Corporate chieftains — notably those who gather each year in Davos, Switzerland — may think they live in a world where countries with interdependent economies and companies with interconnected markets operate as if there were no borders. The notion that these connections would ensure both global prosperity and universal peace was shattered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

For many years, I’ve been asked the same question: “Does good corporate governance really matter?” And for years I’ve replied, “Yes.” Now I have more to add. After nearly two decades of service, I recently retired from the Encompass Health board as our term limits required. Four other directors who joined the board at roughly the same time also departed.

Boards and companies ignore DEI concerns at their own peril.

Media coverage and global conflict have focused attention on business decision-making.

The march toward board diversity continues despite judicial setbacks.

“Time for a Name Change” is the title of a thought-provoking article posted recently on LinkedIn by Stephen Davis, senior fellow and associate director at Harvard Law School’s Program on Corporate Governance. Davis argues that the acronym ESG has outlived its usefulness and needs to be replaced. Writing largely from the viewpoint of investment professionals, he suggests a new term: 360-degree investing.

Requiring disclosures on climate change and DEI may infringe on free speech.

But racial and ethnic diversity representation needs work.