2016年-EBA欧洲银行管理局_EBA-Op-2016-10_28Report_on_the_benchmarking_of_diversity_practices29_23页_497kb

EBA Report Summary: Benchmarking of Diversity Practices

Core Content

This report by the European Banking Authority (EBA) provides an analysis of diversity practices across credit institutions and investment firms in the European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA) Member States. The data was collected under Article 91(11) of Directive 2013/36/EU, which requires institutions to consider diversity when recruiting and to implement a diversity policy. The report highlights the current state of diversity in management bodies and outlines key findings and challenges.

Main Views and Key Information

1. Diversity Policies

• Adoption of Policies: Only 35.53% (307 out of 864) of institutions have adopted a diversity policy.
• Gender Diversity in Policies: Of those with a diversity policy, 69.06% (215 out of 307) have a policy promoting gender diversity.
• Policy Implementation: Policies vary significantly across Member States, with some having a high percentage of institutions with gender diversity policies, while others have very few.
• Targets and Timelines: Many institutions that have adopted a diversity policy do not set a specific target percentage for gender diversity. Among those that do, the majority set a target of 0%, which is not in line with the directive's intent.
• Timeline for Targets: Only 22 institutions indicated a timeline for achieving diversity targets, with most not specifying a time frame.

2. Diversity Practices

• Gender Representation:
  • Executive Directors: Only 13.63% of executive directors are female, with a significant portion (69.42%) having only male executive directors.
  • Non-Executive Directors: Female representation is even lower, at 18.90%, with a higher proportion of institutions (60.82%) having at least one non-executive director of each gender.
• Institution Size and Diversity:
  • Larger institutions (especially significant ones) show better gender diversity in management bodies.
  • Investment firms, particularly small ones, typically have a low or no female representation due to being run by the owner.
• Age Diversity:
  • The representation of women in the supervisory function is higher in larger institutions.
  • The average age of non-executive directors is higher, which may explain the lower female representation.
• Educational and Professional Background:
  • Diversity in educational and professional backgrounds is more developed than other aspects.
  • Over 50% of institutions have a diverse educational background in their management bodies.

3. Recruitment Trends

• Recent Recruitment:
  • A slight increase in the recruitment of female directors was observed in 2014 compared to 2010–2013.
  • Some Member States showed a significant rise in the percentage of female directors, while others saw a decline.
• Volatility:
  • In Member States with fewer institutions, recruitment results can be volatile due to the limited number of appointments.

4. Recommendations and Future Steps

• Need for Improvement: Despite legal requirements, diversity in management bodies remains low, especially in gender representation.
• Additional Measures: Both institutions and Member States should consider additional measures to promote balanced gender representation.
• Ongoing Monitoring: The EBA will continue to monitor diversity practices and issue periodic benchmarking studies.
• Review Mandate: The European Commission is required to review the appropriateness of diversity benchmarking by the end of 2016.

Key Figures and Tables

Conclusion

The report underscores the importance of diversity in management bodies for improved decision-making and strategic risk management. While some progress has been made in recent years, particularly in recruitment, the overall level of diversity remains low, especially in gender representation. The EBA emphasizes the need for more comprehensive diversity policies and active measures to increase representation, particularly in the supervisory function. The findings highlight the necessity for further action by both institutions and regulatory bodies to ensure a more balanced and inclusive management structure.