Criminals have figured out they don’t have to hack into computer systems or try to get Social Security and credit card numbers. They realized they could just ask for the money. And that’s what they did.

Globally, companies are under increasing pressure to disclose cybersecurity breaches. It’s less and less an option to shove a breach under the table until you learn something truly horrific that must be disclosed.

The next major cyber threat isn’t in the healthcare industry. It isn’t banking, either, thanks in part to both of those industries’ strict regulations. Manufacturing is undergoing a transformation that will increase risk in that industry, so is that the next major area at risk of cyber threats?

In the past few years activists have broadened their horizons, targeting even small and mid cap companies. Institutional investors are supporting activists more and more, and if you didn’t already have enough keeping you up at night, there are two new trends in this ever evolving landscape that put your company at risk.

With an increasing number of investors focusing on “intangibles” in their institutional analysis, Elena Basova, Senior Analyst at Nasdaq IR Intelligence, and Martyn Chapman, Head of Strategy for Nasdaq Governance Solutions, weigh in on how companies can best use an ESG framework to quantify their assets.

Last year was a good year to be an activist; not so much to be a company on the receiving end of a campaign. The wave of shareholder activism last year had corporate leaders on edge.

It’s not a secret that activist hedge funds may not represent the interests of a company’s shareholder base. But a report from Institutional Shareholder Services shows that they don’t look like them, either.

Steve Balet, managing director of Strategic Governance Advisors and Scott Barshay, partner and head of M&A at Paul Weiss, discuss how the C-suite and board should think about, and prepare for, an activist investor.

In the fight against shareholder activism, Facebook won. At least for now. Activists pushed the company to split the chairman and CEO role for Mark Zuckerberg, who holds both titles and has come under a barrage of criticism over his handling of security and privacy issues in the last year.

Everyone on your board knows who the weak link is. Maybe it’s someone who has a spotty attendance record. It could be the person that doesn’t read the board notes but shows up for the coffee and schmoozing. You know who he is (& likely it is a he because 76 % of U.S. board seats are held by men, according to Spencer Stuart). Yet, even when boards conduct an annual evaluation the weakest board member remains on the board of directors. Why?