Intro.(1:30) - Start of interview.(2:14) - Donna's "origin story": She grew up moving a lot since her dad was a Navy pilot. She attended Trinity University (started at 16). After college she worked as a newspaper reporter at a small daily in Washington State and then worked in the PR office for the State Department in Brussels. She later got an MBA at the University of Texas at Austin with the objective of becoming an investment analyst. After graduation she joined Dyer, Robertson & Lamme (’96-’98) in Houston as an equities analyst. She then joined Invesco (’98- ‘07) as director of equity research, including responsibility for voting the proxies. She joined T. Rowe Price (’07- Present) with a specialty in corporate governance.(6:34) - Her description of T. Rowe Price (NASDAQ:TROW), a global investment management firm with ~$1.59 Trillion of AUM. "This firm is virtually all active management (95%)." It's pure play asset management, deeply rooted in fundamental investment research. Corporate governance became more relevant around the time of the financial crisis (2007), so a decision was made to create a corporate governance specialty group.(10:42) -  How does T. Rowe Price think about its corporate governance function? "I think that our corporate governance approach is complementary to the passive investors." "We have a set of guidelines but nobody gets wedded to that, we approach each situation case-by-case." "This year brought so many exceptions, such as compensation during the pandemic." They look at every single vote. The proxy team is comprised of 3 people. They have a separate responsible investment team that covers ESG matters.(17:21) - On ESG and its impact on corporate governance: T. Rowe Price had 1,002 engagements with companies in 2020: 53% dealt with ESG matters. The job of the ESG folks is still centered around getting the information they need (disclosure of relevant data is still an issue with ESG). "We have a very disproportionately large footprint in small and mid cap companies, plus private companies, and they need a lot of coaching on ESG, DEI or corporate governance matters."(20:11) - On corporate governance of private companies (pre-IPO). We are early in the life-cycle of these companies so we can show them what are the corporate governance trade-offs (particularly from the shareholder side).(24:14) - Her take on dual-class share structures (enlightened by her role in the private investments valuation committee at T. Rowe Price). They plan to be long term investors, so they make sure that the companies that they have invested in understand the trade-offs involved in decisions such as having dual-class shares (for example, exclusions from S&P500 index if dual class shares don't expire). "It's reasonable to start with a classified board and graduate to an annually elected board later." On dual-class shares: "over time we have concluded based on years of experience that [the dual-class share structure] is not aligned with our interests... but...we are perfectly comfortable with a time-based sunset provision of 7 to 10 years." "This is a market where dual-class stock is accepted, so we think that a road-map idea and compromises like time-based sunset provisions are the right pragmatic solutions" "I think a lot of investors view that sunset provisions are the perfect compromise in this market, where there are not many alternatives."(29:39) - Her take on the current proxy season: "This was a very surprising year but I would not put [the Exxon proxy fight] on that bucket. Anyone that was surprised by that outcome was not playing close enough attention." "We don't see [the Exxon case] as a watershed event where investors will push E & S directors into boardrooms." "I think the conditions were very Exxon specific and that same fund with those same directors brought at any other company would have had a different outcome."(30:46) - On compensation issues in this proxy season. "We've been really surprised at how inve