause me to do more we have Bank of America carbon neutral now we have a 300 billion dollar environmental program I think as people learn more about that we just created a new markets committee with an infant Tom on tied to lead help driving a business case as people hear more about that you're gonna see more people do it even smaller size banks etc Brian we have under your leadership the business council developed this framework I think we should distribute this framework to everybody here and to integrate now everybody into this let's say yeah mobilization of of all businesses any comment well it is not only for us companies but it is also for those who invest in us asset managers or behind them as its owners they also find it very difficult to see which company is now really sustainable and which company not there are more than 650 different matrices out there to determine who is sustainable now nobody understands out of 650 different matrices who's are really sustainable and how you compare companies it's for us companies important it's of investors important it is for society at large important and that is what Brian and together with the IBC tried to do in the past months and in the coming months is to converge that to a much more clear a set this is sustainable this is not sustainable this is the way you measure and I think that transparency class fits 100% which is stakeholder model so we start here a true revolution we do yeah now Jim you as the chairman of Siemens you you had just to make some difficult decisions and even when you adhere to the stakeholder concept you cannot avoid that at certain moments you have to take the decision in one way or another way and to find the right balance what is your experience and your advice yeah so you're right we had a pretty challenging situation recently and it was challenging in many ways it was emotional because of the let's say lack of facts in the conversation around it and it was super complex so was with the social media and the spread of information that we have today you suddenly find yourself in a very defensive moment when when actually in your core you feel that you know pretty proud of where the company is and where it's going I mean the the factual situation which makes me proud of Siemens is that Siemens was one of the first industrial players who actually committed to CO2 neutrality we did that in 2015 so that's five years ago and said by 30 will be neutral and by 20 this is this year we'll have a 50 percent reduction of CO2 compared to 14 so very committed to that we we changed our philosophy as well to say well you know being a stakeholder oriented and planet-oriented is not about you know how you spend your money ie we make business we make a profit and then how much of this profit will we do before we actually turn it around and say it's about how we make our money and fact is that today 44% of the total revenue of Siemens which is a what 82 billion euro company is associated with solutions that help our customers run their business in a more sustainable way and so with that in mind you feel proud about where the company is and then suddenly you find yourself in a communication crisis because we had committed to deliver a signaling system to a train and the train moves cold from a coal mine and you look at that you feel you're pretty far away from the the bad doing but we had committed to this project and suddenly you know if you follow then the media and the headlines the headlines says you know Siemens is building coal mines which is not factually true and but it's really hard to deal with that situation and you got to make some choices I was still going to deliver that system it's not a big contract you know you want to value commitments to customers for me this case shows that first of all there is a an urgency on this where you permission to play as a company even though you feel you're doing the right things can be taken away from you instantly in a place where you didn't expect it and and secondly I believe that we are right now at the tipping point where the scrutiny around projects that are not relevant for that future a fossil free future will be dramatically increasing the climate change is not some topic we can talk about it's about real action and and you've got to realize that as a company and you've got to take real action that the issue is not the commitment to the future that you want to bring your company to but the transition to get there you don't get there in one day we have 15 years when we started this now we have 10 left we're doing fine but we need to basically re reinvent the company go from solutions that were fossil based to renewable base you've got to re skill the company you've got to restructure the company get out of certain businesses so that you can invest in others and you do need to reposition the company because otherwise you suddenly find yourself in the wrong headline even though you're doing the right thing so as a chairman for me it's about not getting distracted by this because you've got to do the right things but if anything you need to talk more about it and you need to accelerate your efforts otherwise any little project even though you feel you're far away from the wrongdoing can distract you and reduce your ability to become what you have intended to be you were very much not in your head you have your own experience and can you tell yes I do and I mean it's had to do with whether or not we take on certain projects as an example there's much discussion about different technologies and how they're used and I think that those have to be values based decisions but what's changed is how much you have to talk about it so that people understand why you take these decisions and I think it's even what surrounded this whole dialogue around the purpose of a corporation that there's been things that are written very binary about the topic and this isn't a binary topic and if you manage for the long term you do have an and between all of these words yet people want to polarize this so when any one of us do things for our community our employees our clients the countries everywhere within which will we live our partners I always feel they give us license to operate that is where our license to operate comes from so that communication that Jim was talking about a it is both important to have it but it's also because it is good for your business this isn't it's not an altruistic thing that you are doing in of itself and I think you can't in this day and age explain that enough or give the rationale I mean when I say I do when people will say well this is charity or foundation work I say no it's not I mean skills is not charity and foundation work and if living in a democracy that people think they have a better future is not charity work because they are your employees and your customers so that's why I was really understanding and agreeing with this point that I think it's just so important to both position everything right and connect those dots right because it's a virtuous circle but you got to get get it moving so that one of the setups that we did with the groups today was to talk about the six trillion and the charity is eight eight hundred billion a year you have a government the biggest government in the United States has a billion dollar deficit and is only a four trillion dollar budget so this work can't be charity it's what Jim said it is retooling your business system to have the outcome otherwise we're going to fail because we have eight hundred billion a year and we have six trillion demand and it's not going to come close and that's if you took all the money and all the charity in the world only went to this items nurse the arts and a lot of the things which are not you know are also included so this idea what Jim is saying is we're saying they operate your whole expense base your whole customer base your whole supply chain and over time transition to produce these results is a much more sustainable sustainable process Mark I will I will ask you in a moment a very sensitive question but before coming back to you Cheney if you want to judge the behavior of a company you have to have ethical principles now you have to have some principles and now you are a leader in one of the foremost leaders in artificial intelligence and so on new technologies where we haven't succeeded yet to create the ethical framework around how do you deal with those issues yet look I this is a topic that we took up many years ago first principles always start with yourself before you try to put them on other people and to this day we've written ethical principles for AI so within my own company it starts with because I build this stuff the belief that it's there to augment what you and I do and make us better that does matter where you start from and how you start building these things and then the part that you must be transparent and you must be sure it's rid of bias and it has to be explainable so once you start laying out what your principles are for this and then audit yourself to them so I think there are some pretty simple things we do and many people can do things like do not hide your AI you should know when you're interacting with it versus versus just a system there are things like you should check it for bias I mean we've built products that actually can it doesn't matter who built your AI it can tell you if it has bias and an important sort of footnote like what is bias because the actual act of concluding bias is bias you've had some set of values that you've determined this is good and this is bad and so that's culturally different it varies in many places so what our tools really look for are just patterns and then you have to put them against the values it's a values question not a technology question right and so you would don't hide it test it all the time I think when it comes to regulation and a framework to deal with AI you should deal with how it's used not try to not the technology and regulated itself it takes precision regulation and then above that if I'm a company we have an AI ethics officer I think you guys do too is I mean I think many of us do now so then we've worked with all countries around the world Europe has come out with one OECD's got one number of these have been built that I think have been built quite sensibly in partnership with with business and industry and academia to give them input because there is always going to be this balance between innovation and whether it be privacy or security or any other path you go down and in these early stages you really do want to both watch its use also regulate it based on risk and be sure you're transparent so that's I I think it's an incredibly important thing and it isn't just something a government does every company has to do it for themselves Mark you have been a proponent and a fabulous partner in promoting the stakeholder concept thank you because you are all model but you went to even one step further and what you did is actually to speak out on social issues in a very strong way so you took a position for example in addressing poverty in your community in San Francisco you even were involved in a voting dispute and of course you are support for LGBTQ rights now my question is should a business leader not only apply or submit himself to the ESG standards but even go one step further and speak out on political issues well Klaus I mean just listening to this panel and being here at the conference in recent events certainly I would tell you and I would certainly tell the business leaders that capitalism as we have known it is dead and this obsession that we have with maximizing profits for shareholders alone has led to incredible inequality and a planetary emergency we all agree of data gratitude to you Klaus you have shown us the way forward and Klaus is right for 50 years we have seen he has called for a new capitalism a stakeholder capitalism a more fair a more just a more equitable a more sustainable way of doing business that values all stakeholders as well as all shareholders and I know Klaus you are right because Salesforce and through your mentorship is living proof that stakeholder capitalism works now you know we've had a phenomenal return for our shareholders $165 billion in market capitalization 4,000% return since we went public in 2004 but Klaus we've also had a very good return for our stakeholders 310 million in grants so far to worthy causes our employees have volunteered four and a half million hours to their local communities 45,000 non-profit NGOs including the World Economic Forum use our product for free and that's about a billion dollars of our software a year as well and it's why Klaus I so strongly believe that when we serve all stakeholders business is the greatest platform for change and the great news is and I believe that you can see it here that stakeholder capitalism is finally hitting a tipping point in the US the business round table has stated now the purpose of a corporation includes a fundamental commitment to all stakeholders not just its shareholders that choosing between the two is a false choice and this month Davos manifesto 2020 that you have written says that the purpose of a company in the fourth industrial revolution is to create a value for all its stakeholders so taking that all into my heart when you say does it mean then that I have to fight for my employees yes so if they're being discriminated against and if they're LGBTQ employees yes we will fight for them does it mean that I have to fight for our customers of course or even our local stakeholders in our community like our homeless yes every CEO has a responsibility to think about all stakeholders and yes as you've seen aggressively at this conference the planet is a key stakeholder we are in a planetary emergency that is why I commend you Klaus for 1t.org calling for the planning of 1 trillion trees to sequester over 200 gigatons of carbon and calling on the governments that have spoken here the businesses that you've spoken here the NGOs that have spoken here to take immediate action to one yes be net zero reduce your mission about to also we need to sequester the carbon that has been transferred from the grounds and from the oceans and from the trees into the atmosphere so anyway I want to thank you Klaus for leading us to this vision of stakeholder capitalism that we are today and you certainly deserve a tremendous accommodation for 50 years of this vision thank you thank you very much Mark we are coming to an end of the session would you I have the feeling we are here at the funeral it's the funeral of shareholder capitalism but it's the birth of stakeholder capitalism now to conclude this is panel discussion what would be your advice now to the audience I mean I'm sure there are still people who are skeptical about this transformation what what is your message to people who are skeptical and still have question marks in their mind so for me as a business leader I had a epiphany in 2008 when I went on a trip to India and met some of the poorest people on the planet and some of the richest people on the planet the same day and I almost resigned and said I gonna you know spend time to do something good for the world and I realized a few hours later that if I stayed in business and I could leverage the vehicle of business then probably I would have a significantly more impact than I would just have us Jim Hagerman Snava who cares about me at the time I was with SAP and and we began a process of trying to redirect the company towards a stakeholder orientation that led not only to a doubling of the value of the company but actually an excitement inside the company about what this company could do I'm seeing the same now with Siemens I see the same with AP Miller mask so in my mind we often underestimate the power that business can have you ask should we be polite political no I don't think so we should influence policies to create frameworks that align better the stakeholders but it is not our duty to be political I think we need to have opinions and most of all we need to leverage the global reach of our companies the the integration that we have with employees and in societies in which we operate and demonstrate action because that's what business is really good at and and I hope that everyone will sign the manifest I certainly will because I also think it's completely unfair that one CEO is asked to take responsibility for some other CEO who's not getting it done and therefore my please to everyone sign it and then do something be a force because business can be thank you walk do you want to close I I think that you know there's been some comments made about corporate cultures but I think that we realize that a corporate culture alone will not be enough to meet the urgency and scale of today's global challenges we need new resources the wealthiest among us people like me and so many of us here we need to pay higher taxes that's a word that has not been used yet on the panel and I'm pleased that your man Davos manifesto close recognizes that companies need to pay higher taxes and pay their fair share and one example of that is how we're addressing this at Salesforce in San Francisco where we radically supported a new tax on our largest companies to address our homelessness crisis because that homeless are stakeholders as I mentioned but you asked what should we be doing now as business leaders and I would tell my fellow business leaders here that none of these challenges are going away we need to rise to this moment of urgency we need to act now if you're attending this conference you need to commit to stakeholder capitalism if you are attending this conference you need to commit to being net zero if you're attending this conference you need to help to protect the oceans if you're attending this conference you need to commit to help planning one trillion trees every single one of us is a platform for change this is a time of action not words we are at that point of urgency with our planet and that's why I wrote the books trailblazer because I believe that my business and really all of us are tremendous platforms for change and that we must act today thank you so the question the skeptic might say can you do both can you really deliver for all the constituencies can you deliver for your customers can you deliver for your employees can you deliver for your shareholders and deliver for society and we we've looked back and back tested this in a lot of ways in our research just pure matter the BRT firms that signed the BRT have outperformed their industry if you our research team has proven that if you don't follow good as yes principles you could look back and if you were an investor if you didn't invest in those companies that performed poorly missed 90% of bankruptcies a research team has declared the next decade one of the ten trends is moral capitalism and that's where the investor money is going to flow so if you're thinking about you can produce a profit pure shareholder and not address your owners and not address your employees you're going to have a problem but I'd flip it around and be more optimistic you can do both our company has been able to across the decade I've been CEO generate tremendous share or return earn record earnings two and a half billion a charity fifty billion dollars community development gonna complete completed 125 billion dollars plus environmental financing and you can do it while we're making money these are all business propositions so I think the skeptics say you can't do both you can now let's go out and do it fight care well I hope it's not a funeral although it's always good to bury the things we don't need anymore but I hope it's more a burst a burst of taking care like a Marcus saying of all the different stakeholders globalization brought prosperity for billions of people for many countries but not for all countries and not for all people in all countries including the planet being one of those stakeholders of globalization and I think what we should do my advice I am deeply convinced that you can serve all stakeholders that you can serve the planet that you can serve society and create profit however not always on the short term not so what should we do we should resist the temptation of being seduced to deliver value only on the short term and it is sometimes tempting to do that but we should resist that temptation and go for the long term and if you go for the long term I'm convinced that you can combine value creation in an economic sense together with societal value and ecological value and that is what we CEOs what we businesses need to do Jimmy you have the last row yeah well that's a tough position I think everyone's done a great job and I'm always humble about advice because I need more advice than I probably give so I think the only thing I would add to this conversation then is IBM's in its second century so I think this is living proof that if you do honor all stakeholders as I said earlier it is your license to operate and one thing I had to think hard though in this new era I'll end where where class your first question to me was on the fourth industrial revolution and there is something different though here now and I think the world is bifurcating between what I called simply talking to my workforce seven eight years ago to the team I said the world was bifurcating into good tech and bad tech and I think you have to decide what of those you are and if you're good tech what does that really mean and I don't mean to quote technology company I mean good tech or bad tech and how you're going to use it and for us we made a decision that it would be about things like everything we did would build trust it would be to prepare society and their skills we would be the industry's role model for diversity and inclusion and honor the planet and that's what that means and my own my would end on that advice to just decide what that means for you to be on the good side of history. Thank you all the panelists and you see why we feel such this annual meeting and see manifesto 2020 should really be a turning point for one sinking to a new sinking and you have seen with the panelists passion which is behind because we are dealing here not with a theoretical issue I think we are dealing here with an issue which will determine the survival of the free enterprise system of democracy if we take it in a broader context so let's take up the challenge and please thanks the panel.