Category Archives: Sustainability Leadership (M.St. course blog)

Women in Sustainability Leadership – where do they go?

My main reason for doing this course was to expose myself to new perspectives, and avoid the risk of group-think that could come from a career focused only on one sector. Diversity is, I feel convinced, a key part of the sustainability response – different people have different perspectives and the blend, rather than one or the other, innovates and find ways to take good new ideas to scale. That’s why the core of my professional and academic interests are not in organisations per se but in partnerships and networks and in the definition of shared objectives between apparently disparate groups. I visualise the partnership approach as the equivalent of that machine in the opticians where they put a frame over your face and click different lenses into place, then say ‘better with this one? Or with this one? Better with? Or Without? With? Or without?’ When you and the optician have fine-tuned it you get that giddy sense that the world is brighter and sharper than before. That’s what good partnership and co-design means for me. Embracing diversity can bring challenges and that’s why we need to talk about it. If it was easy, people would be doing it anyway.  A bit like moving to a more sustainable economy.

I have worked in mostly quite female-dominated environments, so coming to a course where of the 40 participants, 30 are men, was quite a novelty. I did not feel intimidated, or that my contribution was valued less because I was a woman. I felt more concerned that my NGO professional background would be a barrier. Language and cultural barriers may be more of an issue in our course than gender, and being an English speaker from a very young age I have easy access to all the course material. However I did look out a bit to see who was talking more in the room, I always do. It’s not a formal ‘air-time’ audit, but there were definitely some brilliant women in those rooms keeping quiet in the Sidgwick campus in September who I hope will speak up more in March. And some very thoughtful and reflective men and women who spoke little, but made an impact when they did, became role models for the week for me (I have a tendency to over-talk and lose impact as a result).

The experience did make me wonder about the career prospects for women in sustainability.  It may be that women will equalise professionally in sustainability, but there is some way to go, see this article from 2014 where a specialist recruiter reviewed 600 sustainabilty leadership roles and identified that at the Director level, only 19% were held by women, just slightly lower than the FTSE 100 average.  Essentially,  the figures suggest that the same social and economic patterns which mean that few women hold top corporate jobs are reproduced in the sustainability sector, despite its sunny uplands of sharing  and circular economies.  There is a longer discussion of the visibility of women in sustainability leadership here: http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2013/12/18/why-weinreb-report-sustainability-pioneers-left-women-out.

That leaves me personally with the sense that I have to have my lines ready – when speaking to clients or potential employers, how do I take their perception that I appear to be a maternity-leave risk off the table and get them to focus on the fact that I am a damn good, very hard-working and creative professional? I’ve stripped my Twitter profile of anything about motherhood. But using emotion wisely and well is also part of the resilience we were exhorted to cultivate on this course. In my last months at my last employer (I set up my own company in December) I used my own experience for the energy to work with an older, male, Somali colleague on geting the broader issue of diversity in our leadership into some forums where it might make a difference.

Part of the problem is probably my own conditioning.  I noticed that on Twitter, I seem to mostly retweet things from men. Again, I haven’t audited who I follow but I suspect there is a majority of men. So this afternoon I looked at the Guardian’s list of top 20 women tweeting on sustainability and started following all those who looked relevant to my interests. I was delighted to see that Cristiana Figueres Twitter profile proudly declares three things : ‘Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Passionate about fighting climate change. Mother of two wonderful young ladies.’ One day I will be professionally secure enough to own up in public to being a mother.

I also noticed (and bearing in mind that this probably wasn’t the most thorough research the Guardian had ever done) that most of their list of women tweeting on sustainability are independent consultants.  There’s nothing wrong with that, it’s the path I’ve chosen as the one that makes sense of my choices now, and in my first month I’ve picked up three clients, and I have not even done a stroke of marketing yet. I’ve also been approached by good professionals who hope I can bring them work as well – all women as it happens – and if we, and any men who wish to join in, can find a way to support each other to lead good and interesting professional lives then hurrah.   It’s partly now an unplanned experiment in work-pooling.  Consultants who have been doing that work for a while need (I imagine) a large degree of resilience, self-confidence, impeccable organsiational and presentational skills, and great networks.  Joining an established consultancy and building relationships with client after client, is not exactly easy, and starting your own enterprise, even as a one-woman band, is hardly easier.  But that snapshot of women in consultant roles does suggest a certain type of leadership approach, that of the expert or perhaps the communicator, the person fertilising ideas rather than the person making the hard decisions, taking the flak and perhaps changing the paradigms from the top of a large business.

And out of that thinking about different perspectives, and the ways we find to deploy our skills,  the idea of partnerships, of defining shared objectives and identifying ways to overcome differences of incentives and constraints, keeps coming back as a core theme. I’m just not sure yet how to incorporate that academically into my work.

Smart Cities, technology and democracy

I wouldn’t normally just post an article without commenting on it, but I’m nearly out of time for everything on my course, so I will have to. http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/dec/17/truth-smart-city-destroy-democracy-urban-thinkers-buzzphrase This article on smart cities and democracy is brilliantly written, it is a stream of crystallised gems.  By Stephen Poole for the Guardian.  It encapsulates everything that fascinates and worries me about smart cities and democracy.  What if the thing that really got disrupted by technology turned out not to be cab rides and hotel rooms but democracy and our very nature as individuals with free will? My favourite paragraphs are these ones: ‘And what role will the citizen play? That of unpaid data-clerk, voluntarily contributing information to an urban database that is monetised by private companies? Is the city-dweller best visualised as a smoothly moving pixel, travelling to work, shops and home again, on a colourful 3D graphic display? Or is the citizen rightfully an unpredictable source of obstreperous demands and assertions of rights?’ Some really thought provoking stuff on how we can be predicted as crowds (something I suppose market researchers have known for a long time); and on the double-edged sword that is big data in both empowering citizens, but putting them under mass surveillance at the same time.    I need to come back to this when I’ve finished my study obligations, there is so much to think about and unpack here.

Another great article to think more about here on the FT – 17/01/15:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c7428fe2-9684-11e4-a83c-00144feabdc0.html#slide0

It discusses the potential for Britain’s smaller towns to flourish more by becoming bigger.  It quotes interesting numbers of inhabitants required to make various facilities viable:  a nursery, a pub, a cinema.

Here’s another article that provokes some thought, although quite differently.  Google are investing in an urban technology division (apparently to the dismay of their investors, who grow ‘restless’ about the tendency of Google to make long-term investments). What is almost most interesting about the article is how uncritical it is of some of the aims.  It describes Uber and Lyft in Messianic sustainabilty terms as reducing demand for car ownership by making car service more cheap and accessible.  Nevermind that they are not actually reducing demand for car usage (possibly just displacing that demand to hire cars) and certainly never mind the precarious employment situation and low pay of the people driving Uber’s cars.  Similarly, the software predicting where crime will happen – tell me, journalist, exactly what sort of profiling does that software use?  Would that profiling be legal in America if a human being rather than a machine was carrying it out?  I’m a huge fan of technology and its capacity to make the world a better place.  But uncritically failing to place technology in a social context runs risks of those technology gains being made at the expense of other important needs, like the needs for living wages and equal treatment under the law.

Grasping complexity: data visualisation and cities

I have been looking at visualisations in relation to cities.  Mainly because I stumbled across Luminocity 3d and I thought it was beautiful, but I didn’t understand it, so I had to spend some time looking at it until it started to make sense.  A bit like those fractal pictures people used to have on their walls when we were students.

Picture from Luminocity 3D website http://luminocity3d.org/Transport.html#trip_flows_journey_to_work_2011/7/52.606/-2.505

Luminocity 3D work journey flows at http://luminocity3d.org/Transport.html#trip_flows_journey_to_work_2011/7/52.606/-2.505

I have been interested in data visualisations in general for some time.  The main reason is that I hope that visualisations could help make the cognitive leap we need to cope with complexity.  I have always been enchanted by words and narrative.  But as I grow older – words fail me.  Mainly they fail me because there is too much stuff around that is really, really important, that I will never have time to read about it and that makes me stressed about whether I’m going to make the wrong choices.  I suspect I’m not alone in this.  My oldest friend Annika Mckee has recently introduced me to the concept of heuristics, which I understand as the study of the mental wiring that helps us take short-cuts through information, which we often need to, because the information is overwhelming and only a small proportion is relevant.  Data visualisations cannot be the only tool we use, if only because relying exclusively on visualisation would exclude blind and partially sighted people (I doubt that Luminocity would be understood by a screen-reader).  My question is whether data visualisations could be a way to help answer some of the questions in sustainability more quickly so that we can stay away from the environmental, social and economic cliff-edge that is out there somewhere in the dark.  They are increasingly part of the way that people tell stories about issues on social media.

I love cities (because they are exciting, diverse and liberating) and I know that these complex systems are a huge nexus for both anxieties and manifestos of hope regarding sustainability. That cities are a ‘megatrend’   has become accepted wisdom, and as such, it should be unpacked.  The challenges are well documented.  Cities account for 37–49% of global Greenhouse Gas emissions while urban infrastructure accounts for over 70% of global energy use (figures from Climate Change: Implications for Cities, Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership 2014). So my first question is whether visualisations can help us understand some of the sustainability opportunities around cities.

There is the challenge of defining a city, and of what to say about the people who carry on living in small towns and the countryside, almost as if the fact that ‘Cities are Megatrending’ (said everyone ever writing a strategy in the last five years) is less important than having a nice quality of life and knowing your neighbours.  The Metropolitan Revolution: ‘How Cities and Metros Are Fixing Our Broken Politics and Fragile Economy’ (Katz and Bradley, 2013) talks (zealously) about metropolitan areas rather than cities, defined as ‘a collection of municipalities that together form a unified labor market and is often defined statistically by the commuting patterns of its residents between home and work.’ (p2).  Eurostat provides a more detailed definition.  In the UK debate about whether cities like London or Manchester should have more financial powers of their own, I don’t think it has really got into the public mind yet that this might have significant impacts on people outside the city, who might or might not consider themselves in any way dependent or financially responsible for the city.

So that was a bit of complexity to use to test whether data visualisation was a way to work through the question of ‘who is linked to the city’ without piling through all the statistics on the internet.  I looked on LuminoCity 3D at  the chart showing the flows of journeys to work.  Apologies for the UK- centric and London-centric approach here, but I live and work in London , so I looked first at London and saw it defined by a new set of borders based on commutes.  If you define it by the visual you see on LuminoCity 3D, then London stretches to Ipswich (Suffolk) to the East, to the Kent and East Sussex coastlines at Margate, Folkestone and Brighton, to Reading in Berkshire in the West, and Stevenage in Hertfordshire to the North.  This map gives me a mental sketch that tells me that 9 counties around London have very significant numbers of people commuting to London every day.  It would be interesting at some point to see whether the London Metropolitan area now extends further than the Eurostat definition, simply because the combination of house prices and okay (well, sort of okay) transport links create the market for massive commutes.

You can go into more detail on LuminoCity 3D.  The chart on the left hands side tells you quickly that 832,000 people commute into London from other places every day, 20% of its population of employees.  That’s more than the population of Sheffield and more than 10% of the number of residents in London.  But it’s not all one way.  9% of London’s employed residents commute out.  I can’t tell where to, because the lines on LuminoCity don’t show direction of travel.

Looking away from London, Brentwood is fascinating as nearly 80% of its residents commute out, but 80% of its employees commute in.

I’d love to know how this all breaks down further.  Are women or men more likely to work near home, or is that possibly something that happens for the rich and the poor, while the middle gets (literally) squeezed on the commuter trains?  LuminoCity only has UK data so we don’t visualise the elites who travel globally for work, what would they add to the picture?  Why do so few people who live in Brentwood do jobs in Brentwood?  Is it choice, or lack of choice?  Who commutes to Brentwood and where are they coming from?   What does the ‘good enough’ snapshot of commuter flows across Britain tell me about cities and opportunities for sustainable business (without having to think too much)?

Infrastructure and communications:

I’d make a bet that all these millions of people moving around the country every day to get to their job is not great for our carbon emissions.  There may be a huge business and sustainability opportunity for companies developing home-working and e-meeting services.  Personally I believe also in the social impacts of flexi-working.  Less time on a train means more time with your family, or painting a picture, meeting your mates in the pub, chatting to your neighbours or digging in the allotment.

There is a new trainline proposed that will connect Oxford and Cambridge via Milton Keynes.  Presumably at certain points in the timetable this will mean that Milton Keynes is briefly the most thinky-thinky town in Britain.  Maybe Silicon Fen will start commuting in from little towns to the West of Cambridge.  Maybe Apple should set up a new store in Milton Keynes to sell tech gadgets to the Fentrepreneurs who want to spend their leisure time browsing new smart phones.  If I was Bristol or Colchester, I’d be lobbying for that trainline to be extended to me.  Imagine what that East-West university highway could do to Britain.  The exchange of thoughts, and wonderful R&D hubs and new businesses popping up all along it gathering and commercialising the best innovations from UK academia south of Leeds/Manchester and north of London, as well as giving Britain a new axis to distract us from the North-South divide.

Building new homes, commercial and civic spaces

Barratt Homes did a study for Centre for Cities on the need for more housing around London.  Well, yes, people don’t want to spend 15 hours or more a week on a crowded, unreliable train, although I find it depressing that there are no voices talking about putting more good jobs in the places where people already live.  There are alternatives for small and mid-sized towns with some investment: you could turn your market square into a wifi hotspot (as piloted in my Finnish harbour-side hometown of Oulu) and let the people work from picnic tables in the summer – maybe with renewably powered device charging stations.  If we could make that work well, wouldn’t that be more beautiful as well as fun and productive?  But if you must build houses where the jobs are right now, rather than spread the jobs around more equally, then the type of houses and the type of communities such projects would build are huge sustainability questions. You could build an architecturally gorgeous and fully BREEAM certified housing complex but forget that the local schools can’t cope with that many new kids and have a big local rift on your hands.

New businesses:  is there a way to pick through this data and identify where you could find the skills and workforce to set up a new business or new branch office?  Breathing new life into places, building on historic industries and creating exciting new opportunities for people.  This is actually a live question for my family because himself and I want to move to the coast one day and need the economy and national business culture to catch up with our aspirations  – or just get off our lazy behinds and figure out how to do it ourselves.

It’s clear that cities are major zones for the production of the effects that produce climate change, and it’s also clear after all this gazing at Luminocity 3D that the policy definition of a metro area has nothing much to do with the cultural image of a city.  Data visualisation has helped me bridge that gap between my romantic image of London from Waterloo Bridge, and the opportunities that businesses and social enterprises may have in making metro areas into places where people can live well without compromising the lives of future generations (the core of the Brundtland statement on sustainability), or the lives of people living outside the city.  Could thinking through what the mega-city looks like help us build better human-scale communities within the city, and even provide benefits to people who live at or outside the boundary of our own metro?

 

Luminocity 3D preview image
Luminocity preview image – the transport map here is even more Matrix-like…: http://luminocity3d.org/Transport.html#trip_flows_journey_to_work_2011/7/52.606/-2.505