The New Growth Agenda

Foreword

Given the array of macro concerns companies face today, from war and political instability to market shocks from higher-for-longer interest rates, the Oliver Wyman Forum and the New York Stock Exchange joined forces to gather intelligence on what CEOs are thinking about and how they are responding. In the second quarter of 2024 we collected survey responses from more than 100 CEOs of companies whose shares are listed on the NYSE. This report is based on those responses, along with CEO interviews, results from the Oliver Wyman Forum’s 2024 quarterly survey of more than 15,000 people across 17 nations, and Oliver Wyman’s 2024 performance transformation survey of approximately 400 executives. In addition, we analyzed fourth-quarter 2023 earnings calls for NYSE-listed companies and studied longitudinal macroeconomic trends.

In the pages that follow, we delve into the results to show the ways in which CEOs are leading their companies through this unusual moment in global economic history. We hope you find the results as illuminating as we do. 

Executive Summary

With the stock market at record levels, technology fever running high, and the US economy outperforming most others around the world, one might think the boom times of the 1990s are making a comeback. But the underlying business conditions companies face today couldn’t be more different.

Many of the forces that drove corporate growth during the ’90s and well into this century — disinflation, low capital costs, deregulation, free trade, labor mobility, and geopolitical stability among them — have reversed course or are in jeopardy.

Rarely has the business environment appeared so promising and so uncertain at the same time. Today’s CEOs don’t have the wind at their back — they are traveling directly into it.

The biggest concern among CEOs of NYSE-listed companies, shared by 54% of those we surveyed, was the possibility of government interference in the economy via regulation, protectionism, and industrial policy — a sea change after decades of deregulation, free trade, and laissez-faire supremacy. Next up on the list of worries, at 51%: the combination of volatile inflation and higher interest rates. The third biggest concern was geopolitical instability, cited by 37% of chief executives.

To generate “alpha,” or managerial outperformance, in the years ahead, CEOs will need to balance growth and efficiency objectives, revamp supply chains to manage global risks, modernize workforce strategies, and harmonize competing internal and external priorities in an era of technological, demographic, and social tumult. 

Playing for growth

Many of the CEOs we surveyed are pursuing a new growth agenda tailored for these times. Three-quarters said they see big strategic opportunities on the horizon despite the uncertainty, including mergers and acquisitions and disruptive new business models. And some 71% of CEOs are optimistic about the ways rapidly changing customer demographics and preferences could fuel growth.

But the optimism is tempered. CEOs can’t toggle between “risk on” and “risk off” in an era of higher-for-longer interest rates and rapid innovation — they must drive growth and value simultaneously. That explains why as many chief executives cited organic investment in new revenue streams among their top three priorities as cited capital efficiency and cash flow management — 55% in each case.

That said, CEOs are still pushing harder for growth. Twenty-nine percent rated organic investment in new revenue streams as their No. 1 priority, compared with 20% who cited capital efficiency and cash flow management. 

Betting on AI to drive growth — and value

Artificial intelligence is the clearest example of the new growth agenda in practice. The overwhelming consensus among CEOs was that AI is the best way to focus on revenue and cost simultaneously.

Fully 98% of the large-company CEOs we surveyed said they consider AI an opportunity for their business rather than a risk. They cited a combination of goals: More than 90% said they are investing in AI for efficiency, customer insights, and operational risk reduction, while 88% said they are investing to boost workforce productivity.

The spoils of AI won’t be distributed equally, however. Scale is a big differentiator: Larger companies have the deep pockets needed to make transformational bets, while smaller companies are looking more to build capabilities.

But the biggest mistake many CEOs fear would be to do nothing at all. More than 40% of CEOs cited not moving fast enough on AI and being left behind by competitors as one of their top AI-related risks. 

Managing for protectionism and other risks

Governments around the world are prioritizing economic security more than they have in the past several decades, imposing tariffs and launching industrial policy initiatives such as the Inflation Reduction Act. That is forcing CEOs to look for new ways to win on tilted playing fields. Fully 86% of leaders of large and midsized companies said they are planning to take action in the next year or two to address geopolitical stability, protectionism, and government industrial policies.

Regional blocs are gaining prominence as globalization evolves. Some 60% of CEOs said they plan to reduce exposure to higher-risk regions in the next year or two — again, primarily to address geopolitical uncertainty, tariffs, and industrial policies. A little over a third (38%) said they are regionalizing their operations and developing local supply chains. Only 16% of CEOs said they are planning to reshore their operations domestically, showing that globalization is not in retreat but rather is being reimagined for a new age.

The belief that geopolitical factors and crises are now a permanent feature of the business environment is leading CEOs to bolster their companies’ business continuity and crisis management playbooks. They also are empowering local and regional management teams for increased agility to respond to conditions on the ground. 

Driving workforce performance in an unsettled world

Today’s everything-everywhere-all-at-once environment presents challenges for workforce management as well. The pandemic unleashed the Great Resignation and the related phenomenon of quiet-quitting, forcing leaders to rethink major elements of their talent strategies. Now generative AI is already proving to be disruptive.

CEOs recognize that companies with flexible operating models are best prepared to navigate accelerating business conditions. Some 59% said their top workforce priority is to break down business silos to create a more unified franchise. To mitigate employee concerns about AI-related job losses, 31% of the chief executives we surveyed said they are placing a priority on investing to fill in critical skills gaps and reskilling the workforce more broadly, and an equal number said they are upskilling managers to adapt to new ways of working and market conditions. CEOs these days need to focus energy not only on their markets, customers, shareholders, capital structure, and business model but also on solidifying their company’s culture, defining its mission and purpose, and reconciling the goals of thousands of employees whose personal views might not align.

So far, they seem to be getting out on the front foot. Seven out of eight said they have frameworks or policies to support employees affected by a crisis and protect a unified culture that avoids employee polarization, while more than 70% said they have frameworks for adjusting the company’s commercial footprint to reflect its values. 

The road ahead

The most successful CEOs in the next few years will be the ones who can generate alpha amid a fog of uncertainty by remaining flexible and acting on early warning signals.

Of course, this inaugural survey is merely a moment in time, capturing attitudes very much anchored to 2024. How will changing demographics and technology fuel growth in coming years? How will generative AI create long-term value and revenue opportunities? What will supply chains look like in the years ahead? Will the new ways of working succeed? We view these insights as the starting point in a longer conversation to come on leadership in an era of unpredictability. 

Playing For Growth

“The test of a first-rate intelligence,” wrote novelist F. Scott Fitzgerald, “is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.” By that standard, chief executives face a real test of their business IQ because today’s environment contains so much promise and uncertainty.

The uncertainty stems from a dramatic shift in recent years away from the largely benign economic, policy, and geopolitical environment — including low-cost finance and free trade — that had driven corporate growth for decades. CEOs of NYSE-listed companies ranked policy-related issues as the biggest factors disrupting their business, including regulation and protectionism, volatile inflation and interest rates, and geopolitical instability.

Chief executives are responding with a growth agenda designed for today’s circumstances. They are emphasizing growth- and value-oriented initiatives in equal measure, with an identical 55% citing organic investment in new revenue streams and capital efficiency and cash flow management among their top three priorities for creating shareholder value. They also are keen to capitalize on many of today’s big disruptions, with more than nine in 10 CEOs citing AI as an opportunity for their business rather than a risk. 

Rising policy and political risks

CEOs understand that the world has changed since the heydays of globalization and neoliberal economics. Their wall of worry is topped by disruptions emanating from governments and the broader realm of policy that far outweigh traditional business concerns such as the competitive environment, talent attraction, shareholder expectations, and cybersecurity. And unlike those traditional concerns, most CEOs see policy and geopolitical issues as risks to their business rather than opportunities to exploit.

Leaders of large companies, defined as those with sales of more than $5 billion, rate regulation, protectionism, government subsidies, and geopolitical instability as their biggest concerns, most likely reflecting their broader geographic reach. Volatile inflation and interest rates are a bigger worry for CEOs of small (sales of less than $1 billion) and midsized companies, which typically don’t enjoy the same financial strength as big companies. Talent attraction and retention is also a continuing worry, with chiefs of smaller companies rating it among their top three concerns.

These disruptions make corporate strategizing a more complex and risky endeavor. Governments increasingly are tilting the playing field with tariffs and subsidies. That forces CEOs to consider a wider range of factors than in the past, and to do so while contending with a higher cost of capital, shifting customer preferences, employee anxiety about potential job loss to AI, and other issues. 

Political polarization and the rise of populism at home also pose a challenge to business leaders that can exacerbate skills shortages. In a climate where the loudest voices are often the most extreme, CEOs can struggle to maintain good relationships with regulators and lawmakers and influence policy. More than ever, they will need soft skills to make hard choices.

Going on offense

The broader array of risks that companies face today isn’t deterring CEOs from pursuing expansion. In addition to the overwhelming majority who consider AI as an opportunity for their business rather than a risk, fully 75% of CEOs said they saw opportunity in the competitive environment, including mergers and acquisitions and disruptive new business models, and nearly as many expressed optimism about rapidly changing customer demographics and preferences. Moreover, many of these vectors reinforce each other. Members of Generation Z are more positive about using generative AI than older generations, for example, while AI can be a tool for gaining competitive advantage in the market. 

Respondents to our survey were just as likely to cite organic investment in new revenue streams as a top three priority as they were to cite capital efficiency and cash flow management. But CEOs get only one No. 1 priority, and for our respondents, growth emerged on top. Twenty-nine percent ranked investment in new revenue streams as their No. 1 priority, compared with 20% who cited capital efficiency and cash flow management. 

More than a third of CEOs cited cost reduction as a top three priority for creating shareholder value, but only 8% ranked it No. 1. The findings are consistent with recent public statements that characterize cost reduction as more of a standard element of corporate financial hygiene. Fully 81% of companies mentioned cost efficiency plans earlier this year in calls presenting their 2023 financial results. Most of those plans anticipated cost savings of 5% or less, suggesting companies are focusing on sharpening the business rather than overhauling it. 

The lower priorities are also instructive. Only 5% of CEOs said they were prioritizing moving to an asset-light balance sheet to boost shareholder value, which supports the idea that most companies are pursuing incremental improvement of their cost structure rather than a transformational one. And just 9% said they were putting a priority on pursuing private and alternative sources of capital, in what could be taken as a vote of confidence in the public capital markets. 

Betting On AI To Drive Revenue — And Value

The vast potential of the internet wasn’t immediately apparent three decades ago, but it’s obvious in the wake of the sweeping disruption online connectivity has unleashed on everything from retailing and media to, most recently, commercial real estate. That lesson may explain the astonishing consensus among chief executives about today’s technological wonder, AI. 

Fully 96% of the NYSE-listed CEOs we surveyed said they consider AI as an opportunity for their business, not a risk. So far, they are focusing on it more as a lever for driving efficiency and productivity in existing operations rather than as a transformative tool for generating new revenue streams. That may reflect the early-days nature of generative AI, which hit the mass market only a year and a half ago. 

Yet leaders clearly see AI as a race they do not want to lose. More than 40% of CEOs surveyed cited not moving fast enough on AI and being left behind by competitors as one of their top AI-related risks. This AI FOMO, or fear of missing out, is highest among large-company bosses at 51%. At the same time, nearly half of all CEOs said they are investing in AI with the ambition to be a market leader across at least one use case, including 64% of big-company chiefs. 

Balancing opportunity and risk

CEOs have a tricky balancing act to pull off in their approach to AI. They don’t want to see their business disrupted by faster AI innovators, yet they also are being careful about moving before use cases are proven and they have a better grip on the risks associated with the technology. That likely explains why leaders show greater willingness to test and learn on lower-risk internal use cases even as they consider bolder moves ahead. 

More than 90% of CEOs said they are investing in AI for operational efficiency and support services, while 87% cited insight generation via analytics, 87% said workforce productivity, and 82% cited operational risk reduction.

This suggests leaders see AI as a useful lever to complement existing cost-cutting and capital efficiency efforts in generating internal funding of growth. Investment in customer-facing solutions lags by comparison. More than 70% of CEOs said they are investing in AI for customer-service automation, and 58% cited investment to develop new revenue streams, such as developing new products. 

Cybersecurity tops the list of AI risks, mentioned by nearly half of CEOs in our survey. Aside from not moving fast enough, CEOs also cited inaccuracies and bias (38%), limited AI literacy in their workforce (37%), and limited understanding of how to govern and control AI-related risks (33%) as significant concerns. 

The importance of scale

Size is a big factor in how companies regard the opportunity of AI. CEOs of large firms are much more likely to be investing heavily in AI with the aim of becoming a market leader than smaller companies, most of which tend to be investing incrementally to build capabilities. For example, a third of large-company CEOs said they are investing heavily to be a market leader in the use of AI for operational efficiency, compared with a quarter at midsized companies and 11% at small companies. Similarly, 64% of large-company CEOs said they want to be AI leaders in at least one use case and 24% want to be leaders in at least three cases; the comparable percentages for small-company bosses were 30% and 7%.

That gap isn’t surprising considering the greater emphasis CEOs of small and midsized companies put on capital efficiency. But if you believe AI will become an increasingly important ingredient of corporate profitability and innovation, the results raise a question of how smaller companies can compete effectively. At the same time, large companies may face challenges in generating good returns on their AI investments considering the high percentage that are seeking to become leaders, and the cost and scarcity of talent needed for effective AI implementation.

Fifty-eight percent of CEOs of all stripes are investing in innovation to develop new revenue streams, but here too aggressiveness skews in favor of large companies (67%) relative to midsized (57%) and small ones (44%).

Meanwhile more than half of small-company CEOs and a third of chiefs of large companies said they are delaying investment in such innovation until use cases of the technology become clearer for their business. This suggests that many companies are starting out cautiously with AI and looking to become fast followers. But fast means fast; chief executives said one of the biggest risks in AI is not moving quickly enough and being left behind by competitors. 

Managing For Protectionism And Other Risks

CEOs of NYSE-listed companies are accepting rising geopolitical tensions and increased government intervention in the economy as the new normal and adapting their operating models accordingly. More than three-quarters of chief executives surveyed plan to take action to adapt to this new environment in the next one to two years. This does not mean globalization is dead, though. Most companies are shifting their footprint to more-friendly countries rather than reshoring operations domestically. Companies also are strengthening their crisis preparedness capabilities and, in some cases, building in-house geopolitics teams to run war games and prepare responses to future geopolitical events. 

These survey findings suggest a significant and lasting departure from the globalization-at-all-costs ethos that has guided companies for more than three decades, considering that such adaptations can involve sizable capital expenditure and dent profit margins. Moreover, the new mindset is pervasive among corporate leaders. Fully 86% of leaders of large and midsized companies are planning to take action in the next year or two to address geopolitical instability, protectionism, and government industrial policies. Even among smaller companies with revenues of less than $1 billion, which tend to have smaller global footprints, a solid majority of 60% plan to act. 

Realigning around protectionism

Talk of resilience erupted in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, when lockdowns caused widespread manufacturing disruption in Asia and sent companies scrambling to secure everything from semiconductors to personal protective equipment. What’s notable today is that even as economies have recovered and growth is back as a top priority, companies are responding strategically, not tactically, to geopolitics and realigning supply chains to operate in friendly countries. This can be seen in bilateral trade data, which show a close correlation between trade growth and the geopolitical alignment of trading partners in the past 24 months. 

Sixty percent of CEOs, including 63% of large-company chiefs, said they plan to reduce exposure to higher-risk regions in the next year or two, primarily to address geopolitical uncertainty, protectionism, and government industrial policies. Roughly half of CEOs also said they plan to prioritize supply-chain resilience, adopt more flexible operating models through dual sourcing or reduced lead times, and adjust regional investments based on government incentives and regulations.

In contrast, only one CEO in six plans to reshore some overseas operations to the company’s domestic base. This suggests that companies are still prioritizing locations to optimize their cost structure, but are doing so through a geopolitical lens. There are plenty of countries in Asia, Latin America, and elsewhere that aren’t subject to tariffs or trade restrictions and offer low costs of production and good access to consumers in advanced economies. One notable exception to the continued cost focus is the impact of government incentives in selected sectors. According to Clean Investment Monitor, investment in clean energy and transportation in the United States rose 52% in the first 18 months after the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, to $366 billion.

Restructuring complex supply chains can be a costly and time-consuming exercise. That a majority of CEOs said they plan to do so suggests they believe geopolitical instability is here for the long haul.

CEOs of large companies are taking action across a wider front, with more than half citing plans to reduce exposure to higher-risk regions, prioritize supply chain resilience, move to more flexible operating models, and adjust regional investments based on government incentives or regulations. In contrast, only 33% of CEOs of midsized companies said they plan to prioritize supply chain resilience in investment or expansion decisions, suggesting they may be prioritizing growth over resilience.

By sector, energy and utilities; consumer goods; healthcare; and communications, media, and technology (CMT) are the most active in looking to reduce exposure to higher-risk regions, with at least two-thirds of CEOs in each of those sectors saying they planned to do so. More than three-quarters of energy and utilities CEOs and half of industrials and materials bosses said they planned to adjust regional investments based on government incentives and regulation, the only sector to make that a top three priority. And three-quarters or more of healthcare and CMT CEOs said they planned to move to more flexible operating models through measures such as dual sourcing or reduced lead times.

Geopolitical fragmentation also is leading some companies to take a more regional approach to their operations so decisions can be made closer to the political factors that affect the local business environment. A little over one-third of CEOs (38%) are regionalizing their operations by empowering local teams and regional operating companies, and developing local supply chains. Financials is the only sector in which regionalization is a top three priority, likely reflecting the importance of policy on this heavily regulated sector. 

Crisis preparedness

Growing conflict is a defining feature of today’s times. Countries representing 27% of global GDP were involved in state-based conflicts between 2012 and 2022, up from 12% in 1985–95. 

The belief that sudden geopolitical surprises are a more regular feature of the business environment is leading CEOs to strengthen their intelligence capabilities and develop strategies for anticipating and reacting to politically driven events. 

Two-thirds of CEOs are developing or buttressing their business continuity and/or crisis management governance. This includes identifying specific teams to handle those preparations and developing playbooks for how to respond to an actual crisis. Large companies are more active on this front, with 73% of CEOs citing business continuity and crisis management preparedness. They also are putting these capabilities into practice; 43% of large companies are running geopolitical scenarios and war-gaming exercises to be truly crisis ready. And nearly a quarter of large-company CEOs said they plan to hire talent or advisers with expertise in geopolitics in the next year or two, more than twice the share of small- and midsized-company CEOs. 

Our survey reveals that geopolitical preparedness is very sector specific. For example, 94% of financial CEOs said they are developing or strengthening business continuity and crisis management governance, the highest response to any question in the survey. That likely reflects the global nature of the financial services industry and its high level of supervisory oversight. Two-thirds of CMT CEOs also are enhancing their governance in this area. Meanwhile, four out of five CEOs in consumer goods and industrials and materials said they plan to de-risk and/or diversify their supply chains to respond to geopolitical events. 

The how of geopolitical risk management is just as important as the what. While geopolitical risk should be overseen by a C-suite stakeholder, corporations should develop expertise in various jurisdictions with the local knowledge and relationships to provide early warnings of budding risks and help craft solutions. Companies also should encourage closer collaboration among risk talent spread across their government relations, compliance, and security teams who do not always speak the same language or share the same priorities. That can help create relevant and stress-tested business-continuity frameworks to address geopolitical crises of the future. 

Driving Workforce Performance In An Unsettled World

CEOs of NYSE-listed companies acknowledge that playing for growth in today’s environment requires a more flexible operating model that draws on talent from across the firm to accelerate innovation cycles, develop customer solutions, and find new efficiencies.

To achieve this, they are focusing on the organizational levers they know best: how decisions are made and by whom. Their top two workforce priorities are breaking down business silos to create a more unified franchise, cited by 59% of CEOs, and empowering top leaders and managers to decentralize decision-making, named by 53%.

Breaking down walls and fostering collaboration was the clear top priority overall, cited by nearly two-thirds of small- and large-company chiefs and by at least 50% of CEOs across all six industry sectors included in the survey. 

The logic for close collaboration is compelling. It can enable a company to differentiate its offering by drawing on the breadth of its talent and capabilities, to better respond to actual customer needs rather than simply selling a set of products, and to provide a company-wide view of risk that facilitates active management of supply chains and the development of contingency plans.

Of course, AI adds a whole new level of complexity, risk, and employee anxiety to the task of change management. To mitigate these challenges, nearly a third of chief executives said they were prioritizing investing in filling critical skills gaps and reskilling the workforce more broadly, and an equal number said they were upskilling managers to adapt to a changing workforce and market conditions. Eighty-eight percent of employees surveyed by the Oliver Wyman Forum said it’s important to receive training or reskilling, both in hard skills like AI and soft skills like analytical thinking and self-awareness. 

Responding to crises 

As CEOs modernize their workforces to meet the demands of rapid technological and demographic change, they are also trying to keep employees engaged in a time of unusual social division. Many CEOs said they have already established frameworks to help guide their actions, and many create an open dialogue to make people heard. But most of the CEOs we have spoken with acknowledge the difficulty of trying to address social or geopolitical issues when opinion among employees, board members, investors, suppliers, and clients may be sharply divided.

Many companies have adopted frameworks or policies to guide their responses to such events — particularly when it comes to supporting employees directly affected by a crisis, where 52% of CEOs said they have well-developed and tested approaches. Likewise, 40% of CEOs said they have tested frameworks for protecting a unified culture and avoiding polarization in a crisis, while 33% said they have policies for adjusting the company’s commercial footprint to reflect its values.

Such frameworks are more common among large companies, with 80% of CEOs saying they have well-developed policies to support employees affected by a crisis, compared with 27% of small-company chiefs and 36% of midsize ones.

More than a quarter of CEOs even said they have tested frameworks for communicating the company’s stance on key societal issues, internally or externally — despite the tough balancing act leaders face when it comes to issues that don’t directly impact or relate to a company’s core business. 

There are no easy answers to a stakeholder base that is both increasingly expectant of their corporate leaders to respond to social issues and increasingly divided on what the answers should be. This is one of the topics we’ve heard CEOs talking to each other most about, and it’s likely to require significant attention in the years ahead. 

Research Methodology

The Oliver Wyman Forum conducted a CEO survey in collaboration with the New York Stock Exchange between March 22 and April 22, 2024. The survey was conducted among 112 CEOs of NYSE-listed companies, across all industries and size bands.

The survey results are presented as unweighted given the valuable insight of each CEO and hard-to-reach audience. Percentages displayed in exhibits may not sum to 100% due to rounding.

The survey was split across topics that are salient for many businesses globally, such as market outlook, responding to geopolitics, creating shareholder value, and workforce strategy priorities.

While the insights from the survey are largely sector and size agnostic due to low sample sizes, there were specific cases in which it was important to differentiate between the industry and size of the company. We have used a base size of 30 respondents per industry and size category, and in cases in which this has not been reached, we treated the findings as directional only.

In addition to the CEO survey data, we used the Oliver Wyman Forum’s 2024 quarterly consumer survey of more than 15,000 people across 17 nations — the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Mexico, Brazil, India, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, China (Hong Kong), Indonesia, Singapore, Australia, South Africa, Canada, and the United States. We used a global sample because a significant portion of the companies are global in their commercial footprint. That survey was sourced from a panel of 67 million people worldwide, and to ensure representative distributions our respondent pool generally mirrored the demographics of each country, including age, income, education level, political affiliation, and gender.

To enhance our understanding of consumer and workforce perspectives, we also used the Oliver Wyman Forum Gen Z survey, conducted in October 2022 with a sample of 10,000 respondents from the United States and the United Kingdom. Half of the respondents were Gen Z (ages 18 to 25), and the other half consisted of representative samples of other generations (ages 26 to 65). All of the data were weighted to ensure accurate representation. Again, we used a global sample because the companies are global in their commercial footprint.

The survey data is supplemented by other secondary research as well as interviews to understand qualitative sentiment around key topics. 

Among the CEOs who participated in the survey:

Acknowledgements

Authors

Ana Kreacic, James Warrick-Alexander, John Romeo, Amal Khatib

Contributors

Tom Buerkle, Michael D’Esopo, Matthieu De Clercq, Bruno Despujol, Christian Edelmann, Elie Farah, Aaron Fine, Kaijia Gu, Erick Gustafson, Robert Hunter, Rupal Kantaria, Amy Lasater-Wille, Jonathan Lee, Helen Leis, Paula McGlarry, Chris McMillan, Jilian Mincer, Hanna Moukanas, Ted Moynihan, Charles Myers, Hari Naidu, Anders Nemeth, David Pagliaro, Chris Palmer, Nisha Patel, Hiten Patel, Mark Pellerin, Daniel Shen, Ben Simpfendorfer, Natasha Smith, Richard Smith-Bingham, Vita Spivak, Heather Stern, Terry Stone, Nick Studer, Daniel Tannebaum, Huw van Steenis

Art & Design

Karen Lara, Sujin Lee, Jens Lischka, Yireli Pale, Ramona Pillai, Mattias Sundell, Cynthia Perez, Shams Rzayeva

New York Stock Exchange

The New York Stock Exchange is the world’s largest stock exchange, with a combined market capitalization of $39 trillion and an unmatched community of leading companies. It is the premier global venue for capital raising and is part of Intercontinental Exchange (NYSE: ICE), a leading global provider of technology and data. The NYSE Group includes five equity exchanges — the New York Stock Exchange, NYSE American, NYSE Arca, NYSE Chicago and NYSE National — which trade more U.S. equity volume than any other exchange group. It also includes the equity options exchanges NYSE Arca Options and NYSE Amex Options.
To learn more, visit nyse.com.

Oliver Wyman Forum

The Oliver Wyman Forum is committed to bringing together leaders in business, public policy, social enterprises, and academia to help solve the world’s toughest problems.
The Oliver Wyman Forum strives to discover and develop innovative solutions by conducting research, convening leading thinkers, analyzing options, and inspiring action on three fronts: Reframing Industry, Business in Society, and Global Economic and Political Change. Together with our growing and diverse community of experts, we think we can make a difference.