Colgate Palmolive

Diversity mgt
Colgate-Palmolive, a global company with a strong concern for ethics, has been effective in developing a diverse workplace and accelerating its connection with
multicultural consumers.

Diversity Strengths

Under the guidance of Eugene Kelly, worldwide director, global workplace initiatives, Colgate-Palmolive's diversity-management initiatives have flourished in the
last year.

Chairman, President and CEO Ian Cook is a strong diversity proponent, signing off on executive compensation tied to diversity, appointing members of the
diversity council, meeting regularly with employee-resource groups and regularly using the company intranet to promote his diversity commitment.

The company has 29 employee networks, which are used for recruitment, retention, talent development and multicultural-marketing outreach. They include groups
for parents, women and multicultural employees. Fifty-eight percent of employees are members of these groups.

Colgate-Palmolive has mandatory diversity training for its entire U.S. work force, lasting a full day. The company also has a long history of philanthropic giving to
multicultural organizations, including the UNCF, National Hispanic Corporate Achievers and Colgate Women's Games scholarships.

Training & development

Professional Development
At Colgate, we truly care about our people. Attracting, developing and retaining exceptional people is a key global priority. To support employee development and
job satisfaction, we proudly offer global career opportunities, access to world-class training and education programs and continuous coaching and feedback.
Career Development
Our Career Development approach is all about motivating our people to take on challenging and exciting work and giving them the skills, experience and support
they need to succeed.
We practice our approach through:

• Individual Development Planning (IDP): Colgate IDPs enable employees to partner with their managers to identify skills, behaviors and knowledge
needed to achieve specific goals
• Succession Planning: Colgate relies on global succession planning to identify and develop the next two to three generations of Colgate leaders
• Job Postings: Open positions are posted internally

Training and Education

Colgate's leadership position in the global marketplace is directly linked to the skills and expertise of our employees. Practical learning and professional growth are
critical to our continued success. Thus, we invest generously in the training and education of Colgate people.
Our commitment to skill development includes:

• Formal classroom and online study

• Sharing best practices, globally
• Developing practical work applications based on real-world experiences

Ongoing Coaching and Feedback

We encourage ongoing, two-way communication so that Colgate people know how they are doing and what they need to do to further develop as professionals.
We encourage:

• Annual goal-setting sessions

• Continuous coaching and feedback, to discuss progress, identify areas for improvement and redefine priorities
• Written appraisals to document progress toward career and corporate goals

Expatriate Management
From star marked website- slideshare ppt

Governance Commitment in Action

Colgate’s Corporate Governance Commitment
Colgate’s Board of Directors believes strongly that good corporate governance accompanies and greatly aids our long-term business success. This success has
been the direct result of Colgate’s key business strategies, including its focus on core product categories and global brands, people development programs
emphasizing “pay for performance” and the highest business standards. Colgate’s Board has been at the center of these key strategies, helping to design and
implement them, and seeing that they guide the Company’s operations.
The Board believes that Colgate has consistently been at the forefront of good corporate governance. Reflecting its commitment to continuous improvement, the
Board reviews its governance practices on an ongoing basis to ensure that they promote shareholder value. This review resulted in the recent amendment of our
by-laws to provide for a majority voting standard in uncontested elections for directors.
Board Independence and Expertise

• Strict Director Independence Standards.The Board of Directors is composed entirely of outside independent directors, with the exception of Ian M.
Cook, Chairman, President and CEO. Eight of Colgate's nine directors are independent and only one is a current member of Colgate management.
The Board believes that an independent director should be free of any relationship with Colgate or its senior management that may in fact or
appearance impair the director’s ability to make independent judgments or compromise the director’s objectivity and loyalty to stockholders. Based on
this principle, the Board adopted director independence standards which outline the types of relationships, both personal and professional, between
directors and Colgate, its senior management and other directors that, if present, would preclude a finding of independence. These standards, which
are substantially stricter than those required by the listing standards of the NYSE, guide the Board’s annual affirmative determinations of
independence. Click here to view the standards.

• Executive Sessions/Presiding Director. The independent directors of the Board are scheduled to meet in executive session without the Chairman,
President and the CEO present at every regularly scheduled Board meeting. The role of presiding director at these sessions is rotated among the
independent directors every year in accordance with an established schedule. The role of the independent presiding director is to, among other things:
establish agendas for executive sessions in consultation with the other directors; serve as a liaison between the independent directors and the
Chairman and CEO in matters relating to the Board as a whole (although all independent directors are encouraged freely to communicate with the
Chairman, President and CEO and other members of management at any time); review meeting schedules to help ensure there is sufficient time for
the discussion of all agenda items; have the authority to call meetings of the independent directors as appropriate and to be available, as appropriate,
for consultation and direct communication from shareholders. Delano Lewis currently is serving as the presiding director.

• Audit Committee Independence and Financial Literacy. All members of the Audit Committee are independent directors. The Board has also
determined that all members of the Audit Committee are “audit committee financial experts” as that term is defined in the rules of the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and that they meet the independence and financial literacy requirements of the NYSE.

• Board Experience and Diversity. As its present directors exemplify, Colgate values experience in business, education and public service fields,
international experience, educational achievement, strong moral and ethical character and diversity. Click here to view Colgate’s criteria for Board
membership, entitled “Independent Board Candidate Qualifications.”
Directors are Stockholders

• Director Compensation in Stock. On average, 81 percent of a director’s compensation is paid in Colgate stock. Board members also receive stock
options each year.

• Significant Levels of Director Stock Ownership. Board members own significant amounts of Colgate stock. Under Colgate’s stock ownership
guidelines, independent directors are required to own stock equal in value to at least five times their annual fee. For more information on director stock
ownership, please see the table included in “Stock Ownership of Directors and Executive Officers” in Colgate’s 2008 Proxy Statement.

• No Director Pensions. In 1996, the Director Pension Plan was terminated. At the same time, the annual grant of Common Stock under the Stock
Plan for Non-Employee Directors was increased to further align the interests of directors with those of stockholders.
Established Policies Guide Governance and Business Integrity

• Charters for Board Committees. Each of the Audit Committee, the P&O Committee, the Finance Committee and the Nominating and Corporate
Governance Committee has committee charters developed under the leadership of their respective committee chairs. The committee charters
describe the purpose, responsibilities, structure and operations of each committee. The Audit Committee charter reflects the increased authority and
responsibilities of the committee under the corporate governance rules of the SEC and the NYSE. View the committee charters: Audit
Committee, Finance Committee, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, P&O Committee.

• Corporate Governance Guidelines. First formalized in 1996, the guidelines reflect the Board’s views and Company policy regarding significant
corporate governance issues. As part of its ongoing review of best practices in corporate governance, the Board periodically updates the guidelines.
The Board believes the Corporate Governance Guidelines are state-of-the-art. Click here to view Colgate’s Corporate Governance Guidelines.

• Code of Conduct. The Board sponsors the Company's Code of Conduct, which was first issued in 1987, and Business Practices Guidelines, both of
which promote the highest ethical standards in all of the Company's business dealings. The Global Business Practices function, headed by an
executive officer, oversees compliance with these standards. The Code of Conduct applies to the Company's directors and employees, including the
Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer and the Chief Accounting Officer, and satisfies the SEC's requirements for a code of ethics for
senior financial officers. The Code of Conduct is updated periodically, most recently in August 2008. Click here to view Colgate's Code of Conduct.

• Business Integrity Initiatives. The Board supports Colgate’s efforts to communicate effectively its commitment to ethical business practices. To
further this goal, executives and key managers throughout the Colgate world are required to annually certify in writing that they understand and
comply with the Code of Conduct and that the people they supervise are also in compliance. Colgate directors also annually certify their compliance
with the Code of Conduct. In addition to already existing training regarding the Code of Conduct, Colgate values and effective leadership, Colgate’s
Global Business Practices function has launched an updated mandatory management training program entitled “Business Integrity—Colgate Values
at Work.” This initiative is designed to educate Colgate executives, managers, and other key Colgate people around the world about the applicable
laws, regulations, guidelines and policies governing Colgate’s business practices. The training includes topics such as: the proper gathering of
competitive information, adhering to antitrust laws, ensuring proper accounting practices, avoiding conflicts of interest, the giving and receiving of gifts,
insider trading and Colgate’s Code of Conduct, including our internal compliance certification process.
 • Political Expenditures. As set forth in the Company’s Code of Conduct and Business Practices Guidelines, the Company has a long-standing policy
against making contributions to any political party or candidate. In addition, each year the Company advises its U.S. trade associations of this policy to
prevent use of Company dues or contributions for any such expenditures.
Board Focused on Key Business Priorities

• Strategic Role of Board. The Board plays a major role in developing Colgate’s business strategy. It reviews the Company’s strategic plan and
receives detailed briefings throughout the year on critical aspects of its implementation. These include subsidiary performance reviews, product
category reviews, presentations regarding research and development initiatives and reports from specific disciplines such as manufacturing and
information technology.

• Succession Planning and People Development. The Board has extensive involvement in this area with special focus on CEO succession. It
discusses potential successors to key executives and examines backgrounds, capabilities and appropriate developmental assignments. Regular
reviews of professional training programs, benefit programs and career development processes assist the Board in guiding Colgate’s people
development initiatives and efforts to gain a competitive recruitment and retention advantage.
Direct Access to Management

• Management Participation at Board Meetings. Key senior managers regularly attend Board meetings. Topics are presented to the Board by the
members of management who are most knowledgeable about the issue at hand irrespective of seniority. An open and informal environment allows
dialogue to develop between directors and management, which often produces new ideas and areas of focus.

• Direct Access to Management. The Board’s direct access to management continues outside the boardroom during frequent discussions with
corporate officers, division presidents and other employees, usually without the CEO present. Directors are invited to, and often do, contact senior
managers directly with questions and suggestions.

Ensuring Management Accountability

• Performance-Based Compensation. Colgate has linked the pay of its managers and employees at all levels to the Company’s performance. As
described in greater detail in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis in Colgate’s 2008 Proxy Statement, the P&O Committee adheres to this pay-
for-performance philosophy, and stock-based incentives comprise a significant component of senior management’s overall compensation.

• CEO Evaluation Process. The Board’s evaluation of the CEO is a formal annual process. The CEO is evaluated against the goals set each year,
including both objective measures (such as earnings per share) and subjective criteria reflective of the Company’s strategy and core values. As part of
the overall evaluation process, the Board meets informally with the CEO to give and seek feedback on a regular basis.
Board Practices Promote Effective Oversight

• Board Size. Designed to maximize board effectiveness, Colgate’s by-laws fix the number of directors between seven and 12. Continuing the Board’s
practice of being comprised of less than ten directors, nine directors currently serve on the board.

• Directorship Limits. To devote sufficient time to properly discharge their duties, the Corporate Governance Guidelines recommend that directors
should not serve on more than three other corporate boards.

• Meeting Attendance. On average, the directors attended 97% of the meetings of the Board and the committees on which they served in 2007. No
director attended less than 91% of these meetings.
Continuous Improvement through Evaluation

• Board Self-Evaluation Process. Each year, the Board evaluates its performance against certain criteria that it has determined are important to its
success. These include financial oversight, succession planning, compensation, strategic planning and Board structure and role.

• Board Committee Evaluations. The Board’s committees also conduct self-evaluations annually, examining their performance against their
committee charters. The results of these evaluations are reviewed with the Board, and further enhancements are agreed upon for each committee.

• Individual Director Evaluations. Complementing the Board and committee self-evaluations, the Board has also developed an individual director
evaluation process to be used every few years. Using director effectiveness criteria selected by the Board following a review of external best
practices, directors evaluate their peers and the resulting feedback is shared with individual directors by an external facilitator. The process enables
the directors to provide valuable feedback to one another and identifies areas of strength and areas of focus for enhanced effectiveness.

• Colgate-Specific Director Education Program. During 2007, the directors, under the leadership of the Chair of the Nominating and Corporate
Governance Committee and the Presiding Director, designed a Colgate-specific director education program. Held in December 2007 and attended by
all of Colgate’s directors, the Institutional Shareholder Services (“ISS”)-accredited program was led by an expert external faculty with relevant judicial,
legal, business and board experience.
External Recognition for Colgate's Governance Practices

• High Governance Ratings. In December 2008, Colgate received the highest rating of 10 from GovernanceMetrics International (“GMI”), becoming
one of only two U.S. companies to achieve this score in every GMI ratings cycle since they began in 2003. GMI is an independent governance ratings
agency which examines the governance practices of nearly 4,000 companies worldwide. Colgate is also among the high rated companies by
Institutional Shareholder Services (“ISS”), a provider of proxy voting and corporate governance services. ISS evaluates the corporate governance
structures and policies of nearly 7,500 companies worldwide.

• Business Week Top 10 Boards. On three occasions, most recently in October 2002, the Board has been ranked among the top 10 boards in the
U.S. by Business Week. In each case, Colgate was chosen from a group of more than 200 public companies based on Business Week’s surveys of
institutional investors and leading corporate governance experts.

• Corporate Board Member "Champion Board". In September 2002, the Board was named one of five “Champion Boards” by Corporate Board
Member. Colgate was chosen by a group of securities analysts, competitors and academics who cited the open interaction among directors and
between the Board and management.
Colgate-Palmolive database captures cultural awareness
Expatriate knowledge put to good use

Abstract

Colgate-Palmolive Co. has extended a system, originally used only for global succession-planning, into a valuable expatriate knowledge database. The
database contains information – made available throughout the company’s worldwide network – on each manager’s experience or awareness of
different cultures.

Article Type:

Viewpoint

Keyword(s):

Knowledge management; National cultures; International business; Skills; Information systems; Colgate-Palmolive Co..

Journal:

Human Resource Management International Digest

Volume:

11

Number:

Year:

2003

pp:

19-22

Copyright ©

MCB UP Ltd

ISSN:

0967-0734

Colgate-Palmolive Co. has extended a system, originally used only for global succession-planning, into a valuable expatriate knowledge database.

The database contains information – made available throughout the company’s worldwide network – on each manager’s experience or awareness of
different cultures.

Rather than view foreign assignments as one-off experiences, Colgate-Palmolive sees them as part of an extended overseas career track, and 75
percent of its $9.5 billion annual sales comes from outside North America. It has a global expatriate population of around 300. Some 40 percent of
these have had four or more global assignments, while 75 percent have had two or more.
Colgate-Palmolive’s wide geographical presence places great emphasis on detailed knowledge of local markets and their differences, which can affect
pricing and business planning, and this is where a database of expatriate experience comes into its own.

Wide geographical presence

In his HR Magazine article, London-based freelance business writer Robert O’Connor points out that a major advantage of sending people abroad is
the skills and experience repatriates bring back. With some planning, an organization should be able to form a database of this knowledge.

If an employee leaves a company that does not have such a database, all their skills and knowledge could be lost for good – or go to a competitor.

But J. Stewart Black, president of the Center for Global Assignments, a research and consulting organization in Alpine, Utah, claims that many US
companies have failed to realize the importance of creating databases of repatriate skills and that the business mind-set has not kept up with
international expansion.

In his feature, O’Connor highlights how a sophisticated human-resource information system (HRIS) could be the answer to creating an effective
database of repatriate skills – detailing education, specific areas of expertise and language abilities.

The prospect of higher retention rates and more accurate market research could be a compelling argument in favor of HRIS upgrades, which can
sometimes be time-consuming and expensive.

Initiatives can fall short of their goal

Kevin C. Desouza, doctoral candidate and research associate at the Center for Research in Information Management, University of Illinois, Chicago,
states in his Business Horizons article that in the knowledge economy, a key source of sustainable advantage and profitability is how an organization
creates and shares its knowledge.

Many knowledge-management initiatives rely on information technology (IT) as a major enabler but, Desouza argues, most knowledge-management
initiatives fall short of their goal.

A survey completed in 1998 of 431 US and European companies with knowledge-management projects revealed that only 13 percent believed they
were successfully transferring knowledge from one part of the firm to another, and 46 percent ranked their firm high on the ability to generate
knowledge.

Desouza believes the reason is that although IT can enable people to cover distance and time barriers through e-mail and group-support systems, it
does not motivate people to share knowledge. The biggest challenge to knowledge management is persuading people to share their know-how.

Barriers to knowledge management

Interviews with senior executives responsible for knowledge-management initiatives, and with front-line employees who use these technologies,
showed four main barriers to the efficient use of knowledge management:

• being known as an expert;

• requisite knowledge too hard to capture and categorize;
• lack of adequate communication and action; and
• forcing it.

Many IT and software firms have developed knowledge-management systems to help programmers to tap into their peers’ experience but, contrary to
popular opinion, software engineers are nervous of becoming known as “expert” because they then risk being allocated projects based on their past
experiences rather than more challenging new ones.

Being stereotyped as an expert can therefore hamper rather than advance a career, so companies should allocate employees to projects not on what
they know but on their potential to learn. Executives could also do more to eradicate the fear by clarifying the scope of the systems and not deviating
from it.

Fostering communication

Specialized domains, such as software engineering, strategy consulting and finance, contain knowledge, which cannot easily be articulated or put in an
explicit format. Sometimes, the cost of contributing insights into the knowledge-management system outweighs the benefits.

Desouza argues that by using dialog with one’s peers, the knowledge exchanged surpasses that stored in information systems. It is impossible to
capture all expertise in databases, so it is essential to foster communication.
He emphasizes that it is crucial for executives clearly to communicate the importance of knowledge-management-system training to staff, which
involves a learning curve. This would help to combat the commonly held view among employees that use of a knowledge-management system is a
luxury rather than a requirement of their job.

On the other hand, it is important not to over-manage or micro-manage, as people can then feel pressured and become less motivated. Senior
executives need to avoid strict guidelines on what knowledge can and cannot be shared.

It helps to let employees experiment with new technology at their own pace, as changing to a knowledge-management culture does not happen
overnight.

Dedicated roles

Elizabeth Lank, an organizational-learning specialist with a career covering consultancy, speaking and writing, stresses in her People
Management article that organizations need people dedicated to the development and maintenance of knowledge and information infrastructures and it
is the responsibility of HR professionals to identify these key employees.

She states that people with real accountability are needed to ensure that the knowledge-management initiatives do not end up being another “flavor of
the month”.

Three types of role are needed:

• knowledge architects – a policy-setting role;

• knowledge facilitators – a development role; and
• knowledge aware – knowledge and information sharing accountabilities incorporated into existing jobs.

The architects would be senior strategic roles taking on titles such as chief knowledge officer or learning director, and answering questions like, “What
knowledge information is critical to share and how will we share it?”

Facilitators would run the processes that help knowledge, information and learning to flow and would be people such as company journalists, company
librarians or Webmasters.

The third category illustrates how it is the responsibility of every employee to share his or her own expertise and knowledg