Salz Review - Wall Street Journal
Salz Review - Wall Street Journal
Salz Review - Wall Street Journal
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
173<br />
<strong>Salz</strong> <strong>Review</strong><br />
An Independent <strong>Review</strong> of Barclays’ Business Practices<br />
Approach to the <strong>Review</strong><br />
Internal and External Data<br />
In compiling this report, we conducted independent analysis of both internal data supplied<br />
to us by Barclays, as well as external data. Internal data included a selection of: Barclays’<br />
Board, Board committees, and executive management committee minutes; management<br />
papers and reports; policies; governance and control frameworks; employee surveys;<br />
aggregate remuneration and performance management data; and management<br />
communications. External data included annual reports; regulatory requirements and<br />
guidelines; industry reports, books and database analysis; and UK House of Commons<br />
Treasury Committee papers.<br />
The views, findings and recommendations set out in this report are based solely on the <strong>Salz</strong><br />
<strong>Review</strong>’s assessment of the documents and information considered by it during the course<br />
of the <strong>Review</strong>. The <strong>Review</strong> requested that Barclays provide it with relevant documents for<br />
those matters which were in the scope of the <strong>Review</strong>, including those relating to specific<br />
regulatory events. The <strong>Review</strong> has not, however, conducted a forensic investigation or<br />
audit of the documents and information made available to it. In some cases restrictions<br />
were placed on the <strong>Review</strong>’s access to documents or documents were redacted by Barclays,<br />
in each case for legal reasons. Accordingly, while the <strong>Review</strong> has sought to identify a<br />
reasonable selection of documents, it may not have reviewed all materials relevant to<br />
specific events. Likewise, the <strong>Review</strong> has been to some extent dependent on what it has<br />
been told in interviews and has assumed the veracity of information provided to it at<br />
interviews, unless there was any reason to think otherwise.<br />
As the purpose of the <strong>Review</strong> has not been to conduct a forensic analysis, other individuals<br />
considering the same information or documents could form a different assessment of it.<br />
Similarly, the <strong>Salz</strong> <strong>Review</strong> might have formed a different assessment of the matters under<br />
consideration were it to have reviewed or considered other documents or information.<br />
We are grateful to those people in Barclays who provided us with this information.<br />
Interview Programme<br />
Over the course of the <strong>Review</strong> process, we conducted over 600 interviews with key<br />
Barclays and industry stakeholders:<br />
― Barclays’ employees and Board members (current and former);<br />
― Investors in Barclays;<br />
― Clients and customers of Barclays;<br />
― Regulatory and government bodies engaging with Barclays;<br />
― Barclays’ professional advisers;<br />
― Board members and executives from Barclays’ competitors; and<br />
― Other organisations and interested parties.<br />
We are extremely grateful to everyone who gave up their time to meet with us, send their<br />
ideas and provide us with input.