View from the Top

The CEO of Fortescue may have a head for numbers – she’s been CFO of five companies – but she’s no slouch when it comes to culture and communication. By Kirsten Galliott.

Fortescue CEO Elizabeth Gaines on being “chief communicator”

How do you defifine good leadership?

Good leadership is about being able to articulate a vision that inspires and binds people to the same goal or objective but at the same time empowers people to be individuals.

What do you hope will be the hallmark of your leadership?

Fortescue has a unique culture, which can take years to build and weeks to destroy. It was started by our chairman, Andrew Forrest, 15 years ago, when the company was founded. Empowerment – not just in the leadership team but across the whole business – is actually at the core of it. So the hallmark of success will be ensuring that our culture stays as fresh and relevant today or in fifive years’ time as it was when the company was started.

Beyond empowerment, what makes the culture unique?

The culture is built around family and family values. We’re all on the same journey together. Andrew had the vision that China was going to grow and would need a lot more infrastructure, which would drive demand for steel and iron ore. Many people said, “He won’t be able to get that up and running.” Well, we have and every time someone says we’re not going to succeed at something, that pushes us even harder to achieve what others think is unachievable. That really binds people together. We’re a family; we’re a team. We look out for our mates; we have a crack.

You’ve been CFO of fifive companies, including Fortescue. Is your fifinancial acumen your key strength?

I’ve got a head for numbers; I remember numberplates that I had 20-odd years ago. But I think what I bring to the role is many years of experience. Working in diverse industries can be a benefifit because I’ve seen difffferent cycles in difffferent industries. When we’re dealing with complex issues, I can think through other situations I’ve been in and the implications of decisions we’re about to make.

There was commentary when you were appointed last year about your pay being $500,000 less than your predecessor’s. How do you respond to that?

There have been appointments where male CEOs have replaced male former CEOs on lower salaries. I think there’s a general trend in remuneration policies