Search

We’re on the second of our two-part series on popular culture and how certain shows should be required watching for just about everyone in a corporate setting: human resources, marketing, communications and, really, anyone. To that end, Special, the second season of which premiered on Netflix late last month, must be in your queue.

The story focuses on Ryan Hayes, an unpaid intern at the ridiculous blog Eggwoke, a site so absurd it makes Buzzfeed’s addictive listicles read like NPR. More importantly to the story, Ryan has cerebral palsy and is also coming to terms with living as a gay man in the Los Angeles area. Ryan is optimistic and has an infectious smile, but he is also flawed: He certainly has his anger issues and at times has toxic co-dependent relationships with his mother and Kim, a fellow Eggwoke writer and his best friend.

But best of all, Ryan is telling his own story, as the series is based on the experiences of Ryan O’Connell, a disability activist and LGBTQ advocate. He plays a fictionalized version of himself in the series, while also writing for and producing it. This is a story that was unthinkable even five years ago, and it’s refreshing to see O’Connell’s perspective shared on Netflix.

And therein lies the gift of Special: It’s told in Ryan’s own words.

Much of the show revolves around Ryan coping with cerebral palsy and the foibles of a 20s-something gay man living in Southern California. But in its second season, more characters and their backstories are coming to life, which augurs well for season three.

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

As is the case of many conventional television and now Netflix series over the years — from landmark shows like the first season of Schitt’s Creek in 2015 and to the Mary Tyler Moore Show’s launch 50 years ago — the writing and development of the characters improved remarkably in the second set of episodes of Special. The result is a series that in only eight episodes touches upon many challenges countless people who don’t “fit in” face day after day.

Those struggles include some of the basics: balancing work and home life, finding one’s way as a person of color in a very white and “bro-centric” office, coping with how corporate types respond to you based on your appearance and background, and having your colleagues view you more as a professional and less like the token gay or disabled person who helps the comms team prove your company is “woke.”

As the Pride Month messages start rolling out with calls to “celebrate diversity,” shows like Special are a reminder that before your organization sets off your celebrations, make sure that as you communicate such efforts, any storytelling about your colleagues’ experiences is told in their voices — instead of on your own assumptions.

Image credit: Izayah Ramos/Unsplash

A new report makes a strong bottom-line case for fleet managers to adopt new clean transportation technologies that are mature, available, and appropriate. Policy makers will have the final say on clean fleets, but the study provides strong dollars-and-cents support for electrifying fleets, including the nationwide U.S. Postal Service fleet.

The case against natural gas

The new State of Sustainable Fleets report was produced by the clean tech consulting firm Gladstein, Neandross & Associates. It was sponsored by a group of legacy companies that have become invested in the energy transition, including Daimler Trucks North America, Penske Transportation Solutions, Cummins, Inc., DTE Energy, and Geotab as well as Shell.

The report casts a wide net in terms of “clean.” It makes the case for fleet managers to realize bottom-line benefits by choosing cleaner technologies that fit the needs of their sector. In that context, GNA affirms the role of compressed natural gas in achieving a rapid switch out of petroleum fuels for heavy duty uses like waste hauling and mass transit.

However, as the impacts of natural gas extraction come into sharper focus, policy makers who prioritize climate action will most likely incentivize other pathways for clean fleets.

In addition to the climate and environmental impacts of methane emissions from natural gas drilling sites, the catalogue of local impacts includes significant public health threats related to air pollution and water contamination.

The water contamination issue also intertwines with water scarcity risks, providing policy makers with additional reasons to discourage fleet conversion to natural gas.

On the other hand, the renewable natural gas field is growing, so it is possible that compressed renewable gas could play a role in the clean fleets of the future.

The case for electrification and clean fleets

In terms of deep decarbonization, electrification is widely acknowledged as the wave of the future, and the report reflects that sentiment.

“Battery-electric vehicles are poised to become a leading clean fleet technology in three to five years,” GNA states, while advising that commitments by larger fleets will require the deployment of vehicles in the tens of thousands per year.

The sticking point is up-front costs for clean fleets, as GNA acknowledges. Electric vehicles generally cost more up front than other comparable vehicles, mainly due to the cost of the batteries.

However, studies show that the lifetime cost of owning an electric vehicle is lower, with fuel savings being only one of the key factors. Another factor is the simplicity of electric drive compared to internal combustion engines, which leads to lower maintenance and repair costs.

In addition, the cost of batteries is dropping rapidly. Analysts foresee that the up-front cost of electric vehicles will reach parity with other vehicles in the coming years.

Hydrogen fuel cells represent another pathway toward clean fleets. As with batteries, fuel cell costs are still relatively high. However, the report notes that automakers and fuel cell producers are already laying the foundation for fuel cell fleet electrification, especially in heavy duty vehicles including buses and trucks.

Clean fleets for the U.S. Postal Service, eventually

The GNA report is especially timely considering the brewing controversy over updating the aging fleet of the U.S. Postal Service. Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who was appointed by former President Trump, has already become notorious for mismanaging the country's postal service in the runup to the 2020 General Election. By way of follow-up, earlier this year DeJoy awarded a massive 10-year fleet “modernization” contract to the firm Oshkosh Defense that barely modernizes at all, at least not in terms of fleet electrification. The new contract relies mainly on new fuel-efficient internal combustion technology.

The new contract created a firestorm of protest among decarbonization advocates, especially in consideration of President Joe Biden’s focus on fleet electrification for federal agencies.

Democrats in Congress responded by proposing a new budget that would account for the higher up-front costs of purchasing more electric vehicles for the Postal Service.

DeJoy himself seemed amenable to the proposal, but during a markup of the Postal Service reform bill in the House Oversight and Reform Committee last week, Republican legislators threw cold water on the idea.

Raw Story reported on the committee activity on May 27, noting that the members “initially had a bipartisan agreement to pass the Postal Service Reform Act. But when amendments were introduced to update the postal fleet to electric vehicles and to secure the elections ahead of 2022, the House quickly became divided, with Republicans ‘strongly objecting’ on both issues.”

Fleet electrification and fiscal responsibility

To be clear, an electric vehicle contract is only one element in fleet electrification. For example, a successful plan for rolling out clean fleets must include a strategy for recharging all those vehicles’ batteries.

However, the evidence clearly indicates that electric vehicles fall well within the mature, use-appropriate framework for the new clean vehicles described in the GNA report.

As Raw Story reporter Alison Greene notes, the disconnect between available technology and Republican objections to electrifying the Postal Service fleet reveals a deep crack in the Republican Party’s image as the party of fiscal responsibility.

“The actions of Republicans during a mark-up of U.S. Postal Service legislation cast doubt on a basic theme of the party,” Greene wrote.

“They say that their positions are driven by fiscal responsibility and low costs for government services,” she added.

In other words, any fleet manager would have to be crazy to pass up an opportunity to electrify as quickly as possible, especially when the CEO insists upon it.

As of this writing, a more ambitious fleet electrification plan for the U.S. Postal Service is still up in the air. That’s a shame, because a Postal Service electrification contract would help build economies of scale into the electric vehicle pipeline, with a ripple effect on the private sector.

Business leaders who seek to save on fleet costs while shrinking their carbon footprints might want to lean on their Republican representatives in Congress to read the GNA report. Perhaps that will help remind them what fiscal responsibility looks like.

Image credit: Andrew Winkler/Unsplash

Back by popular demand, we thought we’d roll out another curated gift guide, but unlike for Mother’s Day, we think we’re giving you enough time to shop for your Dad (or anyone who’s had such a role in your life) for Father’s Day. Whether they like to eat, garden, wear, build (or clean), here are few ideas to celebrate your father – or any parental figure.

It’s the day after Memorial Day. Is that grilled cleaned yet?

Your parents (or only your dad and mom) just hosted that first post-pandemic Memorial Day cookout, and that grill could use a cleaning. Well, don’t expect Dad to do it! You should step up. Better yet, get busy, and come prepared with a bevy of Mrs. Meyer's cleaning products; leave your parents' house with a gift bag of these products so they are stocked the rest of the year. Unlike the conventional cleaning products out there (which smell noxious) and some of the “sustainable” options (do they even work?) Mrs. Meyers products leave behind that fresh, understated, without the oh-man-the-house-is-now-clean-but-now-I-have-to-leave-the-house scent. Also, if Dad loves tending vegetables or flowers, he’ll appreciate the fact that the company’s current campaign is focused on generating funds to help kids learn about gardening.

T-shirts with messages that shouldn’t be bottled up

Based in Baltimore, Mess in a Bottle and its founder, Kalilah Wright, literally don’t mess around. T-shirts include messages (such as the one shown above) about intergenerational wealth, strong women and challenging norms about appearances make this site a fun visit and a great place to shop online. Onesies, jackets and mugs are among other gifts offered. Mess in a Bottle has worked with Target; let’s hope other retailers celebrate what this company stands for.

Does your dad seethe when the My Pillow Guy appears on TV?

Yes, giving your father pajamas or slippers for Father’s Day is not only cliché, but you should at least wait until the fall and winter holidays. But if your father could use an upgrade for those eight hours a day when he needs sleep - and your budget doesn’t include one of 800 online choices for a new mattress - consider gifting him pillows from One Fresh Pillow. The company offers a subscription service that offers two types of pillows, but the real gift is the fact this company is not shy about its political views on social media. We tested out one of their pillows and it’s definitely comfy. Further, most company web sites are annoying in their tone; this company definitely gives off a likable vibe, and not only cause it shines as the anti-My Pillow Guy.

Lego of those cultural norms, and celebrate Pride Month with Dad

There are many reasons why these $35 “Everyone Is Awesome” Lego sets are a great gift: a parent who just adopted; a Lego fan who has all the spaceships and cityscapes already made by this iconic building block brand; or perhaps you just want to bond with the parental figures for Father’s Day. The company’s vice president of design, Matthew Ashton, is on the record saying he wished he scored a set like this one after he came out, and sums up the design succinctly: “I wanted to create a model that symbolizes inclusivity and celebrates everyone, no matter how they identify or who they love.”

Go wild on Father’s Day with wild nut butters from Wild Friends Foods

Is supporting women-owned businesses important to you, your parents, or, just about anyone? Wild Friends Foods and its line of nut butters check many boxes: It’s a certified B-Corp, runs its own 1 percent give-back program and says it sources responsibly for its ingredients, whether they are nuts, coconut, cacao or honey. If appreciating Dad means he scores a 6-pack of nut butters in the mail, then you’ll score points with a Wild Friends order. Sign up for their email newsletter and they’ll give you another 10 percent off; shipping is free on orders of $49 on up. The chocolate coconut peanut butter is to die and slather for, not necessarily in that order.

Speaking of going nuts, here’s one way to shop locally, give nationally

California’s San Joaquin Valley has plenty of secret gems to visit, and to nosh: Enzo’s Table is one of them. The fourth-generation Italian-American family sells it all: Biscotti including ones made with almonds from local orchards, infused olive oils (the basil flavor tastes like liquid pesto, and the Eureka and Meyer lemon options will disappear in a heartbeat) and if dirty martinis are Dad’s (or Mom’s thing), the Arbequina olives are a must – the only risk is that they may all get eaten straight out of the jar before that first drink is shaken. Other favorites include the almond butter and chile con limon pistachios. The company makes it easy with their flat-rate shipping and packages their products beautifully.

Ginning up for Dad’s Day

Pre-made cocktails are all the rage, and the assortment is overwhelming. Some of the canned and bottled concoctions are impressive; unfortunately, too many are gross. Among the winners is Northern California-based Zaddy’s, the canned cocktails of which check many boxes: The company avoids using plastic within its packaging, participates with 1% For the Planet and donates some proceeds to The Story of Stuff project. Of the three flavors, the favorite is a toss-up between the Gin(ger) Fizz and Corpse Reliever but all work; plus, if Dad (or Mom) is a gin fan, these drinks are a winner – and only have 100 calories a can.

Orchids, grown responsibly

Of course, you should consider giving your father flowers, especially if they are easy to take care of! California’s central coast (from Santa Barbara to Santa Cruz counties) is host to the perfect climate for growing many varieties of flowers. Westerlay Orchids, based in the small seaside town of Carpinteria, is a third-generation family business that excels in raising Orchidaceae. If you happen to live on the west coast, Westerlay’s orchids are available at some supermarkets, or you can arrange online to have mom or dad receive a box. The company succeeds when it comes to shipping them skillfully without overdoing the packaging. Further, Westerlay has invested in a bevy of sustainable farming practices and technologies. FYI: Orchids have a small footprint when it comes to care - we’re talking a monthly rinse of the roots and a few ice cubes each week. Easy-peasy.

Bouqs offers countless color pops of joy

We’ve long covered this Southern California company, which has been changing how flowers are sourced, sold and delivered for several years. Bouqs promises to deliver flowers directly from farms in regions such as South America. Customers can visit the company’s site and select a bouquet, and recipients will receive those arrangements relatively quickly. Less storage time means less waste - as much as 40 percent of all flowers marketed in the U.S. end up never sold.

The company has said its flower farming partners can now gain access to benefits such as day care, health care and education for its employees - while practicing “sustainable, eco-friendly farming.” As far as flowers go, this is about as farm-to-table as you can get. Currently, Bouqs is partnering with Maurice Harris, founder of LA-based floral studio Bloom & Plume; together, they will contribute funds to Campaign Zero to fight police brutality.

Image credit: Mess in a Bottle

“Pandemic panic” has caused nearly 70 percent of people to turn to single-use plastic more, according to at least one survey. Yet 86 percent of Americans agree we need to transition from an economy that throws things away to one that emphasizes reuse and recycling, according to recent research from WWF. Finally, 90 percent of consumers believe companies should use packaging that can be easily reused or recycled, according to a Ball Corp study.

That’s just the start of all the conflicting data out there. So, what’s the solution to this mounting single-waste plastics crisis?

Here’s part of the answer: From startups to multinational corporations, the business community has the expertise and influence to solve the plastic waste problem once and for all.

Join us tomorrow, June 2 at 1 p.m. ET/10 a.m. PT for “Pushing Past Plastic: How Brands Can Be Part of the Solution,” the second edition of 3BL Forum: Brands Taking Stands - LIVE. Together, we will explore how and why business is taking bold action to combat our plastic problem. 

REGISTER HERE

We’ll welcome senior leaders from Morgan Stanley, PepsiCo, The Consumer Goods Forum, Closed Loop Partners, Just Salad and Deliver Zero to our virtual stage for this discussion. The full agenda is below. 

Presented by 3BL Media, 3BL Forum: Brands Taking Stands - LIVE convenes top brands and organizations throughout the year to explore the “how” and “why” behind business leadership on today’s most pressing issues.

Tomorrow's Agenda

Understanding the Issue
A one-on-one interview with Audrey Choi, Chief Marketing and Sustainability Officer, Morgan Stanley, with Leon Kaye, TriplePundit’s executive editor.

Driving Solutions at Scale
A panel discussion, moderated by Mary Mazzoni, 3p’s senior editor, with:

• Burgess Davis, vice president of global sustainable packaging and sustainability strategy, PepsiCo 
• Ignacio Gavilan, director of sustainability, Consumer Goods Forum
• Bridget Croke, managing director, Closed Loop Partners

Moving Toward Reusables
A one-on-two interview with Lauren Sweeney, Co-Founder, Deliver Zero and Sandra Noonan, Chief Sustainability Officer, Just Salad, with Mary Mazzoni.

There is no cost to attend this and any future editions of 3BL Forum: Brands Taking Stands – LIVE! To stay up to date on the latest 3BL Forum news, follow @TriplePundit on Twitter and sign up for email alerts here.

Image credit: Brian Yurasits/Unsplash

The fight against facial recognition software and its inherent racial bias is far from over. But even if the larger technology companies say they have curbed their development of these technologies, one group in particular still isn’t having it: And now, the nonprofit is using its soapbox to warn consumers about potential risks.

It’s been quite the month for Fight for the Future, a coalition of leaders who represent the A to Z of various workers, from artists to z/OS systems programmers. It’s safe to assume, however, that they probably wish their time was spent doing their actual work instead of confronting how technology and telecommunication companies’ shenanigans are getting in the way of fair access to the internet and fair treatment under the law.

First, Fight for the Future is looking to amplify the revelation that the broadband industry was reportedly behind the filing of millions of fake comments that helped lead the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to rescind its stance on net neutrality in 2017, and to demand accountability for the industry players involved. The media have largely overlooked that story, despite New York Attorney General Letitia James’ bombshell report on the fake comments earlier this month.

The pitfalls of facial recognition software and algorithms are also looming, and it could potentially put U.S. residents in legal jeopardy. More retailers are using such technology to track shoppers’ movements, match identities to purchases and, in the end, hopefully find ways to lure you with deals to get you to buy more.

Left undiscussed is how, in the wrong hands, such technology could put people in legal trouble for crimes they did not commit, such as shoplifting. Retailers would reply that the deployment of technology is only one way to prevent theft and thereby keep prices low.

Nevertheless, that statement also flies in the face of how most retailers approach shoplifting: Most won’t publicly admit they will turn a blind eye to it (mostly out of legal and reputational concerns, and in fairness, there’s a situation in San Francisco that has shown the opposite extreme), but there is no shortage of online forums where retail employees make it clear they’ve been told not to confront a suspected shoplifter. Still, reports indicate some retailers are leaning on facial recognition software instead.

“There are very few laws to protect people from this intense surveillance, and stores do their best to hide what they’re doing to avoid scrutiny,” Fight for the Future said in a recent email blast. “But even if people did know this was happening, not everyone can opt out of shopping at certain stores depending on where they live or what they can afford. People who work in these stores don’t have a choice if they want to keep their job.”

Several large technology companies, including Amazon, IBM and Microsoft, have backed away from developing facial recognition software for a bevy of reasons. One of them is over the risk of dubious use by law enforcement agencies, a concern that was amplified last summer as protests demanding true social justice swept across the U.S. But that isn’t stopping smaller technology companies from creating, developing and improving facial recognition software.

This begs the question: Even if smaller technology companies say they won't provide this technology to law enforcement because it has been proven to be inaccurate and racist, why would they provide it to retailers to profile customers simply trying to shop in their stores? As with any technology, one purported “good use” does not preclude companies from harnessing it for other reasons.

Robert Williams, a Detroit-area man who was wrongfully arrested in front of his family after being misidentified by facial recognition software, is one person who spoke out last summer. "Federal studies have shown that facial-recognition systems misidentify Asian and black people up to 100 times more often than white people," Williams wrote in the Washington Post.  “I get angry when I hear companies, politicians and police talk about how this technology isn’t dangerous or flawed. What’s worse is that, before this happened to me, I actually believed them.”

For consumers who wish to base their shopping choices at least in part on where such creepy technology is not being used, Fight for the Future has a solution. The nonprofit recently rolled out a scorecard that lists major retailers and food services companies based whether they use, might use, or will not use such technology, including a seamless way for people to call them out on social media or email them directly about concerns they may have.

Companies that as of press time are in the green, saying they “won’t use” facial recognition technology now or in the future, include Costco, CVS, Home Depot, Target and Walmart.

“We are on the verge of an unprecedented increase in state and private spying that will be built in plain sight,” Fight for the Future said in a public statement. “People are alarmed, and this map and the toolkit arms people everywhere with the resources to both fight back and learn from how others are doing it. It’s going to take all of us to rid this country of this most dangerous technology.”

Image credit: Melanie Lim/Unsplash

If the decision-makers at ExxonMobil thought that algae biofuel would enable the company to survive in a low-carbon economy, they thought wrong. The field of algae-sourced fuel has shown promise, but it is about to be upstaged by green hydrogen. Meanwhile, public opinion on climate change has shifted firmly into a call for quick, decisive action. Like it or not, companies that failed to anticipate this shift will be forced to change — and in losing a much-publicized fight with its shareholders, ExxonMobil just became Exhibit A.

Algae biofuel to the rescue

ExxonMobil has become notorious for researching the causes and impacts of climate change on the one hand, while masking its own role with the other.

Although ExxonMobil reportedly made the connection between human activity and climate change at least as far back as the 1970s, by the 1990s it was providing financial support for a full-blown campaign aimed at discrediting climate science.

In 2007 the Union of Concerned Scientists issued a report detailing ExxonMobil’s anti-science activities. Coincidentally or not, two years later the company began investing a substantial sum in algae biofuel research through the firm Synthetic Genomics, Inc.

ExxonMobil is stuck in an algae biofuel rut

To be clear, the idea of algae biofuel is not pie in the sky. The U.S. Department of Energy has been promoting algae farming as a next-generation solution for the land use and food supply issues that confront the conventional biofuel industry.

The problem is pace. ExxonMobil began its algae biofuel research relationship with SGI more than 10 years ago, in 2009, and so far it has little to show for its efforts.

The 2009 research venture was initially intended to yield near-term commercial results, but by 2013 it shifted into a pure research phase.

By 2018, ExxonMobil also formed relationships with the Colorado School of Mines and Michigan State University. However, that year the company issued a summary of its algae biofuel activities that revealed just how far behind the curve it was.

Based on a 2012 peer-reviewed study involving researchers from its own ranks along with MIT and SGI, ExxonMobil insisted that “algal biofuels will have about 50 percent lower life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than petroleum-derived fuel.”

But today, those words ring hollow. Practically every automaker in the world has announced ambitious plans for converting to all-electric drives, either through batteries, hydrogen fuel cells or both.

ExxonMobil has similarly promoted natural gas as a lower-carbon solution for power generation, compared to coal. However, the plummeting cost of wind and solar has begun to push natural gas out of that market, and U.S. President Joe Biden’s plans for offshore wind development will accelerate the trend. In addition, the explosive growth of the green hydrogen market threatens the grip of natural gas on ammonia production and other industrial fields.

Shale gas gamble sinks once-mighty energy company

Even as ExxonMobil touted its algae biofuel research and cut ties with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) lobbying organization, it also invested heavily in shale gas during the same period.

The COVID-19 pandemic finally revealed deep flaws in the company’s shale gas gamble. In September, Christopher M. Matthews of the Wall Street Journal reported the company had lost approximately 60 percent of its value compared to seven years ago.

The “fall from grace” was stunning.

“Analysts estimate Exxon will lose more than $1 billion this year, compared with profits of $46 billion in 2008, then a record by an American corporation,” Matthews reported, adding that “the company’s removal from the Dow Jones Industrial Average in late August, after nearly a century on the index, marked a milestone in its decline.”

Matthews is among many energy industry observers who pinned the problem on ExxonMobil’s failure to diversify into market-ready clean technologies.

“Exxon doubled down on oil and gas at what now looks to be the worst possible time,” he wrote. "While rivals have begun to pivot to renewable energy, it is standing pat. Investors are fleeing and workers are grumbling about the direction of a company some see as out of touch and stubborn.”

Tiny hedge fund picks up the shareholder activist flag

Against this backdrop, yesterday’s news of shareholder action by an upstart hedge fund called Engine No. 1 dropped like a bomb. Shareholder activists have tried for years to shake ExxonMobil out of its fossil energy stupor. Engine No. 1 finally achieved measurable success by seating two of its four candidates on Exxon's board of directors. Even as a partial victory, the achievement was stunning.

“In a dramatic boardroom battle on Wednesday, a tiny hedge fund fought with the energy giant ExxonMobil over the future of the oil and gas industry — and won,” National Public Radio reported.

The blow seemed to come out of nowhere, but Engine No. 1 launched last year with ExxonMobil as its target.

“No public company in the history of oil and gas has been more influential than ExxonMobil, and yet the Company has failed to evolve with the industry’s transition, resulting in significant underperformance to the detriment of shareholders,” Engine No. 1's website reads. “The energy industry and the world are changing. To protect and enhance value for shareholders, we believe ExxonMobil must change as well.”

As reported by NPR, Engine No. 1 achieved its winning strategy by presenting a strong bottom-line case to larger firms, including the California State Teachers' Retirement System (CalSTRS) pension fund, as well as the advisory firms ISS and Glass Lewis.

That case included comparing ExxonMobil to other leading energy companies that are more active on decarbonization.

“ExxonMobil has underperformed the S&P 500 and each of its proxy statement peers (BP, Chevron, Shell and Total) for the last three-, five- and 10-year periods, both before the COVID-19 crisis and after COVID-19 but prior to our arrival,” Engine No. 1 explains, by way of emphasizing that the pandemic has been just the latest in a series of existential crises for the company.

Making change from within

The clean tech strategy for companies like BP and Shell is a strong contrast with ExxonMobil. Instead of relying mainly on foundational research, these firms have been acquiring other clean energy companies and pivoting their existing fossil energy knowledge base and supply chain into new areas where applicable.

It remains to be seen if the candidates promoted by Engine No. 1 can steer ExxonMobil in that direction. However, the strategy appears to be consistent with the actions of other oil and gas firms.

Kaisa Hietala is one of the Engine No. 1 candidates to win a seat. Among her many energy industry credits, Ms. Hietala served as EVP of Renewable Products at Neste for five years, from 2014 to 2019.

Engine No. 1 notes that Hietala’s tenure at Neste transformed the company into the “world’s largest and most profitable producer of renewable diesel and jet fuel, which was named by Harvard Business Review as one of the ‘Top 20 Business Transformations of the Last Decade’ in 2019.” Hietala is also a partner and co-owner in the sustainable business consultancy GAIA Consulting.

Gregory Goff is the other winning candidate. Though some renewable energy advocates may be skeptical of his deep and continuing roots in the fossil energy field, his track record in corporate profit-making is a strong complement to Ms. Hietala’s experience.

If Engine No. 1 had succeeded in seating its other two candidates, the inclusion of Goff comes into sharper focus. Among many other credits, candidate Alexander Karsner is a Senior Strategist at Alphabet (the parent company of Google). He served as Assistant Secretary of Energy for Efficiency and Renewable Energy at the U.S. Department of Energy from 2005 to 2008, a period in which Congress enacted new energy policies that set the stage for accelerating decarbonization.

Rounding out the four candidates is Anders Runevad, former CEO of the global wind energy firm Vestas Wind Systems. In that position he set the company on a high profile — and highly profitable — decarbonization track, which included joining the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change as a non-party supporter.

Even with landing only two candidates on the ExxonMobil board, Engine No. 1 has established a winning model for making change. Companies that fail to absorb the urgency of climate action on their own will be forced to do so, sooner or later.

Image credit: Raymond Kotewicz/Unsplash

Imagine being among the pioneering women scientists — in this case, a physicist — in your twenties. Then, you realize that your doctoral dissertation is so remarkable that not only can your findings point the way toward accelerating the development of life-saving medicines, but your colleagues now want to start a business with you to scale the technology.

This swift progress has been a reality for Dr. Nabiha Saklayen, CEO and co-founder of Cellino. Her vision is to automate personalized, autologous cell therapies. Stem cell-derived therapies and regenerative medicines potentially could cure some diseases, including Parkinson’s, diabetes and heart disease. Using a patient’s own cells is by many accounts the safest and most effective way to regenerate healthy tissue for the person’s body. However, most autologous cell therapies are manual-labor intensive and come with costly laboratory overhead. Cellino is working to change this.

Cellino team members are experts in stem cell biology, machine learning and laser optics. They are on a mission to make personalized, autologous cell therapies accessible for patients. The process for patient-specific stem cell generation usually involves a highly skilled scientist working at a bench, looking at cells by eye and removing unwanted cells with a pipette tip. The company's approach connects different disciplines to automate the process.

The potential impact that Cellino’s novel biotechnology could have is herculean. And true, clinical trials may prove the technology is ready to scale and avoid the problems that led the fall of companies like Theranos as well as lesser known startups such as Laguna Pharmaceuticals and Revision Optics; nevertheless, the team advancing Cellino’s unparalleled technology will need to be matched with equally astute business leadership.

As Dr. Jennifer Doudna, Nobel Prize winning biochemist and founder of the International Genomics Institute (IGI), told Fast Company: “Being a brilliant scientist doesn’t automatically make someone a brilliant business person.”

To that end, IGI has teamed up with Tory Burch, a fashion designer and executive, to launch the Tory Burch Fellowship at the IGI. The one-year fellowship program is designed to support woman entrepreneurs in leading, growing and scaling up companies in the genomics field.

It may come as no surprise that Dr. Saklayen has been awarded the inaugural fellowship. What sets this program apart from other biotech fellowships is the emphasis the program places on business guidance and education. Dr. Saklayen will have access to $10,000 for business education; personalized coaching and mentoring sessions for fundraising; executive training for challenges including conflict resolution; and up to $50,000 for research supplies.

While Cellino has already secured $16 million in seed financing led by The Engine at MIT and Khosla Ventures on top of recent fellowships, the business guidance should prove to be useful as the average venture capital investment in biotech has more than doubled over the past decade.

As Dr. Doudna stated in Cellino’s recent announcement, "Part of our mission at the Innovative Genomics Institute is to be the bridge from research to real-world impact.” In the coming years, as Dr. Saklayen guides Cellino forward, bridging the gap between scientific theory and real-world impact will be critical. Securing more funding, while repeatedly conducing scientific testing in addition to launching public relations campaigns are monumental tasks that challenge many startups. Here’s hoping this startup and those supporting it can conquer the challenges and deliver life-saving therapies to people living with disease.

The Tory Burch Fellowship at IGI also sends a message to the scientific and business communities: Women are increasingly pursuing careers in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics), yet women scientists often face many challenges and, in the long run, can benefit from the financial and professional support. More women are launching startups across many industries, but they score the necessary funding at a rate far lower than that of their male counterparts.

“Despite women’s groundbreaking research, discoveries, and achievements in science and technology, in 2019, only 35 percent of students enrolled in STEM coursework were women,” wrote U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens last month. “We must fund robust programs to create opportunities and training that lead to viable career paths in technology, engineering, health sciences, science policy, and academia — and we must do so in a way that builds a stronger and more diverse STEM workforce.”

Image credit: Artem Podrez/Pexels

By Leigh-Ann Jackson

Over the past 20 years, Ron Guerrier has served as Chief Information Officer for multiple Fortune 500 firms, as well as the State of Illinois. No matter the post, he’s been driven by a desire to promote equality in the tech field and beyond. In September, the Chicago-based innovator stepped into the CIO role at HP, with the goal of building out its IT organization and overseeing company-wide digitization. But he’s also eager to further the company’s commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

The HP Racial Equality and Social Justice Task Force, formed last summer and formalized this year, was what initially piqued Guerrier’s curiosity about HP. His interest grew stronger when he came across CEO Enrique Lores’ public statement about “leading with values” in the wake of George Floyd’s murder. 

“I was blown away,” Guerrier said, “because it resonated as something that was extremely authentic.” 

During last summer’s nationwide civil unrest, he recalled, “A lot of CEOs and boards were posting statements and then they just went quiet.” By contrast, he found that HP had a plan to make good on the company’s committments about social justice and racial equality. Its nascent task force and its expanding partnerships with HBCUs convinced Guerrier that the company intended to “use the power and influence of this phenomenal brand to change things.”

“I follow the basic rule [which is to] create awareness and advocacy,” Guerrier says. “But, I think a lot of companies end it there. They forget the third ‘A,’ which is action.”

For Guerrier, taking action is key. His dedication to uplifting underserved communities has led him to volunteer with the gang rehabilitation program Homeboy Industries and serves as a founding Advisory Board Member of STEM Advantage, a nonprofit organization promoting STEM opportunities for minorities enrolled in the California State University system. He also sits on the board of the disaster relief organization SBP, which he describes as “Habitat for Humanity plus”— the nonprofit helps underserved communities maneuver their way through the FEMA process after a disaster hits, and rebuilds homes, making them net zero and carbon neutral whenever possible.

HP’s efforts to tackle climate change were yet another draw for Guerrier, who has been eco-minded since his college days at the University of Illinois. “My family originates from Haiti and I have cousins who work at HP recycling centers. How small of a world is this? Right now, I’m looking at an HP Elite Dragonfly made using recycled materials including ocean-bound plastic potentially from Haiti!” 

Looking ahead, Guerrier plans to use his platform to continue addressing the digital divide in education, to create pathways for advancement, and to encourage businesses to “see the art of the possible in Black and Brown communities.”

What’s your impression of the DEI work HP is doing?

As a founding member of OneTen, a coalition that aims to create one million family-sustaining jobs for Black Americans, we’re partnering with our global procurement group to make sure that we hire more Black-owned IT companies. We recently signed up for the Information Technology Senior Management Forum, an organization that helps Black employees understand the importance of networking and connects them with strong sponsors within the company. So when we do have an opportunity at the manager or director level, we can have a diverse palette of candidates. That is putting the action behind awareness and advocacy.

How have your personal experiences in the tech world shaped your perspective? 

About 12% of the US population is African American, but we represent 3%, at most, in IT. So there is a huge gap. I want to make sure that we create better opportunities. There were times in my career where I’ve been at CIO events and I’m the keynote speaker, but I’m mistaken for security or the coffee guy. Several times, they would ask for my credentials just to validate that I’m in the right place. That’s embarrassing, but I use it as a learning opportunity to stress that you have to view everyone with an equal lens.

You’ve been vocal about increasing STEM education in Black and Latinx communities. Will you continue to advocate for those efforts in your new role?

What I want to do next, as I get more into the HP ecosystem, is see where there are opportunities to accelerate these passions. Where could we create equality and bring on more Black and Brown candidates who are more than qualified, but they just don’t know the network? At the end of the day, the network matters. The important thing is to connect the dots.

Read the full Ron Guerrier interview here.

This version was previously published in the 3BL Media newsroom.

Image credit of Palo Alto, CA (home to HP’s headquarters): Paulius Dragunas/Unsplash

After an on-duty police officer murdered George Floyd last year, many leading corporations stepped into the media spotlight with big-dollar contributions aimed at supporting the Black Lives Matter movement. That included ambitious plans for new get-out-the-vote efforts in the run-up to Election Day 2020. However, these pledges ring hollow as state legislatures overturn decades of progress on voting rights, with a ripple effect on women and LGBTQ persons as well as Blacks and other people of color.

Why business leaders need to speak up on capital punishment

The U.S. is one of a vanishingly small number of nations that still routinely puts people to death for civilian crimes. The practice is deeply tinged by structural racism in the criminal justice system. That is no accident considering the torrent of white on Black violence that exploded in the decades following the Civil War, a period in which thousands of free Black citizens were accused of crimes, tortured, and murdered by lynch mobs who claimed to have the force of law and moral consensus behind them. Studies have linked the decline of lynching with the rising use of capital punishment up to the 1950’s, primarily in southern states.

Civil rights organizations have pressed long and hard to abolish the death penalty, and Celia Ouellette, CEO and founder of the Responsible Business Initiative, argues that business leaders who support justice reform must also take part in that effort.

“The death penalty is a direct descendant of lynching in every sense,” Ouelette explains. “A University of Washington study found jurors in Washington were three times more likely to recommend a death sentence for a black defendant than for a white one in a similar case.”

The death penalty “embodies the worst aspects of our racist and broken justice system, and by calling for its abolition business leaders are helping to honor their commitments to racial injustice,” Ouellette maintains. “It is simultaneously a tool and symbol of oppression, and by helping to tear it down they demonstrate their commitment to a less cruel and discriminatory future.”

Capital punishment as a political strategy

Nevertheless, it is not difficult to understand why business leaders who profess to support civil rights and criminal justice reform are reluctant to speak out on capital punishment. Death penalty advocates have a powerful advantage in the sphere of public discourse. They can simply turn the conversation to focus on the heinous nature of the crimes. They draw attention to individual actions that are abhorrent. No one would want to defend a person found guilty of such horrible crimes, especially not a CEO with the company’s brand reputation on the line.

That focus on the individual has successfully distracted attention from the use of the death penalty as a race-based political strategy. Recent generations of politicians have successfully ridden into office by supporting the death penalty, just as past generations mollified their constituents by justifying “lynch law.”

From the previous U.S. president on down, the death penalty supporters of today win their elections by amplifying the heinous nature of capital crimes, especially crimes involving white victims, and the death row population reflects that continued race-of-victim bias.

From capital punishment to insurrection

The emotional trap set by Trump and other death penalty supporters came to a head during and after the 2020 election cycle, when Trump took the political element of capital punishment and weaponized it to a level unprecedented in modern times.

He pushed through a rash of 13 federal executions beginning in July 2020, a timeline that appeared to be deliberately aimed at ginning up enthusiasm among his supporters in the days and weeks leading to the November 3 General Election. Even after losing the election, Trump continued to ram federal executions through, breaking a 130-year precedent of suspending federal executions during presidential transition periods.

By way of context, no federal executions took place in the entire 17 years leading up to 2020, including the first three and a half years of Trump’s term in office. Only 50 federal executions have been recorded since 1927, and Trump alone accounted for 13 of those 50 deaths by the time he finally left office.

From insurrection to voter suppression

Weaponizing the death penalty is only part of a twin strategy that emerged during Trump’s 2020 campaign. Having used the death penalty to amplify his law-and-order agenda, Trump then proceeded to draw a portrait of an election system manipulated by criminals.

As Election Day came and went, Trump rang alarm after alarm about criminals hijacking the election. Through the office of the president, he provided the moral cover for white supremacists to keep him in office by any means necessary, up to and including the bloody insurrection of January 6.

Unfortunately for those who took part in the events of January 6, Trump provided no legal cover. Hundreds have been arrested and charged for their actions.

On the other hand, scores of Republican legislators have picked up right where the insurrectionists left off.

Even before the mob rampaged through the Capitol Building, 147 Republicans in Congress publicly affirmed that they would not vote to certify the 2020 election results. They transformed a routine matter of paperwork into a powerful endorsement of the idea that criminals had overturned the 2020 election results.

All but a handful of these 147 Republican lawmakers carried out their pledge on the evening of January 6, even after the mob nearly succeeded in its mission.

The stunt delayed, but did not stop, the inevitable certification process. However, the damage was done. Scores of Republican lawmakers in Congress brought the Trump voter fraud canard back to their home states, where they provided the moral and ethical cover for more than 360 pieces of state legislation aimed at making it more difficult for Blacks and other Democratic-leaning populations to vote.

Voter suppression, George Floyd and corporate social responsibility

The voter suppression movement now poses an existential challenge for corporate support of the Black Lives Matter movement, and for other foundational issues of corporate ethics including gender equality, LGBTQ rights and immigrant rights.

Ouellette’s concise summary of the problem at hand is that “legislation that groundlessly disenfranchises Black voters will serve to perpetuate systemic racism in the United States.” As a corollary, voter suppression also serves to disenfranchise Democratic-leaning voters who support corporate action on racial equality and other social issues, and that can put corporate leaders between a rock and a hard place.

“Businesses have growing responsibilities beyond their own operations – it’s not enough to simply do no harm,” Ouellette says. “The latest data shows that silence has consequences: Six in 10 [59 percent] Americans say it is no longer acceptable for companies to be silent on social justice issues and a further 49 percent say they assume companies that remain quiet on social justice issues don’t care.”

“If they are truly committed to fighting systemic racism, they should use their massive voices to speak out against discriminatory policies,” she concludes. “The truth is that employers and investors speak up, policymakers listen. By speaking out against injustice – whether that’s at events, in op-eds, interviews or any other media – businesses send a powerful message to decision-makers about their preference.”

From lynch “law” to the death penalty to voter suppression, GOP legislators who raise the specter of white victimhood are leaning on centuries-old tropes that have poisoned the national conversation for far too long. It is time for those who hold a massive megaphone to use it: or, give up the pretense of caring.

Image credit: Priscilla Gyamfi/Unsplash

Brace yourself: Pride Month is almost here, which means companies will still start overlaying their logos with the rainbow flag and proclaim their “allyship” with the LGBTQ community.

Of course, a quick search engine check will reveal that too many of these companies have also funneled contributions to political leaders who have supported legislation that is hostile toward LGBTQ rights.

But never mind that hypocrisy, as we have at least one reason to celebrate how the queer community is breaking through.

Last Saturday, SNL brilliantly skewered what critics have long said has frequently been an off-message, corporate-sponsored Pride Month for years. But the video, in which Lil Nas X makes an appearance (and really gets things rolling), also shows how far the comedy sketch show has come showcasing LGBTQ voices over the past decade. As much as the skit throws shade at some of Pride Month’s cringeworthy and eye-rolling aspects, it is also a celebration of queer culture, presented by LGBTQ actors and writers, not toned down, with zero apologies and nary a concern if straight people get it or not.

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

As with most of the entertainment industry's productions in television and movies, gay characters on SNL were long the frequent punchline and cruel butt of jokes on the show. The first openly gay cast member of SNL, Terry Sweeney, lasted only one season during the mid-1980s: His characters were often the crassest and clichéd cliched gay stereotypes; meanwhile, off the set, Sweeney had to endure the homophobic taunts of colleagues such as Chevy Chase.

Fast forward more than 35 years later, this season SNL has showcased three openly queer cast members, and several sketches have clearly been written with the point of view of those comedians and gay writers. For years, gays were the targets of humor often written by their straight colleagues. Now, the work of those including Bowen Yang and former SNL writer Julio Torres has turned that dynamic on its head: Gay writers and actors are creating more content, and it’s up to the straight audience to figure out the jokes, satire and context.

And therein lies the lesson this SNL parody offers to corporate America: The rainbow flag and boilerplate language that says “We stand with the LGBTQ community” are not inherently bad, but now, they are nothing more than the baseline. Many of those press releases that have been emailed and posted publicly are clearly written by a straight person, which again, isn’t necessarily wrong. Nevertheless, it’s clear gay employees or the wider LGBTQ community often had zero input in those Pride Month proclamations. That oversight certainly shouldn’t occur this year, considering the myriad of bills in statehouses across the U.S. that are clearly designed to shame transgender citizens and their LGBTQ neighbors.

So why should marketers and human resource folks watch SNL’s Pride Month video? Once you get past the NSFW references, the clip can also be viewed as a reminder for corporate managers to check in with their LGBTQ employees, ask the how they are faring amidst all the news out there, what challenges they still face as gay and queer employees in their organization and what they would like to see from the organizations for which they work.

Bottom line, many of us don’t want to be made to feel like the “token gay” that demonstrates their company has a “tolerant” or “working” culture. We just want to be, be ourselves, and only be – period. The end.

Image credit: Mercedes Mehling: Unsplash