 |
|
|
|||||
Headwinds across the business world challenge any leader striving to make an impact beyond shareholder value. Few organizations know this struggle better than the B Team, born out of Richard Bransons drive to elevate the role and responsibility of business in society. CEO Leah Seligmann shares why some leaders are pulling back, where others are pressing forward, and which actions can have the greatest impactfrom climate change to diversity. This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by Robert Safian, former editor-in-chief of Fast Company. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with todays top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode. I remember when [the B Team] came onto the scene. It was kind of this wave of business as a vehicle for social good and social impact and environmental impact. Recently, this ethos has been under pressure. I’m curious how surprised you’ve been by that. I think that the writing was on the wall for a while. But I think the feeling of CEOs is that we really need to re-own the narrative, re-own why we’re doing these thingsbecause they’re good for business, they’re good for our communitiesand get away from a lot of the narrative, the language, and the programs that left people behind. I get to work for this amazing group of global leaders. Half of them are from the business sector, half of them are from civil society, but their focus is really, How do we transform business? And I think we were all a little shell-shocked, to be honest, at the beginning of the year. When the attacks started happening, to have that happening and have CEOs really scared and unsure of what they can say or what they can do. I think what we’ve been spending the last couple of months on is thinking about how do you retake that and go to the things that you really have license to speak about and get a little bit away from [being] the CEO [who] has to stand up for everything all the time, which really was the place that we were a couple of years ago. I know you used the word courage a lot, the courage to speak out in the right places, the courage to act. The collective of the B Team is based on the idea that maybe it’s easier to be courageous when others are joining you. But we’re not seeing a lot of collective action these days, aside from fawning dinners at the White House from tech CEOs. How do you make that start to happen? I think that the appetite to hear a bunch of people speaking out into the wind has really decreased. Those statements were useful. They served a purpose in raising awareness and this idea that sustainability and treating people well could be good for business. At this moment in time though, I think that it rings hollow. So the courage that we’re really looking for is a different type of courage. It’s more engaged. Figure out what people care about and why they’re worried about it and why what you’re saying isn’t landing, and then go from there. So I think that’s a significant shift. And I don’t want to undermine the idea that it actually takes courage to pause sometimes and to listen and to understand why you’ve missed your mark. That maybe is the hardest type of courage because we’re so wired towards action. There was a period where the trust for corporate leaders and CEOs was higher than any other figures in public life in a lot of ways, right? Do you have a sense about why that eroded? I think a big piece of it has to do with the pay gap between everyday working people. That growing inequality makes it really hard to feel like the person that you’ve put so much trust in actually sees your problems and is trying to make your life better. And so we still see employers and CEOs having high trust with their own employees, but this idea that business as a whole is a trusted institution has really eroded along with all of our institutions. Trust in government, trust in the news and the media, all of these things have been impacted by a crisis of trust. The B Team recently announced a new strategy initiative. Lots of high-profile business leaders signed on as part of your group, from Marc Benioff at Salesforce to Hamdi Ulukaya at Chobani, and Ryan Gellert at Patagonia. Can you explain what the new strategy is? I think the biggest piece is the pace. It used to be that you would have one major thing happen and everybody had time to get riled up and create opposition and drive things forward and create coalitions. And now we have multiple times a day things that are coming out that are shifting the landscape, and we need to be much more aware of and able to respond to the context that we’re in. The long-term goals of the B Team remain the same. How do we catalyze business to be a force for good in the world? But now we’re in a moment where every single day you have massive changes. One world order is ending, but we have yet to define or design the world order that we’re heading towards. And then the last piece is we’re in the middle of this incredible technology revolution. Technology isn’t good or bad, technology is potential. And we have businesses really trying to figure out how they harness the power of AI and minimize the downsides. So what we at the B Team decided is that we needed to get very clear on our values, very clear on our outcomes, and be much more nimble in our approach. And honestly, how can we stop being just a group that does a statement every six months and turn into a group that’s actually catalyzing real change? We’ve seen companies make climate pledges, not always delivering. We’ve got a U.S. administration that seems actively hostile to climate action. So what do you do? Most leaders that act on climate see it as in their business interest. Business leaders that stick to the fundamentals of why we have to deal with climate, that doesn’t change with political cycles. The fact that your supply chain is going to be disrupted, that doesn’t shift with who’s in power politically. That’s where we need business leaders to step up and lean in. But also to remember that the reason they got into that game wasn’t because they thought it was going to be a nice PR story; you got into climate because you had to. I noticed that DEI isn’t particularly prioritized within the new B Team strategy. Was that conscious? The word itself might not be used, but the B Team is seeking to create workplaces that are open to all people because we have a strong belief, not just that everybody deserves an opportunity, but business thrives when it attracts the best talent. So it’s not a deprioritization. What does DEI even mean? What value does that acronym give us? I think it covers a huge ground of incredibly rich thinking and work and things that do need to stay in the workplace, but the label DEI just has led to a tremendous backsliding of a vicious unleashing of anti-people rhetoric. So yeah, I think that laguage does need to change. Many businesses, of course, are not part of the B Team collective. Is there something that those places and CEOs that aren’t part of the B Team have in common? Our goal was always to be a small group, a group of leaders that we felt were really driving and pushing this agenda. The agenda is meant to be a broad agenda that could invite anyone in wherever they are, but that little cohort of 33 business leaders is not meant to represent everyone. The group that we have right now, they are in the rooms with so many other coalitions of CEOs and leaders that are trying to do something. And if they can use their role to weave things together, to lift the ambition of those efforts, I see that as success. And . . . ideally, no one would look back and be like, “The B Team did this.” They would be like, “A bunch of people all over the world did these different things,” and we created some positive change in the world. We don’t need credit. We should seek impact. It doesn’t matter to me if the B Team name is ever known.
Category:
E-Commerce
Synchrony’s CEO, Brian Doubles, shares with Stephanie Mehta how a mindset of productive paranoia fosters a workplace where curiosity, collaboration, and creativity drives real change.
Category:
E-Commerce
Companies ask job applicants for references all the time. Its a way to verify a potential hires history and skills, vet their candidacy, and assess character and cultural fit. So why cant the same thing be done in reversewhere you can ask past employees to assess the company youre applying to? Sure, theres Glassdoor. But short of salty ex-employees publicly dragging old employers on social mediaa relatively uncommon move, considering its deemed unprofessional and may result in legal retaliationthere are no real formalized processes to run references on a company youre applying to. A recent Reddit post presented the argument: Jobs be asking me for 3 references and I think I might start doing the same, it read. Let me talk to three happy employees please. The logic is simple: When booking a restaurant for date night, most double check the reviews for other diners’ experiences before making a reservation. Before pulling the trigger on a big purchase, many will scour the web for recommendations and product reviews, to ensure they are getting a good deal. Why shouldnt the same be available for job seekers? Well, some in the Reddit thread say theyve already put this into practice, in their own ways. When I get an offer, I always ask to come talk to the people who would be my peers/reports (since you usually already talk to the superiors in the interview), one Reddit user commented. Do people not normally do that? Another added: I did that for my last job. Got some actual good feedback and decided not to take it. But as some pointed out, current employees may not be the most helpful barometer. Dont speak to the happy ones, speak to the honest ones, one wrote. Or, perhaps candidates could see a stack of resignations with the reason for leaving highlighted, another suggested. After all, Glassdoor reviews exist for a reason. Currently, this sort of reverse reference check doesnt really exist, probably because of the mountain of potential legal issues around defamation. Companies could take retaliatory action against former employees who speak ill of them. (Besides, even the traditional model of companies asking candidates for references has come under more scrutiny and criticism in recent years.) But potential consequences aside, social media platforms like TikTok and LinkedIn have also become fair game for disgruntled ex-employees to publicly air their grievances. Some have even gone so far to film their exit interviews, published for the world (and potential future employees) to see. With company issues like culture rot, quiet cracking, and toxic workplaces putting off potential hires, the once-hidden realities of workplace culture are now being shared in the open. This shift in transparency could return some of the power to employees. Yet, at the same time, job openings are down, while the number of unemployed professionals are rising. Employees are being encouraged to cling onto jobs, even if they no longer enjoy the work. So those with offers on the table might be tempted to seize any available opportunity with both handsregardless if a reverse reference would produce red flags. For now, the next time you’re applying for a job, ask your hiring manager how many times this specific position has been vacant and filled. If its already cycled through three hires in the past year . . . it might be worth a quick stalk on LinkedIn to check if anyone knows something you dont.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||