William Pitt Fellows’ Virtual Roundtable 2023 – The ‘S’ in ESG
In mid-July, the Corporate Partnership Programme convened our William Pitt Fellows and Corporate Partners together for our third virtual roundtable. Introduced by the Master, Lord Chris Smith, and Chaired by Corporate Fellow Professor Simon Learmount. The panel consisted of Corporate Fellow Professor Amanda Prorok, Professor of Collective Intelligence and Robotics, Dr Caroline Burt, Fellow and Director of Admissions at Pembroke and Associate Partner at Cambridge Management Consulting, and graduating Pembroke student, member of LEAP Programme Steering Group and former Junior Parlour Access Officer Natasza Siwinska (2020) to discuss ‘The ‘S’ in ESG’.
The virtual roundtable is an exclusive event that exposes our Corporate Partners to the diverse thought-leadership at Pembroke and allows our academics to connect to the corporate world.
Speaker Natasza Siwinska shares her experience of participating in the roundtable, and offers some thoughts on the social responsibility of business.
Environmental and Governance standards have long overshadowed the importance of Social standards within ESG; a promise of social receptiveness and active modulation of company policy to encompass the uneven playing field. Politics cannot be forgone from this constraint placed on businesses. As the EU taxonomy of ESG values rise and stocks start to become upheld by less easily definable concepts, how will the private sector adapt to the need for a change in work culture for both current and future employees? Are young, prospective employees pushing a liberal agenda with too much force? Perhaps both sides need to set aside their personal agendas and approach a nuanced and realistic compromise. In the US, outcomes such as that of the Supreme Court rejecting affirmative action in university institutions where admissions had an intention of setting social responsibility, pose a more complex question into how policies implemented in the name of well-intentioned change interplay in the real world.
How do we balance all the forces at play? In a recent virtual roundtable hosted by the Pembroke College Corporate Partnership Programme, this was the question that academics and leaders from across the private and charity sector hoped to answer. Companies want to maximise financial income and shareholder revenue as well as employee satisfaction, while prospective employees want to use company power for good in the social sphere. For a while, it has been that companies benefit the most when alluding to social responsibility, while making little true effort. Hence greenwashing, and PRIDE-themed logo changes; attempts to quieten a crowd which is soon to overtake the current workforce, rather than fostering a discussion to implement real change.
"As the EU taxonomy of ESG values rise and stocks start to become upheld by less easily definable concepts, how will the private sector adapt to the need for a change in work culture for both current and future employees?"
Within the roundtable discussion, it was mentioned that there is often little to no outsourcing of goals that companies project to the public onto specialists who can create roadmaps to be followed and realised. Not only this, but the companies that display corporate authenticity; targeting people retention, social impact, diversity hiring, talent pipeline and supply chains, get little recognition for their work, even with ESG scoring. There are even more complications. Companies such as Blackrock actively incentivise ESG values, while muddying the definitions and seemingly using the ‘woke’ movement for their own benefit. How are companies meant to stabilise in light of this? Often, companies may come to similar conclusions; there is no answer to the balancing question of these forces which is adequate yet, but inaction is worse than attempted action. Hence the realisation of some failed attempts, such as quota diversity hiring, box ticking or attempts at boosting employee satisfaction with slightly out-of-touch or one-off incentives and initiatives.
To make matters more confusing, AI (Artificial Intelligence) automation and the changing needs of the workforce also need to be considered. It is in this addition which the answer to the problems of the S in ESG may lie, as the skills being looked for in potential employees shift into data analytics and AI-compatible roles. In the past there have been systematised disadvantages for people from marginalised and inaccessible backgrounds that have heavily influenced the attributes and skills which company hiring practices uphold, as well as company culture. AI and the changing trajectory of sought-after skills within the workforce are not yet a systematised feature integrated into class, gender, or race, and therefore have the power to level the playing field and open new types of jobs. Although it should be considered that AI is a bandwagon which many companies are using at the moment to artificially boost financial income due to higher investing in this realm, similar to that of the dot-com bubble, the real implications of this technology prevail and should be used as a medium through which to even out social factors in a more immediate sense.
What can companies do, right now? Amongst actively seeking out the help of specialists and advisors within the realm of ESG, as well as extracting Scope 1, 2 and 3 reporting from the Environmental standards onto the Social ones, community work may be a useful addition. During the roundtable discussion, some more objective propositions were put forward. Approaches such as that of employees gaining incentive returns for reaching out to communities, especially those who encounter digital poverty, can help provide a head-start on the changing job market with AI and upskilling in mind. Companies can actively think about how their culture is influencing the social climate and upholding out-dated or less people-focused aspects, which may be hindering productively overall. A harmony between legislation, market, and culture needs to be at the centre for this change to occur. Although many young people entering the market now may be seen as naïve as to the inner workings of companies, and may propose unrealistic and overly liberal changes, companies should not artificially ride ‘woke’ waves to ‘wokewash’ their activities in the public eye, whilst continuing to ride the same undercurrents behind the scenes. More real and open discussion is needed, and corporate authenticity is key.
Natasza Siwinska (2020), Early Career Researcher
Natasza has just completed a bachelor's degree in Psychological and Behavioural Sciences at the University of Cambridge, where she sat in committees including one year as the Access Officer for Pembroke College, and on the Steering Group for the soft launch of the Leadership, Enterprise and Adventure at Pembroke (LEAP) Programme. She is currently interning at Illumina as a Patient Advocate and is also involved in research on artificial and human intelligence.
You can find out more about some of our Corporate Partners ESG policies by reading about their work below.