If bankers haven’t already figured it out, their business will be dramatically different in the not-too-distant future. In fact, in a few years time they might not be able to recognize it at all.  One glimpse of the global banking system of the future comes from Adair Turner, chairman of the United Kingdom’s Financial Services Authority (FSA), whose long-awaited and highly-touted “Turner Review” of the U.K. financial industry has just been released.   While the review is intended largely for consumption in Britain, the reality is that regulatory proposals there will be listened to seriously in other European capitals and Washington, D.C.  

A new product introduction by one company – even one as large as SAP – won’t by itself dramatically affect the outcome of sustainability initiatives on a global scale.  But there’s a lot of truth in the old bromide, “What gets measured, matters.”  And while it’s clear that a lot of SAP’s language is intended to help market a product, the notion that the world’s largest business software company would use sustainability as a sales driver signals a remarkable change in tone within just the last few years.  Social and environmental factors are no longer external risks; now they’re a part of the business. 

Popular – and political - outrage over executive compensation is quickly having an impact on corporate governance: hundreds of financial firms set to receive government bailout funds under the federal government’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) learned last week that they will be required to offer shareholder votes on executive compensation this year – leaving management and corporate counsel at many companies scrambling to formulate proposals within the next few months of the Spring proxy season.

When business is booming and the bottom line comfortable, corporate responsibility seems an achievable goal.  But in difficult times, “responsibility” and “accountability” are – surprise, surprise – much trickier terms to define and employ.  Consider, for example, what’s happening in the private equity business, an industry that has been trying to shake a longstanding reputation for buying, stripping and flipping companies in pursuit of multi-billion dollar payouts, with little regard for the social consequences.

When U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner last week unveiled a proposed public-private partnership approach to buying troubled bank assets with up to $1 trillion in federal money – without supplying much detail in support - the stock market tanked and wags in the nation’s capitol suggested he was not up to the job of rescuing the nation's banking system.  But slowly, some new and respected voices are emerging in support – the most recent being Lucian Bebchuk, director of the Harvard Law School program on corporate governance, who argues in a major paper that the administration’s approach has a good chance of succeeding.

As the new head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Linda Schapiro inherits a regulatory agency that many think has grown soft, comfortable and political over the course of the last eight years.  One of her top priorities needs to be fixing the revolving door operating between the SEC and the very banks and investment houses the commission is charged with investigating. 

The inflated salaries and compensation packages for CEO’s of big companies took a generation or more to develop – that’s why they’re not likely to disappear or become more rational overnight.   President Obama’s proposal of a $500,000 cap for the salaries of executives at companies receiving future government bailout funds marks the start - but only the start – of what’s going to be a protracted debate.

A real-life What Would You Do case study: If Mary donated $1,000 for a school to buy products, she would hit her million-dollar goal.