Search

The grimness is inescapable. Whether we like it or not, we're inundated by constant headlines and news segments that lay out everything that's been happening in the United States since COVID-19 hit months ago – and that includes the constant news about layoffs.

Quarantined to our homes, many of us haven't hugged a family member or friend in months. Running essential errands or going on brief, socially-distanced walks are among the only reasons we have to get out of our homes anymore. As you can imagine, this begets an increased mental and emotional toll as people experience increased levels of anxiety, insomnia, irritability and depression. 

Beyond the strain a pandemic can cause to our personal lives, businesses, employees, and the economy have been hit especially hard by COVID-19. Non-essential businesses have been forced to close, some temporarily and others for good. Businesses that are still lucky enough to be open are operating under entirely different protocols. 

Layoffs are a quick fix, not a long-term answer

When the novel coronavirus pandemic first hit, business owners across the United States were already preparing for layoffs. This is understandable as CEOs looked around and watched as countless others went that route in an attempt to salvage profits and, ultimately, the entire business. But this monkey see, monkey do mentality can do more harm than good.

No business owner wants to watch his or her profits decline, not only for the sake of one’s own bank account, but because shrinking revenue usually comes with dire consequences. Under normal circumstances, this could mean upending your entire operations and refocusing your efforts to course-correct your growth. Or it could mean having to make the difficult decision of letting a small number of employees go if their roles no longer serve the long-term goals of the business.

But these aren't normal circumstances and, therefore, traditional solutions can't always be applied. To CEOs that feel pressured to make layoffs, I ask: Is it worth it? If you're making a little less money than you have been, I question whether these layoffs are the correct decision for the long term. The Harvard Business Review, back in 2002, pointed out that companies that found solutions around laying their employees off during a rough financial period actually outperformed other companies. 

If your organization is under a significant amount of financial stress, don't immediately look to layoffs. Firing people isn’t the easy solution it’s wrongly perceived to be, and if you do them for the wrong reasons, it seldom actually helps a company achieve its goals. Instead, consider these steps to navigate tough financial times.

Include your employees in the decision-making process

Do you consider your employees part of your family? Well, your employees should be like family, but that sentiment means nothing unless upheld in the most trying times. 

The vitality of your business will be tested on occasion, especially during unpredicted catastrophes. During the 2008 financial crisis, this is what happened to Barry-Wehmiller, a manufacturing technology company in St. Louis. Its CEO, Bob Chapman, was forced to decide between layoffs or letting his company go under. He did neither. Instead, he was transparent with his employees about the state of the company and they all agreed to make sacrifices like taking temporary salary cuts, suspending the company’s 401(k) matching program, and each employee taking four weeks of unpaid leave at a time of their choosing. Not only did the company survive, but no employees lost their jobs.

You'd be surprised to find that your employees are willing to make sacrifices in light of difficult times to help the company and, at the same time, protect themselves.

If you consider your employees to be family, this should be evident in how you choose to protect them when your back is up against the wall. It's easy to measure how someone's salary could contribute to your profitability, but what cannot be measured is the impact letting go of your top talent will have on your organization now and in the future.

Work to find more creative strategic solutions

Creativity is a weapon against unpredictability and uncertainty. No business could have ever prepared for the onslaught of COVID-19, but it's possible to use these circumstances to your advantage. If your current products or services don't benefit consumers in this time, it's time to reinvent yourself, if only for the time being.

Take the Australia-based company Cheeky Food Events. Its entire business model revolved around corporate team-building events that were centered around cooking — an impossibility today because of the coronavirus. Instead of throwing in the towel, it adapted its operations to deliver catering options to remote workforces. Another example of this is a micro-distillery in Oregon. Shine Distillery & Grill couldn't serve its usual customer base because of the pandemic, so it switched gears and became a temporary private-label hand sanitizer manufacturer. It reported that its business doubled in sales overnight. 

These businesses aren't lucky; they simply saw an opportunity in the current space and adjusted their businesses to avoid loss of profits. 

Take advantage of financial relief programs

The coronavirus pandemic has upended the entire economy, leaving business owners forced to make some of the most challenging decisions they'll ever have to make. While budgets need to be reallocated and sacrifices need to be made, there are incentives put in place that will give businesses some relief during these tough times.

One of these incentives includes the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), a federal loan that is helping small to medium-sized businesses continue to pay their employees. It was signed into law in March and ran out shockingly fast, which prompted another $310 billion to be added to the funds. The stakes for this loan are high, with many businesses having yet to receive their money, but this next round will hopefully bring more luck. And once you do receive the money, it's important to use the loan correctly so you don't pay the price when it comes time to account for your funds.

These are uncertain times for business owners. They are feeling the weight of the world on their shoulders. Like with any erratic situation, there is no one right or wrong way to handle things. But before you make any rash decisions that could have an impact on your employees and the future of your business, it's essential to think through your options. What works for one company may not be the right choice for your own. 

Image credit: Jose Fontano/Unsplash 

The electric vehicle certainly has come a long way from the ill-fated EV1 sedan of the 1990’s, but questions still remain regarding the ability of an electric truck to perform heavy duty tasks, like hauling garbage. That concern has been put to rest by the waste management firm Republic Services. The company has just inked a deal with the startup Nikola Corp. for up to 5,000 battery-operated waste hauling and recycling collection trucks.

Shhhh! An electric truck is coming

Republic has been carefully cultivating its reputation within communities and customer relations, partly with the help of a diversity hiring program that has put more women behind the steering wheels of its trucks.

The switch to electric trucks will make a significant contribution to those efforts by cutting down on engine noise. Electric vehicles do not idle when stopped or parked, and they make far less noise than diesel engines while on the move.

The turnover will also make a significant contribution to Republic’s plans for reducing carbon emissions.

The new electric trucks will run entirely off a powerful battery with a capacity of 720 kilowatt-hours. That will provide enough electricity for a range of 150 miles per charge, while providing energy for all of the equipment on the trucks including the front and side loaders.

The many benefits of the electric truck

Noise reduction and eco-friendliness are just two of the benefits of electric trucks. Superior performance is another one.

Nikola states that its Tre electric drive platform will deliver instant torque along with three times more horsepower than diesel or natural gas engines. In particular, the new electric trucks will be capable of traveling uphill with full loads, a feat that can be problematic for compressed natural gas engines.

Republic will not have to pay extra for the improved performance. In fact, the company anticipates saving money on maintenance costs.

The bottom line angle has already attracted other fleet managers to electric trucks. However, up to now the commercial electrification movement has been confined mainly to delivery trucks. The sheer scale and ambition of the deal between Republic and Nikola together vault heavy-duty applications for the electric truck into the mainstream.

The hydrogen vs. electric truck

The agreement with Nikola calls for an initial fleet of 2,500 battery electric trucks to be introduced starting in 2023, with an option to expand to 5,000.

That is a bit of a surprise move for the company, which introduced itself in 2017 with a focus on fuel cell electric vehicles, powered by hydrogen.

However, Nikola’s Tre electric truck platform is designed for both battery and fuel cell technology. With the Republic deal in hand, Nikola can count on battery technology to achieve economies of scale in manufacturing and supply chain. If all goes according to plan, the Republic order will ultimately enable Nikola to reduce costs for its fuel cell electric vehicles.

The fuel cell angle is especially relevant for the long-haul trucking field. An electric truck powered by hydrogen fuel cell can travel over much longer distances than it would with a battery pack, and it can fuel up in minutes. Fuel cell systems also require less space than battery packs, leaving more room for cargo.

Meanwhile, battery technology is a good fit for Republic. The company’s fleet operates primarily during the day over relatively short distances, providing ample time for overnight charging.

Electric trucks and the green hydrogen revolution

Republic’s switch to electric power will help cut its ties to the compressed natural gas field. The company already reduced its use of fossil gas in 2017 by purchasing renewable gas through the company Clean Energy Fuels.

To the extent that Republic can recharge its new electric trucks with renewable energy from the local grid, the company will also reduce its dependence on coal or gas-fired power plants for electricity.

Republic has already made some interesting moves into the renewable energy field. In 2016, the company embarked on a renewable energy project with the firm Mas Energy, aimed at producing electricity from captured landfill gas. The project covers landfills in three cities in Georgia, for a combined capacity of 24.1 megawatts. That’s the equivalent electricity for more than 15,000 households, or a whole lot of electric trucks.

As for hydrogen, the primary source of hydrogen today is fossil gas. However, Nikola is among the fuel cell stakeholders that are setting their sights on green hydrogen, produced by splitting water with an electrical current supplied by wind or solar power.

Just a few years ago, fossil gas was touted as the cleaner alternative to diesel fuel and coal power plants. Now wind, solar and green hydrogen are knocking gas out of the fuel and power markets. Republic’s new fleet of electric trucks will help accelerate the trend. It just goes to show how much corporate leaders can accomplish, when they take the lead on new clean technology.

Image credit: Nikola

Sustainability rankings aren’t all that different from political polls. We can go back and forth over the methodologies, why the questions were framed in such a way and how the questions are asked, all at the rapid pace of a hamster spinning on a wheel. But during any era, including the current COVID-19 crisis, both can offer a snapshot of how society, politicians or companies are performing at a particular moment in time.

This is certainly true of a recent study taken on by GlobeScan and SustainAbility. Researchers queried several hundred experts across dozens of countries to gauge the largest problems confronting humanity — and the companies that are leading by how they have responded in kind.

Respondents were asked to name three companies they viewed as leaders, and the list isn't much of a surprise. Unilever once again topped the ranking, followed by Patagonia, Ikea and Interface. But new companies also scored mentions, including Microsoft, L’Oréal and dirty-turned-clean-energy giant Ørsted.

Unilever stood out as the fast-moving goods titan led in mentions worldwide; the exception was in Latin America, where Brazil-based Natura & Co., a personal care and cosmetics conglomerate, outpaced the rest of the field. This survey also highlights how even during a time of crisis, Unilever and Patagonia have endured as sustainability leaders, year after year. Much of this has to do with how well companies can adapt — and the experts GlobeScan and SustainAbility queried said both companies performed well, at a rate of almost 90 percent, based on their abilities to plan and execute strategy.

This joint study also presents a veiled warning to companies: Just because we’re in the midst of a pandemic does not mean other global challenges can be swept under the rug. Survey respondents almost uniformly agreed that problems including climate change, biodiversity loss, water scarcity and pollution, poverty, and plastic waste were still of “urgent” concern. And that makes sense, considering the evidence suggesting that the COVID-19 pandemic has its roots in ecological imbalances.

“The 2020 survey makes clear what the private sector must do to increase resilience and the ability to withstand future shocks in the wake of COVID-19: embed environmental sustainability and ESG in strategy, develop new and sustainable business models, improve risk management and business continuity planning, and transform supply chains,” said Mark Lee, executive director of SustainAbility. “The time to act is now.”

What’s also important to remember is that it’s not only about how companies communicate their sustainability work, but also to whom they direct their messaging. It’s no accident Unilever and Patagonia emerge as leaders time and again. Consumers not only hear, but listen, to these businesses. One company has reached millions of people with its handwashing campaigns; the other has not been shy about how it feels about the current U.S. presidential administration.

Image credit: Gelani Banks/Unsplash

Many of us and our peers are becoming increasingly distracted by the U.S. presidential campaigns, or whether or not the college football season will kick off this year. Nevertheless, critics of police departments nationwide are still keenly focused as they lean hard on companies to stop funding police foundations.

Color Of Change, a national racial justice organization, announced earlier this week that it is now targeting several Fortune 500 companies in a bid to convince brands to stop funding police foundations. Companies named in the group’s campaign include Bank of America, Coca-Cola, Goldman Sachs and Target.

Leaders of Color Of Change charge that police foundations across the U.S. are responsible for funding surveillance technology, military-style equipment, and other tools used to intimidate Black neighborhoods and communities of color.

This week’s campaign announcement follows on the heels of another group’s recent investigation, which revealed strong ties between police foundations and U.S. utilities, fossil fuel companies and banks.

“In cities like New York, Atlanta, Seattle, Washington, D.C., Louisville, and Los Angeles, police foundations have bankrolled the hyper-surveillance of Black communities and militarization of local police forces,” Scott Roberts, senior director of criminal justice campaigns at Color Of Change, said in an emailed statement to TriplePundit. “But even as large corporations take pledges for racial equity and adopt new policies for diversity and inclusion, many of them are continuing to support aggressive, racist policing by contributing to these organizations.”

In pushing to hold corporations accountable for their involvement in the U.S. criminal justice system, Color Of Change is urging companies to sever any and all ties with police foundations. Tactics that organizers and their allies have adopted during this latest push include sending correspondence to executives, organizing online petitions, and arranging meetings with company representatives to implore them to divest from these foundations while removing themselves from their executive boards.

Color Of Change has taken on other initiatives, such as a campaign protesting prison telecommunications firms’ alleged price-gouging of incarcerated individuals seeking to stay in touch with families during the COVID-19 crisis. By early April, federal prisons agreed to waive telephone charges, up to 500 minutes monthly per individual, while the pandemic continues. In addition, Color Of Change also claimed credit for its work with the American Civil Liberties Union to convince private equity firms to exit the for-profit bail bond industry.

Image credit: Sean Lee/Unsplash

Last month’s World Population Day put the challenges and realities of sustainable development in the spotlight. The statistics are staggering, especially in emerging markets such as India and Africa, where the population is likely to double by 2050.

While a growing population is arguably good for business (thanks to greater demand, more competition and a surge in foreign capital infusion), it also highlights the urgency to enable sustainable development to meet the needs of the most vulnerable communities. Entrepreneurs are at the forefront of this issue thanks to their lean approach and problem-solving skills. Here are four ways entrepreneurs can help support sustainable development.

Powering fintech solutions for a mobile-first market

Today, at least 1.7 billion people are still unbanked. Entrepreneurs can help advance financial inclusion by taking advantage of the growing smartphone penetration rate. According to GSMA, smartphone penetration will reach 80 percent globally by 2025. This smartphone revolution opens the door to unique mobile financial services and business models such as mobile-only banking, mobile money, carrier billing, micro-insurance and micro-finance.

Branch, Flutterwave, and Paga are among some of the most promising startups building such networks. In turn, these startups helped expose the staggering contrast between the number of mobile phones and that of bank accounts in Sub-Saharan Africa. There are 747 million SIM connections in the region, representing 75 percent of the population, and only about 300 million adults with a bank account. With a mobile-first mindset, fintech entrepreneurs and innovative financial institutions can build user-centric services that reach far more people than traditional financial institutions. 

Bridging the digital divide with low-cost broadband access

Despite the explosive growth of mobile phones in emerging markets, broadband penetration remains low, with only 25 percent of the African population having access to Internet services.

The problem is compounded by the fact that the average cost of 1 gigabyte of data in Africa is over 7 percent of an average person’s income. By investing in innovative Internet technology such as Virtual Radio Access Network (or vRAN) and by partnering with mobile network operators, entrepreneurs can offset some of the broadband costs and pass these savings to customers.

The radio wave technology is particularly appealing to telecom companies as it uses a software-based approach to reduce capital expenditure, boost Internet speed and solve last-mile connectivity challenges. India’s Bharti Airtel recently deployed a vRAN solution across multiple major cities in India to lay the foundation for introducing 5G services. In the U.S., wireless broadband startup Starry filed to raise up to $125 million to bring affordable broadband to market using radio towers and high-rise-mounted transmitters.

Another great example of a company repurposing wireless networks is Climacell, which built an intelligent platform for advanced weather forecasting. The startup recently raised a $23 million Series C round to tackle climate change at a global scale and to strengthen its research and development efforts in the wireless and IoT sectors.

Investors and regulators need to support such companies with greater access to capital and more startup-friendly legislations that will help them build groundbreaking technologies and develop more affordable means to access the Internet.

Empowering female entrepreneurs to close the gender gap

As UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has noted, the pandemic is widening existing inequalities and vulnerabilities for the female population. Curfews have led to a significant spike in gender-based violence in countries such as Turkey as well as Argentina, where emergency calls for domestic violence cases have increased by 25 percent since the lockdown on March 20. In Zimbabwe, the number of caesarean sections performed decreased by 42 percent in the first four months of the year compared with the same period in 2019.

To tackle these challenges, stakeholders should empower women with the resources they need to build wealth while launching new businesses. Organizations such as Nigeria’s Co-Creation Hub and She Leads Africa have built great programs to support young women with business mentoring, technology access and fundraising.

These high-growth programs will ultimately lead to more female entrepreneurs addressing critical challenges. For instance, female-led MIT startup Bloomer Tech recently raised $3 million to develop an electrocardiogram bra to help women with heart conditions, as cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death globally.

Quality education in a post-COVID world crucial for sustainable development

Education is key to reducing gender inequality, and entrepreneurs can leverage their technology expertise to reshape this sector in a post-pandemic world. In Senegal, the ESTEL Business School partnered with the French edtech startup OnlineFormaPro to introduce an e-learning platform that digitizes national academic curricula.

In Morocco, KoolSkools raised over $400,000 to help schools go digital. And in the U.S., Knack partnered with the University of Florida to provide free remote tutoring and mobile-friendly virtual teaching. These edtech startups turned the pandemic challenge into promising business opportunities that could potentially boost both the education sector and human capital.

Over the past 70 years, the world population tripled to new heights and is expected to reach nearly 10 billion by 2050, an increase of more than 25 percent from 2020. If left unaddressed, this growth may exacerbate the problems developing countries are already facing. With record unemployment rates and growing signs of a prolonged global recession, stakeholders need to turn to entrepreneurs to ensure sustainable development worldwide.

Image credit: Sergio Souza/Unsplash

Now that the up-and-coming generation of workers is fully aware of the forces behind climate change, leading fossil fuel companies are faced with a catastrophic loss of talent. After all, who wants to work for a business that is all but guaranteeing destruction of the planet as we know it? Some of these companies may be already beyond saving, but others are stepping up to address current and future employee concerns, including the global oil giant BP.

After false start, BP pivots to renewable energy

BP has come a long way since 2010, when its leadership was exemplified by then-CEO Tony Hayward. His infamous “I’d like to have my life back” quip followed months of other insensitive comments during the catastrophic Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Adding to the hurt, the Deepwater disaster blew the green sheen off BP’s “Beyond Petroleum” public relations campaign. The campaign was already notorious for greenwashing, mainly because it launched in 2000, when no way to get “beyond petroleum” actually existed.

At the time, wind and solar power were still expensive technologies with limited commercial application, and General Motors was the only auto manufacturer making electric vehicles for the public. GM began producing its ill-fated EV-1 car for lease in 1996, but almost nobody was interested. A mere 1,100 rolled off the assembly line and GM clawed back all but a handful by 2001.

Everything has changed since then. Wind and solar power are coming into competition with fossil fuels, energy storage costs have dropped, millions of electric vehicles are set to hit the road in the coming years, and green hydrogen is providing a pathway for decarbonizing heavy industry.

BP has been among the legacy fossil companies to realize how rapidly the global energy landscape is shifting. In 2017 the company took a dramatic step in the right direction when it acquired a $200 million stake in the leading solar company Lightsource.

BP also continued to grow its oil and gas business, but in the meantime it began investing in electric vehicle charging and other clean technologies.

This past spring, BP announced a flurry of clean tech moves including a major new green hydrogen project in Australia, and an onshore wind farm in the U.S. The company also announced the sale of almost all of its petrochemical assets.

The people problem at the heart of the fossil fuel problem

These moves are all well and good, but BP’s continued footprint in the fossil fuel economy has hampered its efforts to attract and retain talent.

That appears to be changing. On May 27, BP’s new CEO, Bernard Looney, made his first appearance at a BP annual general meeting, and he chose to highlight the talent issue.

“Last year – when we met in Aberdeen – we heard from a shareholder called Jo Alexander,” Looney recounted. “Jo used to work for BP – for 10 years – but left 5 years ago. She said she felt – at the time – that bp’s corporate purpose was not consistent with her inner purpose.”

On a second meeting with Looney, Ms. Alexander agreed to re-join the company.

Her decision to re-join marks a significant change for BP. When she left the company, she did not simply leave. She went to work with the U.K. responsible investment charity ShareAction and the professional group On Purpose.

For her On Purpose profile, Alexander wrote that she enjoyed her time at BP, but her role at the company was “at odds with her passion for the planet, our need to reduce carbon emissions and the impacts of climate change.”

In 2018 Alexander co-authored a Union of Concerned Scientists blog post titled, “BP’s Hypocrisy on Climate Policy,” in which the lead author Kathy Mulvey excoriated the company for its aggressive campaigns against climate action legislation in California and Washington State, even as it purported to support the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change.

As for her new position at BP, Alexander’s LinkedIn profile makes it clear that she intends to have a broad impact.

“I am leading the development of an integrated plan for BP to engage its 73,000 employees about purpose,” she writes. “That will start with meaningful dialogue. I will create an environment where staff can do work that is meaningful to them and delivers BP's ambitions.”

Expect to see more Jo’s at BP

The big question is whether or not BP intends to follow through. Looney provided part of that answer last week, when he told Daniel Leal-Olivas at The Times that the company needed to take employee concerns to heart.

“Oil is increasingly becoming socially challenged, there’s no question about that,” Looney said. “I would talk about the people we’ve hired into BP in the past six months that we would have struggled to hire had we not [changed direction].”

Last week Fortune also took a deep dive into Looney’s newly unveiled decarbonization plan for BP. The new plan lends more detail to Looney’s previously announced pledge that BP would become a net zero company by 2050.

The new plan also lends more credibility to the sale of BP’s petrochemical assets, as it involves cutting oil and gas production by 40 percent within the next 10 years, toward a goal of 75 percent less than the company’s peak.

“The sense that investors were really beginning to push, and question our purpose, started to weigh on the financial performance of our sector,” Looney told Fortune. “And our employees were becoming anxious about what I would describe as their personal purpose being misaligned with our corporate purpose.” 

What Big Tech can learn from Big Oil

BP still has a long way to go, but its focus on employee values could provide it with an edge over other competitors as the global economy decarbonizes.

Other sectors would do well to follow BP’s lead. In the tech sector, for example, employees are speaking out on issues of profound social concern, including the pandemic, and the reaction has been mixed.

That includes Amazon, which continues to provide cloud services to oil and gas companies despite repeated entreaties from employees to support its own climate plan with meaningful action.

On civil rights, employees at Google and Microsoft have raised alarms over the use of facial recognition technology and other algorithms by immigration officials and law enforcement agencies.

The threat of a brain drain also has tech firms and other companies scrambling to address other potential hot spots, from privacy issues to LGBTQ rights.

As generational attitudes shift toward environmental action, human rights and civil rights, corporate leaders will have to continue to adjust to a new reality.

Be sure to sign up for the weekly Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which arrives in your inbox every Wednesday.

Image credit: Adzim Musa/Unsplash

Epic Systems is a privately-held company that provides electronic medical records software to the healthcare sector. As Epic has no mandate to report its financials publicly, let’s not assume how it’s currently performing; however, it’s safe to believe that the $3 billion healthcare tech company employing about 9,000 people is holding its own during the COVID-19 era. Epic’s success since its founding over 40 years ago has certainly allowed it to spend some serious coin on a beautifully designed headquarters that puts most pallid office parks to shame.

Earlier this month, the Wisconsin-based company announced that it would require its entire workforce to return to the office by September 21. Employees with a higher health risk have until November to forgo working from home.

Come back to the Epic office, management said

The irony of a company linked to the healthcare industry telling its workforce to return to the office wasn’t lost on many employees, and doubts over the wisdom of going back during the ongoing COVID-19 crisis quickly accelerated.

“Employee dissatisfaction has manifested in more than complaints,” wrote Alice Herman, a journalist based in the Madison area. “It has also cracked open an opportunity for collective action in the Madison area’s biggest, most ostentatiously anti-labor private employer.”

An internal survey leaked to CBS News found that employee concerns were not merely those of the noisy few, but rather reflected hundreds of employees who worried about the risk of returning to the company’s main campus when COVID-19 still looms as a public health threat.

Epic’s leaders said reopening the campus was important for both company culture and being able to serve its customers. “The fact is we can’t do what we do without being together at the absolute highest level,” Sverre Roang, the company’s chief administrative officer, told Anna Werner of CBS News.

Employees, however, said not so fast

When asked about the results of an employee survey that described Epic’s plans as “wildly irresponsible,” a “disaster,” “rushed,” “unnecessary” and even “shameful,” Roang claimed he did not recall such descriptions — and Werner, to her credit, kept pressing him, as she wasn’t having it; and neither were many of the company’s employees.

The company insisted it was taking whatever measures possible to boost safety at its campus – one that is whimsical in design, from the “Intergalactic Headquarters” sign greeting visitors at the entrance to the various design themes across the offices that give off a theme park vibe.

But Epic employees weren’t shy about speaking to the local media to share their feelings about returning to the office – especially in the greater Madison and Dane County area, which is currently having its own struggles containing the virus. Data also suggest 40 percent of Wisconsin’s COVID-19 cases can be traced to a workplace, adding even more urgency. Epic reportedly had 4,000 employees who continued to work at its suburban Madison campus. That critical mass was on the mind of more than a few employees, one of whom told Werner, “I don’t want us to be the next epicenter of the next breakout.”

It’s not a collaboration-versus-COVID-19 question, say public health experts

Public health experts have questioned any rushed return to the office by Epic or any company for that matter. “Just because you can go back into the office, doesn’t mean you should go back into the office,” Dr. Anne Rimoin, an epidemiology professor at UCLA, told CBS News. “To forfeit safety for the idea of having ‘collaborative moments’ is something I can’t agree with.”

Tech companies including Google and Workday have certainly taken public health officials’ concerns, and that of their employees, to heart as they have either delayed a return to the office until next year — or, in the case of Twitter, deciding to make work-from-home policies indefinite.

Over the last several days, Epic’s executive team continued to backtrack on its original directive. On Saturday, the company reportedly sent an email saying employees would not have to return to the office if they felt uncomfortable in such an environment.

By Monday, it was widely reported that Epic has backed off its complete reopening plans for the time being. The saga offers lessons to companies that seek a return to the office, but are unsure how to communicate such a plan.

The notion “employee engagement” is now undergoing a transformation, but the timeless lessons of how to engage employees remain fundamentally the same. Trust them; listen to them; work with them; assume nothing.

The alternative risks a blot on a company’s reputation while its executives and communications team knot themselves into a pretzel explaining the company’s point of view. And as we all have learned, if one side is forced into a position of explaining, the truth is: That side loses.

Be sure to sign up for the weekly Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which arrives in your inbox every Wednesday.

Image credit: Pixabay

Photo: A small barber shop attached to a commercial building in a northeastern Australia coastal town. Small storefronts like this are one part of the vision advocated by supporters of the 15-minute city.

American cities certainly look different these days. Quarantine has kept people inside, most only leaving their homes for essential activities like grocery shopping. Many small businesses have struggled with diminished economic activity. Even with a phased reopening in some cities, car and foot traffic are slower. A third of small businesses in New York City, as one example, may not reopen after the pandemic calms, a report from the business group Partnership for New York City found.

One problem businesses (and patrons) now find in some American cities is the great physical distance between commercial centers and the residential areas where millions spend their days, foregoing their commute to the office and working from home. This change in behavior may not be entirely temporary either. Companies like Twitter have already told employees they will be able to work remotely even after offices reopen.

An urban planning concept called the “15-minute city” is gaining foothold as a viable solution to pandemic woes. C40 Cities, a global network of cities combatting climate change, included the idea in its 2020 C40 Mayors’ Agenda for a Green and Just Recovery. At a time when city centers are desolate, bringing activity to the people and decentralizing commerce would benefit both the communities craving amenities and the small businesses struggling to survive.

In a 15-minute city, residents would be able to take a short walk or bike ride to school, work, shops, governmental services and parks. The benefits would extend to communities, ecosystems, businesses and the economy. Los Angeles, New York and San Francisco are among 17 active North American members of C40 Cities.

Work, school and shopping are all part of a 15-minute city

The idea of localized, walkable living is not new. Activists in the 1960s, including Jane Jacobs, pushed for community-based planning, and more recent movements like New Urbanism tout the benefits of small-scale, pedestrian-centric city living. The 15-minute city, though based on time-honored principles, is an incarnation that meets the needs of the time. Coined by Paris-based urbanist Carlos Moreno, this approach localizes living, shifts the transportation paradigm, and ensures that communities and ecosystems are cared for.

Paris has already taken this decentralization to heart under Mayor Anne Hidalgo, who published a proposal this spring for a “15-minute Paris.” The vision is for a more equitable, prosperous and environmentally-friendly city.

Yes, in a way, the 15-minute city claims to be a universal panacea, but not without great thought and effort. American cities that have been split by highways and freeways and spread across landscapes with swaths of suburbia will have to retrofit their neighborhoods meticulously.

How businesses can begin thinking small right now

There are humble places to start. In this pandemic, where a third of small business owners have had to tap into their personal funds, relocating shops can make a big difference. One strategy is repurposing and building accessory commercial units (ACUs) within residential neighborhoods.

The ACU — a concept from Portland, Oregon, urban planner Neil Heller — is a small commercial unit that can sit in someone’s front yard facing the street. Some homes already have a small unit in the front from a century ago before cars became more widespread. If they don’t, these modest structures aren’t hard to build.

Mixing commercial and residential uses may require tweaks to zoning, especially in exclusively residential areas, Heller told Fast Company. But he says ACUs are a viable solution for many businesses, including shops and cafes that relied on commuters and office-workers before the pandemic sprung up. These businesses can relocate to the communities where people are working remotely.

Smaller units away from city centers and commercial hubs may also require lower rent.

Thinking small makes sense in a distanced world

Not everyone will want to open shop on a quiet residential street, but businesses like tailors, hair dressers, and insurance offices would fit well and find a new clientele, Heller wrote in a recent blog.

We’ve already watched cities adapt quickly to these times by opening streets to pedestrians, bikes and restaurant seating, but much of this change has happened in the urban core where landmarks, commerce and recreation are already centralized. In a time of social distancing, it makes sense to turn our attention to the outlying neighborhoods where people are congregating.

This is the time to make our cities livable and equitable. Where there are food deserts, markets can enter. Where a home is miles from any amenity, small businesses can swoop in. These first steps can be simple. The result will benefit all.

Image credit: Nicolas Weldingh/Unsplash

Amidst all the negative news about the COVID-19 pandemic, there is also a silver lining – as in the potential for decarbonization. A recent analysis published in the journal Nature shows that CO2 emissions decreased daily by 17 percent by April 2020 relative to the mean emissions of 2019.

For the first time since the financial crisis in 2010, global CO2 levels have gone down, yet can we see what a sustainable future could look like?

Not really. 2019 emissions are at a similar level to 2015 emissions, and World Meteorological Organization experts predict that there might even be a boost in emissions when business gets back on track. There are also severe social consequences to stunted economic growth, including job and income losses.

It is becoming clear that the current situation is not a model for a climate strategy that is sustainable in the long run. Companies must come up with feasible and sustainable provisions to ensure successful decarbonization. The following provides examples from diverse international companies collected via the Sustainable Business Roundtable, a peer-to-peer learning network founded by ESMT Berlin.

Value your emissions

Understanding the business case for decarbonization comes first. This can be done by valuing different scopes of emissions in the company value chain (from direct emissions from controlled sources, through indirect emissions from the consumption of purchased energy to all other indirect emissions occurring).

Accenture, one of the first companies from the service industry to introduce Science-Based Targets, focused on exactly that and discovered that Scope 3 emissions (indirect emissions occurring in the company value chain) make up the biggest share of total emissions, about 75 to 85 percent on average. For some companies, like car manufacturers, they constitute an even larger share.

At Volkswagen, where Scope 3 emissions constitute 98 percent of the company's total lifecycle emissions, only 2 percent come from production in its factories. Thus, for Volkswagen, decarbonization is about more than the production of electric cars, namely climate-neutral mobility – from the supply chain and production to green charging electricity and recycling.

Three further examples of companies that have already found ways to reduce their carbon footprint give a glimpse of which corporate strategies for decarbonization are needed.

Climate-savvy via carbon pricing

The German manufacturing company Siemens introduced a “carbon fee” on emissions from operations at some of its sites. The idea was to put a price on carbon emission to make people feel the impact the company's behavior had on the climate. The internal carbon pricing also ensured commitment to the company's 2030 carbon neutrality commitment.

Siemens U.K. charged businesses a fee of $17 per ton of CO2 and re-invested the collected funds into energy-efficiency projects at its sites. Employees were asked to suggest their own energy-efficiency projects and, out of the 70 ideas, five were chosen by a panel of internal and external experts.

Assessing the ideas in a “Shark Tank” style ensured employee engagement as well as entertainment. It also meant that there was a considerable surge in innovations from within the company. Once the carbon fee was established, administrative efforts were kept at a minimum by using existing processes to collect the fees. Sustainability managers regularly informed the CEOs and put the fee as an item on board meeting agendas to ensure that management stuck to its resolutions in the long run. Ultimately, internal carbon pricing internalizes arising risks and opportunities in today’s business decisions.  

Another step in decarbonization: Decouple growth from emissions

A different example on how to successfully reduce carbonization is the Swedish furniture giant Ikea. It has pledged to become climate positive by 2030 “by reducing more greenhouse gas emissions than the Ikea value chain emits while growing the Ikea business." Currently, the company emits 24.9 million tons of CO2. The largest impact here is the production of materials and the product use at home, as well as customer travels and home deliveries. In order to decarbonize, Ikea will promote sustainable consumption and a circular business, strive toward 100 percent renewable energies, and use more sustainable materials and food. This will be achieved by generating renewable energy onsite as well as off-site (by building wind parks).

The retailer will furthermore increase renewable energy for customer and co-worker transportation and improve overall energy efficiency on its sites. Overall, this is estimated to reduce GHG emissions by at least 15 percent in absolute terms by 2030 compared to 2016. In addition to the reduction of GHG emissions, Ikea has pledged to increase carbon storing in land, plants, and products by improving its management practices in forestry and agriculture.

Becoming carbon neutral is not enough

By far the most ambitious decarbonization strategy was announced by Microsoft in January 2020. Its aim is to be “carbon negative” by 2030 and to remove its historical carbon emissions (since the founding of the company in 1975) by 2050. Microsoft currently emits about 16 million tons of carbon, mainly through the production of purchased materials, product use, business travel, and contractor owned vehicles.

By disclosing its own carbon footprint, Microsoft officials put pressure on its peers as well as themselves to take responsibility. On top of decreasing the company’s own emissions, it has pledged to support and empower suppliers, enlist its employees to contribute to efforts, and use the company’s voice to advocate for needed changes in laws and regulations, such as more investments and the removal of regulatory barriers. Microsoft has also created a $1 billion climate innovation fund. The company will use it to accelerate the development of technologies for carbon reduction and removal technologies as well as to invest in new innovations through equity and debt capital and support key academics and non-profit efforts through philanthropic grants.

The aforementioned companies have invested time and money to research into its own emissions as well as to come up with viable solutions, be it everyday changes, company level actions, or legal and policy-based improvements. It is safe to say that all of them have had to deal with economic decline due to the current pandemic crisis.

Only time will tell, if and when these companies will reach their suggested goals. The silver lining of travel restrictions and economic slow-down due to the COVID-19 pandemic shows that reduction of GHG emissions is possible, if only to a certain level. Decarbonization requires carbon pricing and innovation. It also demands forward-thinking, inspirational strategies and peer-to-peer pressure of companies.

As increasingly demonstrated by business players, there is no shortage of that.

Illustrations by Beth Walrond; Photo credit: Dimitry Anikin/Unsplash

Globally, we are at a tipping point when it comes to climate action. There's long been talk about moving toward a zero carbon economy, but it's clear the time to move in that direction is sooner rather than later. 

Over the past few years, corporations have committed to emission reductions and to adopt strategies that will drive the broader sustainability transformation — a trend that significantly picked up pace in 2020. However, this widespread effort has not produced the results needed to effectively deter the effects of climate change, as only 28 percent of companies are on track to meet their set goals. 

So, what will it take to truly achieve a zero carbon economy? We must first consider the barriers currently holding companies and governments back from creating real change in the present. Outlined below are the three primary challenges to achieving a zero carbon economy and actionable advice for how to overcome them.  

Deploying clean energy is one path toward a zero carbon economy

Due to the growing climate movement over the past decade, coupled with the maturation of clean energy supply chains, wind and solar energy costs have been steadily declining since 2009 and can now compete with fossil fuels, according to market data by BloombergNEF. In fact, a recent study found that the cost of generating energy from wind projects has fallen by 4 percent and large solar projects by 7 percent. While this increases the business case for investing in renewables, costs alone are not enough to drive the integration.

Costs to buy renewables are becoming increasingly affordable, with wind energy prices falling by 70 percent and solar energy prices falling by 89 percent over the last decade. However, dispatching the energy after procuring it presents an issue for organizations. Since many local grids are not equipped to store and deploy renewable energy at a consistent and reliable rate, companies would need to invest in upgrading their current infrastructure to rely on renewable sources of energy. This creates a financial burden that many cannot withstand, and deters the timeline of adoption - and in the end, delays the future zero carbon economy.

Purchase power agreements (PPAs) serve as one solution to this issue. By allowing organizations to purchase the renewable energy from a third-party supplier, they don’t need to rely on the local grid. Many large corporations prefer this model, because it allows them to have bold sustainability and renewable energy goals, regardless of the local utilities’ capability to provide power at a consistent rate. 

Capturing carbon emissions

For high-emitting industries like oil and gas, switching to renewable energy and alternative heating sources is not a viable option. However, with major players in these industries committing to aggressive climate goals over the past few months, they’ve had to develop alternate strategies to meet their targets. 

One alternative method is investing in carbon capture technologies, which remove emissions from the atmosphere after they’ve been omitted. Once captured, the carbon dioxide (Co2) can be stored underground or re-sold. In the past, high costs have deterred widespread integration, but a recent investment may be the catalyst for increased adoption. The Internal Revenue Service released guidance that helps developers take advantage of tax credits for carbon capture systems, which helps make the financial case for capturing carbon more economical. 

If the technology is deployed at scale, it will break down the barriers that companies with a reliance on CO2 have faced for decades, and will allow them to contribute to the broader sustainability transformation, eliminating a vast majority of corporate carbon emissions in the process.

Managing waste and resources

While the phrase “reduce, reuse, recycle,” has become widely adopted throughout society, it only scratches the surface of what’s possible through efficiently managing resources. The circular economy is a systemic economic approach to recycling that eliminates the traditional waste model by investing in the reuse of finite resources. This model also has a direct relation to carbon emissions, as it requires less energy to recycle a product than it does to dispose of it.

As the idea of a circular economy becomes more mainstream, companies have begun setting reuse-focused goals. However, BloombergNEF market research shows that, if companies stay on track to meet these goals, there won’t be enough recycling capacity to withstand the demand. In order to change this projection, industries must proactively invest in the circular economy and the necessary resources within the model, like recycling facilities. 

Moving close to a zero carbon future

While we don’t currently have all the answers that will bring us to a zero carbon economy, one thing is clear: All facets of business and government must continue to invest in technologies that will help push the movement forward. As shown, there are various options available today to help companies reduce emissions and transform their business models, but those are not the only solutions. As we look towards the future, companies and governments must continue innovating, testing and advocating for clean energy. It will take a persistent, collective effort to overcome the barriers to zero carbon, but the effort will result in a healthier global society and economy.

Image credit: Aziz Acharki/Unsplash