Themes from 2021 Festival of Work (June 2021)

Just over a year ago I attended the CIPD’s first ever virtual Festival of Work, which at the time felt like a one-off experiment prompted by the first UK lockdown. Back then most of us didn’t envisage the continuing impact of the covid pandemic, and I certainly didn’t predict that I would again attend last week’s Festival virtually. Peter Cheese (CIPD CEO) reflected that the conference would never go back to solely face-to-face given the convenience and economy of on-line, but would likely be a hybrid model in the future, a theme echoed by all speakers as they reflected on our future patterns of working. Here are some of the other key themes. 

“A time of reinvention”

One of the first things that struck me was a more optimistic feel compared to 2020 (https://www.catherineshepherd.consulting/blog/will-work-ever-be-the-same-again), perhaps because lessons learnt from the pandemic are firmly established; that we all agree the pandemic has accelerated changes that were already underway and those changes are here to stay (with notable exceptions such as Goldman Sach’s boss David Solomon (1)); that with vaccine roll-out (sadly not yet world-wide) we can really start envisaging a different future.

As Patrick Hull, Unilever’s VP for Future of Work commented, “we are at a time of reinvention”. Similarly Lars Schmidt (author of “Redefining HR”) reflected that many of us have been in survival model as sub-optimal remote working has been forced upon us, and now we have the opportunity to “thoughtfully design” a working world where people don’t need to be in their workplace 5 days a week. I don’t have any data to back me up, but speakers also seemed more diverse – more international (especially as the conference included an Asian section), more female, and less white – broadening the views offered about what the future will hold. 

Diversity, inclusion, social mobility, ESG

Themes of diversity, inclusion, social mobility, and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) priorities came up in many conversations. Speakers reflected on whether organisations have stayed genuinely committed to activities in these areas throughout the pandemic, or whether they were viewed as ‘nice to have’ and cut back. Alex Edmans suggests we need to shift our thinking that a responsible business is one that does no harm, to one that actively does good. He is the author of “Grow the Pie: How Great Companies Deliver Both Purpose and Profit” which presents data showing that responsible companies also generate better business and financial returns. But companies can’t be all things, to all people, all the time - quite often viewed as how a pie is split between profits and other stakeholder interests (in private sector language). Alex argues that instead we need to grow the pie (by harnessing an organisation’s unique talents and skills) that means both more profits and better outcomes for stakeholders such as employees, customers, the environment, and communities.  

Sandra Wallace, MD of DLA Piper LLP and joint chair of the Social Mobility Commission reinforced the importance of data and metrics when trying to make progress in these areas – the classic Peter Drucker quote that “what gets measured gets done”. The commission suggests using “what was the main occupation in your household at age 14” as a non-threatening social mobility measure, and DLP Piper are using this and other metrics to look at how they recruit, retain, and promote people. (My answer to the question is retail in case you’re wondering). 

Future fit skills

Reskilling and lifelong learning were also discussed by several speakers, as technology reshapes our world. There have been huge job losses during the pandemic (the ILO estimates 255m full-time jobs lost worldwide (2)), and yet as economies re-open there are also big job vacancies – in April the US reported 15m vacancies compared to 10m pre-pandemic (3). Much of this is a mismatch of skills needed by organisations and skills offered by applicants. Patrick Hull reflected on 2 key lessons about reskilling, given Unilever’s commitment that everyone in their workforce would have a future fit skillset by 2025. Firstly people are poor at identifying their transferable skills – people typically identify 11 skills compared to an average of 34 identified by AI. Secondly people are also poor at identifying skills needed in the 4th industrial revolution, so leaders need to reach out to industry experts, customers, suppliers, even competitors to identify those skills. 

Organisations will also need to target and prioritise reskilling - Carl Benedikt-Frey (Director of Future of Work, University of Oxford) reflected on the disparities between jobs that are at high risk of automation (e.g. administrative roles) to those that are low risk (e.g. science), as well as skills such as creativity, social intelligence, and perception/manipulation that are difficult for AI. He also reflected on the disparities between roles that can be done remotely (e.g. financial) to those that can’t (e.g. hospitality and leisure). Often jobs most at risk of automation, and jobs least likely to be done remotely, are also those that are low-waged, leading to questions of how people in these vulnerable jobs are protected not only in pandemics but with the technology revolution. Business will play a huge part but can’t solve all the issues without government policies and investment. Sir Andrew Likierman (Professor of Management Practice in Accounting at LBS) also highlighted roles that are vulnerable to AI (rules based, routine, high cost for low added value, backroom) with those where human judgement is key (values based, complex through ambiguity, interpersonal, innovative, irregular and unpredictable, one-off, empathetic) and argued that both business and education needs to teach judgement skills as these are unlikely to be replaced by AI.

What work needs to be done face to face?

Carl also reflected that as organisations plan for hybrid working, and individuals who have been forced to work at home return to workplaces in some way, the key question to ask is what work should be done face to face and what should be done remotely, rather than the lockdown mindset of maximising remote work. At the start of the lifecycle of a product / service / idea (the phase of disruption and formation), knowledge spill-over intra and inter teams is key, innovation intensity is high, and automation potential is low. Place matters a lot at this stage. In contrast by the phases of stagnation and decline knowledge spill-over is not important, innovation intensity is declining, and potential for automation is high, meaning place is far less important. This supports the trend in organisations reorganising their spaces to maximise conversation, collaboration, and random collisions between people.  

Dr Anastasia Dedyukhina (author of “Homo Distractus”) also argued for the importance of some face-to-face work as prolonged virtual working is not beneficial - technology fatigue is a real thing; email and messaging apps blur boundaries between work and non-working time; and if alerts are left on they reduce our ability to focus and increase our levels of cortisol. We just need to be careful when figuring out hybrid working patterns that everyone has fair access to both office and home working - as Lars Schmidt argued there is a risk of a two-tier workforce, with those who can come into the office more frequently being advantaged in term of connections, learning, visibility, and so opportunities and progression.

Who are your line managers and what are their skills?

The fundamental importance of good line management was noted numerous times, in particular in a panel discussion on mental health and wellbeing chaired by Professor Cary Cooper. He asked the provocative question to organisations of “have you got the right line managers?”. Key skills of listening, building rapport and trust, empathy, and focusing on wellbeing can of course be developed. And yet when working with knowledge worker clients I do meet people whose strength in technical work should be celebrated and leveraged, rather than also giving them line management responsibilities just because they are at a certain level of seniority, which they view as a distraction from the real work. Working effectively in a team and managing a project team are skills that are always needed, but the interest and investment needed by line managers to have great development and wellbeing conversations might mean not every manager is suited to this important role. 

All speakers on the panel also reflected that if there’s one good thing to come out of the pandemic, it’s a recognition that the health and wellbeing of employees is a strategic issue. Perhaps we have over-relied on resilience training, mindfulness apps, and mental health first aiders? Increasingly we’re going to see board level responsibility for wellbeing (perhaps decoupled from HR), integrated approaches from strategy through to day-to-day working practices, and visible role-modelling by leaders.

Our human brains as an island of meaning in our part of the universe

Professor Brian Cox presented a fascinating ending keynote about humanity’s place amongst the stars. Given there are 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe and there are billions of stars in each galaxy (about 400 billion in our Milky Way) it’s very likely that there will be other planets on which there is life. However, planets staying stable for long enough for complex life to evolve may be rare, perhaps only one per galaxy. Which means that although each of us are physically insignificant in the universe, our brains are the repository of meaning in our local area of the universe. Let’s not waste that privilege. 

1.     https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56192048

2.     https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/02/covid-employment-global-job-loss/

3.     https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/there-are-now-more-jobs-available-pandemic-so-why-aren-n1263669