Three lessons the AIIB learned after Pickard’s storm in a teacup
- The development bank’s reputational crisis underlined the importance of best practice in crisis communications and staff conduct, and the need for a better understanding of Communist Party membership
The China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) recently suffered a reputational crisis – its first since its founding in 2015 – sparked by the resignation of its global communications chief Bob Pickard on June 12.
The incident presents three major lessons in management and staff training.
The first is the importance of best practice in crisis management. For any organisation, a crisis is a test of corporate mettle and leadership wisdom. In this case, the AIIB responded quickly to the announcement of an investigation by Canada, a 1 per cent shareholder, announcing that the bank would cooperate fully with it.
Additionally, the AIIB board of directors initiated an internal review, chaired by the dean whose institutional mandate of overseeing the president was put to a major test for the first time. The results of this review, released on July 7, concluded the internal investigation.
These actions, not required by law, shows the bank’s consideration for propriety and should help to shore up the trust of member countries. The best response to allegations is to maintain transparency. The AIIB has turned its crisis into an opportunity to affirm its good governance, show it has nothing to hide, and improve itself by taking on the review’s recommendation to institute a crisis response and communications plan.
In the AIIB’s case, the internal review pointed out that Pickard’s allegations “were cast in broad terms and no evidence was provided to substantiate them”, downplaying the severity of the incident. There is a feeling that a deficit of trust had been acutely felt as a result of intense global geopolitical rifts.
30:39
What to expect from China under third-term President Xi Jinping | Talking Post with Yonden Lhatoo
The second lesson is the need for best practice in staff conduct. As “an international civil servant” of the AIIB, every staff member at the bank has to adhere to a code of conduct whereby, in legally discharging their duties, their loyalties are to lie firmly with the organisation.
Pickard’s stated motive for leaving the AIIB – “As a patriotic Canadian, [resignation] was my only course”, he tweeted. “I don’t believe that my country’s interests are served by its AIIB membership” – reflected how conflicted he was during his 15-month service. This was despite having sworn upon his appointment to AIIB to “regulate my conduct with the interests of the AIIB only in view”. The internal review rightly recommends strengthening the bank’s screening processes for leadership positions.
Being loyal to the organisation does not mean having to compromise on patriotism. These two lofty sentiments can be reconciled, and even mutually enhanced, if one is open, tolerant and collegial in an international environment. AIIB staff should uphold only the banner of the bank’s development mission.
In some instances, one’s loyalty to organisation and country may become conflicted. For example, a government might seek to give instructions to international civil servants or to influence them in the discharge of their duty. Such behaviour risks the government violating international law and staff breaching the organisation’s code of conduct – sabotaging the interests and reputation of both parties. Maintaining independence from government influence thus safeguards the interests of both.
Pickard alleged that the party runs or controls the AIIB in “one of the most toxic cultures imaginable”, and that he does not “want to be a useful idiot”. His language reflects a deep misunderstanding of the role party members play in the community, and unwisely insults his former AIIB colleagues. AIIB vice-president Danny Alexander, former chief secretary to the UK Treasury, has refuted that this language did not reflect his experience of working in the Bank since 2016.
The function of Chinese Communist Party membership in a community is comparable to that of Christianity in a neighbourhood. Communist faith motivates one to be a good role model in business, just as Christian values motivate one to do good. Party members make their own decisions in daily life, uncontrolled by the party. Indeed, party membership is found both in the international organisations led by China and those where China is an ordinary participant.
An international organisation should be open to all political and religious affiliations. Indeed, codes of conduct at many international organisations condemn such discrimination. In the best international organisations, a culture of harmony among diversities is treasured.
Gu Bin is an associate professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University, and a China-Forum expert
