| If you don't have an account, Register here |
We’ll break down the global sustainability context across organizations and ecosystems—outlining the aligned and collaborative approach organizations must take. We will help bring clarity to individuals, teams, and whole businesses, about their roles and opportunities. Our goal is to be part of the critical mass that moves first and changes the systems that have created and continue to worsen an already terrifying sustainability emergency.
Our panel will consider these questions:
You can listen above or watch this HFS Videocast here:
Moderator:
Panelists:
You can also listen on:
• Apple Podcasts
• Spotify
• Google Podcasts
• Anchor
This transcript was auto-generated from the original recording and lightly edited for readability. We've done our best to catch errors, but names, technical terms, and company references may be misspelled or imperfectly captured. For the definitive version, please refer to the original audio or video. Views expressed are the speakers' own.
Hey, thanks, Elena. I know it feels weird to have a chief sustainability officer at a — what are we now, 40, 45, 50-person research company — without an enormous internal sustainability footprint like you might associate with, I don’t know, an ExxonMobil or BP or Shell. I don’t think any of those are in the room, so I can pick on them. But I think we’ll touch on it, because I know there are a lot of services firms of all kinds here today, so I think we’ll talk about how to contextualize sustainability — both your internal footprint, but also looking beyond your work, your customers, and your bigger systems-changing impact. This is kind of a real-time thought that a few of us were having over the last couple of hours, and it was inspired by the fantastic Mary Lassie and her comment on blockchain — instead of focusing on the technology, pivoting things toward outcomes and business value, to actually do away with the phrase “blockchain.” And we’re thinking, well, could we do something similar with the word “sustainability”? I want everyone to think — not just for the panel, but for afterwards and tonight into the networking reception — can we do away with “sustainability”? Do we need to recontextualize everything? We’ll break the whole thing across the global context. Do we need to completely redefine at least how we have the conversation? Because we might be just too far down the rabbit hole, if I’m being honest, on the connotations and what people immediately think when they hear the term. I’ll get everyone to introduce themselves quickly in a second. It’s good that we’ve got quite a big panel, because honestly it’s getting quite hard to know what to say when it comes to sustainability. I know we’re under a lot of pressure sometimes to not go too much down the depressive route and actually focus on what’s practical, what’s achievable. But I’m thinking more and more that it starts to feel like cheating, really — it starts to feel like the easy way out, trying to focus on what’s realistic, what’s achievable, what we can do now. And yes, we of course need to do that, but it’s almost letting ourselves off the hook and not thinking about the enormous, rapid, systemic level of change that we need to make happen right now, as well as all the practical implementation stuff. I think everyone here can probably realize how bad it’s already gotten for so many people globally. And to take a horizon viewpoint — thematic for the summit — what is on the horizon, and how much worse it’s going to get. But without going too much down that depressive road, I’d like everyone to quickly introduce themselves, starting with Ganesh at the bottom, and then we can work our way back toward me.
Thanks, Josh. I’m Ganesh, a partner in our technology and data analytics practice based in the UK, and I’m trying to make sure that technology and data play a pivotal role when it comes to sustainability.
Yeah, thanks for having me here, Josh. My name is Manoj Mathew. I’m with Cognizant, based out of The Hague. I lead our sustainability advisory and engineering business. For the past year and a half — I sort of slid into this role — at heart, I’m a product and service design guy and a process control guy, so that’s usually where my head goes.
Hi, I’m Linden, from ERM, which is the world’s largest global sustainability advisory firm. I’m the global head of sustainability, so my role, I guess, is to ensure that we as a company walk the talk, as well as advising others on that. And I’m based in the UK.
My name is Wolfgang Steiner. I lead the sustainability business go-to-market in Europe for Wipro, combining what we do on sustainability at the corporate level, how we apply what we can do for our clients, and also how we connect with the community.
Thank you. Hi, my name is Marta. I’m a sustainability manager at Kernel. It is one of the largest agriculture companies in Ukraine, and we are the largest producer and exporter of sunflower oil in the world. I’m very much focused in my job on the promotion and development of climate corporate governance and low-carbon development practices within the company. Thank you for having me here. Every time I travel abroad, and especially when I participate in events like this, I think of myself as a kind of informal ambassador of Ukraine, so it’s great to spread the word and talk about this.
Perfect, thanks. Robert—
I’m a consultant at Carbon Limiting Technologies — CLT. CLT works with technology at the bleeding edge of innovation to tackle the clean-tech transition. Since our inception in 2006, we’ve supported thousands of innovators to help commercialize their technologies, to become business as usual.
Awesome. I’ve already touched on the slightly depressing nature of the global context, but what we really want to focus on today is — when you talk about sustainability, there’s always a big variety of levels of maturity, different industries, different people, different teams. But what we want to achieve, when I say “context and plans,” is: whether you’re an individual, whether you’re in charge of a team or a business department, or whether you’re looking at your entire organization — where do you fit within the global context, and where is your time and energy best spent? Where are your spheres of influence? Call it a materiality assessment, or something like that. I think Phil kind of hinted toward it a little earlier. It’s been clear for some time that politics and consumer behavior aren’t going to move at the speed and systems level that sustainability — and certainly if you take the entire UN Sustainable Development Goals as a starting point — really demand. What that does mean, and the clarity it gives on the business side, is that you will hold the last levers, for the most part. And specifically it’s an effort to get the right people in the right organizations in the right rooms, working together to both trigger that systemic change right now, but also implement all the practical stuff — the strategy, the technology, the services, the ongoing management. And this is where we come to the first question. I think this chart has been up a few times, but I wanted to reshow it because it shows easily — you see right down at the bottom there, among many other things that have worryingly dropped to the bottom, you’ll see climate change. And that tells me how easy it is for something like sustainability, certainly on the environmental side, to fall off the agenda when there are multiple other pressures within the global context competing. And although you’ll see various forms of sustainability across the entire environmental, social, and governance spectrum in a lot of these other points — just to show how integrated the approach to sustainability really needs to be, and how few — especially when we see something like 25 to 33% of CEOs typically seem to support sustainability in their organizations. So it’s no wonder that it doesn’t cascade from the global context down to the organizational level and then throughout. Coming on to the first question — some of you will have seen this before — this is essentially global context, taking the UN goals, breaking it down across decarbonization, ESG, geopolitics, industry, down to the organizational level, across business functions, across technologies. That’s a bit of a mouthful, but we’ll leave this up here. I’m going to turn to Marta first, in her role at Kernel, because when we first started talking it was a bit more about building an integrated approach to sustainability — a key phrase — despite the ongoing invasion and the situation that Kernel finds itself in. But the more we’ve gone into it, what you’re best to cover is that it’s not despite the invasion and the war — it’s that it is actually better for people, for the environment, for the business, for everything. So I would love for you to start us off on how, at Kernel, that…
Yeah — everything’s a lie, that’s exactly what you said. Since the beginning of the war, I had a lot of people reach out to me from abroad saying, “Look, we’re so impressed how well you’re doing, how you’re still moving forward with your sustainability pathway, and you’re still doing so much on the climate change front.” That’s something my focus has been on — even going into the CDP rating and receiving the score B and making huge progress. But it’s not that, not only from the perspective of the company but also from a personal perspective, it’s not that we continue to do it in spite of the war. It’s actually that adhering to the principle of sustainability, and really committing and investing ourselves into the separate components of the sustainability concept, was actually helping us go through this and survive, essentially — which might sound dramatic, but it’s actually true. And it’s very interesting, because my function is currently located within the HR department, and not all aspects of sustainability are within my jurisdiction. It’s very much spread across different sectors and functions. It’s interesting: when you speak to some of the people on the operational level, they might not even know that what they’re doing, or what the company is doing, is actually being sustainable — which very much speaks to the point you made. It doesn’t matter what we call it; it’s integrated into the corporate culture and values of the company. And this is a very important thing, because being sustainable gives us additional adaptability, additional resilience and flexibility, which I think we as a Ukrainian business have quite a unique perspective on, and we can really vouch for this. Because one day you wake up and, all of a sudden, every single aspect of your life — everything you considered normal and granted — suddenly becomes a subject of huge uncertainty and danger and risk. And it’s how quickly and how flexibly you can adapt to this that really matters. Just to give you a quick example of how we approach these things, and to cover the main issues we’ve been having: the reliance of your supply chain, the reliance on electricity, is all of a sudden not certain. The availability of your normal export routes is blocked first, and then it’s always a subject of political blackmail. The health of your employees is always under threat. You have to deal with this and help them and make them safe and well. All these problems, all of a sudden, really challenge you; it’s a huge test, which I think we’ve been passing quite successfully. Just to give you several short, concrete examples of how we deal with this. First, how do we connect with society, with respect to the local communities and the people around us? Because it’s the greatest value, and the context of the company is very much connected with the national security and international context. So Kernel has become the second-largest company in Ukraine in terms of materially contributing and supporting the army, supporting people with humanitarian help, and so on. A second specific example would be the approach we have to our employees, and to training and education. One concrete step the company has taken is that we adapted the way we teach and train people, so we created the possibility for people on the operational level to learn additional skills and get an additional skill set — so that in case some people get drafted into the army, somebody else can fill their position very quickly, and the production does not stop; it’s still fluent and still going on. A side note here is that around 500 employees of Kernel are actually in the army, on the front lines, and that’s something we have to deal with all the time — again, a very close context between us and the actual situation within the country. And the third one — I’m wrapping up here — is another component of sustainability: respect for the environment and the resources that we have. We understood that you’re not taking it for granted. We felt it, we experienced it in our own life, that you have to be very wise and very thoughtful about how you deal with the resources you have, in a long-term perspective. So this is a very clear point I would like to make, and the message I would like to deliver: don’t do sustainability because somebody’s pressuring you, because somebody’s advertising and hyping it up. Do it because it’s what makes you resilient in the long term. We can all agree that the world nowadays is really turbulent — since COVID we can’t catch a break, and it’s crazy. You’ve got to be really adapted to this.
It’s amazing. Not only is it a far better articulation of what I wanted to get across than I could possibly give, but you’ve managed to cover all three questions and probably parts of what everyone else will cover. So, fantastic — very much deserved. I’m going to come to Ganesh next, but I’ll leave us on to the second part. Some of you will have seen this: looking at different spheres of influence, looking beyond your own walls to what you do with your customers and your broader systems-level impact. I know we’ve had a lot of conversation about thinking through not just PwC’s capability, but also various technology partners, and a lot of them will be in this room — linking up to that global context but also the wider influence. So, yeah, I would love the PwC…
Sorry, Josh, I’m going to take you back to your first slide, with the graphs, because I think the point there is — no, not that one — you know, when you look at supply chain disruption issues, climate change clearly is a factor there. If you’ve got a landslide in Chile or Argentina, or floods in Asia, that is the root cause of that supply chain issue. Changing consumer expectations, we all know, has sustainability goals in it. I think this is one of the challenges I’m finding with clients, because it is seen as separate — as climate change — but what they’re not realizing is a lot of this is clearly integrated, to your point, Marta. It’s just to build on what she said about the integrated nature of some of this: if you get to it, you will then get to your spheres of influence. Because when we talk about business transformation, it is currently driven by some of the factors at the top, but sustainability needs to be at the heart of it, not just as a side outcome of business transformation. And technology, as we all know, in business transformation plays a key role. And it is the only option we’ve got, I think, to scale. Because I can do something at home, and that will be good for my family and the people around me; I can then move to the community. But if I, as an organization or as a company, we’re going to need technology and an ecosystem of partners who are willing to work with each other to drive that change. So everybody in this room has a role to play with technology. We’ve seen the impact of technology in terms of climate change that you can now see in your smartphones. So that’s just scratching the surface. But if you can use data, which technology will provide, to further strengthen our response to climate change, I think we’ll be in a much better stage.
Yeah. Fantastic. The data aspect is one thing I’m going to have to weave in, to get everyone across, but we’ll try and weave it into the discussion. I want you to come to Linden next. You’ve mentioned it — a consultancy company, and beyond consulting as well, having been around for about 50-odd years, very much existing at the center of pretty much every global system and anything hinting at sustainability. So we’d love the ERM perspective.
Yeah, I’m going to take on board completely what you’ve said. We started back at the start of the ’70s — the first Earth Day, the first Stockholm environment conference, Rachel Carson talking about Silent Spring — where the focus became on business and business’s impact on the world. And I think we’ve got to keep thinking about that. We impact the world in the way we operate: the natural environment, the social environment, the economic environment. I think it’s only in recent times that we’ve started to think about the world’s impact on business — supply chain disruption — and this notion of double materiality, as the language goes now. I think we have to hold both those things and take responsibility for that in business. And that’s where, if we’re looking for different words for sustainability — absolutely resilience, absolutely adaptation, and absolutely integration. The drivers, I think, for those earliest days started to be compliance. We saw the first environmental legislation come in, the Superfund Act in the US, etc. We helped write the original UK environmental legislation, EU legislation, Hong Kong’s waste legislation — so, that compliance era. And then we had the activist era that got this a bit more attention, and it was called CSR and all sorts of things over the years. Now we’ve seen the investors come in, and I think the next era we’re really focused on is this integration era — and I think that’s the word for us, for sustainability. When people get lost in the language, I guess think about two things. One is time: does your business intend to be here for the longer term? Well, in that case you need to be thinking about all of these topics, because they are absolutely impacting your business, and your talent will be expecting to have answers to this. And it’s the integration question — can you walk and chew gum? Can you think about climate, and DEI, and supply chain, and human rights, and, and, and — and grow and be a successful business? If you can’t integrate those thoughts, if you can’t integrate those processes, if you can’t get around the scale of acceleration that we need all of you to help with, then we won’t be here in business. So, sustainable business equals that. I think that’s the way we all need to help get our colleagues’ brains around this — those who kind of balk at the language of sustainability.
Going to have to take the “can you walk and chew gum” line — that’s a good one, I’ve not heard it too often, certainly not in sustainability. Rob, you’re up next. You’ve covered a lot of points that Linden hinted on. I often see that — well, you’ll explain it better than I will — but CLT is almost not a traditional service provider like quite a few in this room; it almost exists at the center of a system between startups, policy, business, sources of funding, and everybody else. So, yeah, we’d love to know how you fit in.
Firstly, I agree with all your points. I think sustainability is a source of competitive advantage nowadays, and everybody sees it that way. CLT — we’re a small company, so we don’t really have the weight to throw around to influence systems, but we try to partake in and influence different networks to move and shift the dial in the right direction. What we’re really strong at is supporting innovators. We’ve supported thousands of innovators since 2006; combined, I think they’ve raised a couple of billion and created thousands of jobs. This is really the aim of the game for us: to help these innovators create sustainable solutions that are also the economic solution. If you have that, I think 95% of the sustainability challenges organizations face will be overcome. Really, it doesn’t matter how sustainable an organization is if you don’t have a good solution that you can integrate into your processes and your systems. But that’s my take on it, and that’s our view. It would be great to hear yours as well, if you have any comments. Purposeful profit.
Yes, that’s probably a good way to summarize it, right? Sorry, what did you say? “Purposeful profit” — yeah, that might be a good way to showcase the content you’re trying to convey. And it’s a perfect segue to bring in Manoj and Wolfgang, from the technology-but-consulting-services, everything-else angle. I’m going to pick on Wolfgang to go last, because I sat next to you at dinner last night. So, to come to Manoj first, and the last point of this panel — although there will be another final question I’m going to have to ask everybody — is data. This quote came before COP26, and it was essentially a chief procurement officer lamenting the overfocus on the platform and on the technology — like automation, AI, analytics — that comes on top of the platform, and not on the data: finding it, preparing it, and getting the data to the platform. You might as well have an Excel spreadsheet if the data either doesn’t exist or it’s terrible. So, tying in the spheres of influence, the data aspect, technology, everything we’ve heard before — Manoj, and then Wolfgang — I would love the Cognizant and the Wipro lenses.
OK, so a couple of first-principle thoughts here. Your starting argument — that we’ve generally given up hope on politics and consumers: both are essentially driven by enterprise for profit. So if we stop being cynical about that — a consumer would always have asked for a faster horse, if it were not for the ability of enterprises to profit, for a motor car or a bicycle or an electric bicycle. What that’s left us with, over 100 years of modern enterprise, is businesses that are acutely tuned to work in one direction: for profit. If I’m a manufacturer, I’m acutely designed to cultivate a supply chain that can profit from the fact that I’ve got a product. And if I ask an automaker, every automaker’s got a reasonably clear plan for market dominance. But if you ask the same automaker, “What’s your reasonably clear plan for transition to a low-resource-intensive model for mobility?” the answers are weak. And I think the answers are weak simply because the math is weak. A lot of the math we have for sustainability today is usually oriented toward aggregating information and presenting it to the investor community, in the hopes of attracting a better quality of investment into your company. So it’s good, because it’s important for companies to be seen as responsible entities. Now, if you set this in line with the climate change targets — the 1.5-degree warming target is sort of like the horizon: it moves closer to you, but you could stare at it for a long time and not figure out how much distance you’ve covered. So if you look at the technology problem that underlies both of these, it’s the ability for a company to actually do the math, or what I’d call the control functions, around how do I infuse profit into a sustainable business model. If I have to decide to sell furniture on a completely circular basis — which means I will always pull back 80% of the furniture that I have and repurpose it — my logistics chain has to look completely different from what it does today. The second part of it is the speed at which you do things. The horizon comes gradually closer to you, and one fine morning you realize we’re all at the deep end. But it’s important to translate it into science-based targets that are achievable over time. Most companies can commit to seriously long-term goals of change, but if you ask somebody how you draw the line between here and there — and it’s interesting, because if you’ve spent six months defining the problem, you’ve lost a fair amount of time to solve the problem. So I’d say these are the two challenges. And the big shift we see here with data is that I sort of see it as the big tip-over, where you’re moving data from an accounting and aggregation model — even though there’s a lot of drive toward that — into essentially baking it into the supply chain, into the life-cycle management system. That’s where we think the real hope is for transformation.
I mean, you can probably sum it all up in road mapping, which is distinctly lacking in most places.
Yeah. If you look at the work chart which you drew — right? — if you’re going to get the CEO to act across those 10 departments, a mechanism doesn’t exist in most companies.
Yeah. So, simultaneously creating the roadmap, making sure it’s detailed enough, but not — like you said — wasting six months, a year, probably longer in a lot of cases, defining a roadmap and having not moved at all. So, yeah, absolutely. Wolfgang, same question as everyone else has had.
Yeah, absolutely. Let me tie that into two pieces to start with. The first one concerns all of us in terms of what’s the role of an organization, and how do you address the potential — but also the responsibility — that the organization has, on the ecosystem, on society. I believe this is also how the engagement on sustainability started with Wipro. Our founders brought in the concept of responsible corporate citizenship, and it has grown its engagement on helping with education, with healthcare, making sure that the people within the company, and also their relatives, but also the wider society, are actually supported by that. Sensing that responsibility, I believe, leads to an understanding of acting on the risks that are around — because, of course, you also address market risks. And I’m very much in favor of getting rid of doing good for the feeling good around it, but instead looking at sustainability as attacking the risks that are there, and making them transparent and open, and talking about it across the ecosystem in which you act. And what’s the biggest leverage? It is data. And technology is allowing us to handle data and break down the complexities. That’s actually why sustainability is such an important playing field, also for us as a partner to our clients and in our environment.
I can guarantee you tackling the risk will make you feel a hell of a lot better as well, so there’s a win-win there. We’ve got about five minutes left, and I was thinking — I had my eye on a question here, and I thought it would be a bit unfair to put everybody on the spot, so I’ll frame it more as final thoughts than as any general responses to the panel. But what’s in my head — I mentioned it right at the start — the two things that need to happen: the practical, the achievable, what needs to be put into practice, but also the massive systemic change that the UN goals and the latest UN report point to. I don’t think any of us learned anything new; we all knew exactly what was coming and how bad it was. But that systemic change still needs to happen. So, any thoughts on that — but also free rein for the next five minutes to discuss. Maybe, like — Marta, just to come back to you.
Yeah, I was just thinking I would like to add to your point that one of the leverages to address risk — you said it’s data and technology — but I think it’s also the availability of the opportunities, the business opportunities that these problems essentially create for us. For example, the climate risk we’ve been focusing a lot on at Kernel is, of course, very inherent to agriculture, and it’s understandable. It’s very easy to communicate to management, to other stakeholders, that it needs to be done, that it needs to be evaluated in a more rigorous way, to rely on modeling and on all of these reports and really address them in a coherent way. But it’s also about the opportunities. How can you link them to a broader context? Because, for example, for us now, we’re looking at the possibilities of bioenergy, biomethane, or any other biofuels. Globally, it’s one of the ways to tackle climate change, but if you look at the more local context, it’s also a very concrete part of energy security. So, having an efficient climate change policy is one of the instruments that delivers efficient energy policy and ensures national security. I think it’s all about finding the role — and it’s the question I’m asking myself every day, which I’m also trying to deliver to the colleagues I work with: what is agriculture’s role, and specifically what is Kernel’s role, in delivering the targets of the Paris Agreement and delivering the targets of climate change mitigation? And, yeah, we’re really moving forward in that context — again, interaction with our supply chain, really contributing to the common goal and to the goals of specific trade partners, and so on. It’s all part of really collaborating and working together.
So, should we go kind of quickfire — Ganesh, Linden, Rob? I know — no, this is good, and we’re not going to solve everything here, right? We’ve got a long day ahead of us still, and a fantastic evening, I’m sure. But, thanks.
So, I just wanted to summarize something — a recent conversation with a client CEO and CFO. We termed it a “trilemma” when it comes to sustainability, which is about cost management, commercial growth, and compliance. That is the dilemma they’re facing. So what we’re proposing to our clients, or something to consider, is prioritization across those ESG components, or the 17 UN goals, because you can’t cover it all. So, to your point about having a longer-term roadmap but short-term achievable prioritization: move forward so that you don’t keep scanning the horizon, looking at something that’s not going to come fast enough. I’ll leave it with that. But one last thought, around ERPs: I think we’re seeing a shift from enterprise resource planning to ESG-centric resource planning, and long may that trend continue.
Yeah, so I’ll try and break it down into two steps. The first part is that climate change goals in themselves are difficult to fathom for those of us within the workings of an enterprise. So, depending on what business you’re in, it’s important to quantify that in terms of business-relevant or profit-relevant goals. If you’re in the agricultural business, or if you’re in the tobacco business even, the way you look at land use as being part of your profit model will vary; if you’re in the coffee business, and so on. So it’s important for organizations to really understand science-based targeting at that level. The second part is you could always do with more data. I think everybody here has gotten the concept of “if I had more data,” but the question is where does data fit in the control model? You’ve got meta-models for profit, you’ve got meta-models for product structure, for market structure — there is no meta-model for sustainability within your enterprise. Just a last thought: I have a customer who’s an automaker, who says, “I’m negotiating for leather. I know how to negotiate for cheaper leather for the same quality, but I don’t know how to negotiate for more sustainable leather for the same quality.” How do you change that behavior within the cogs of an organization — one that says, “I’m willing to pay more for a product” that will change customer sensitivities and essentially make the planet a better place?
Absolutely. Just looking in Elena’s direction — can we steal a few minutes for a final thought from each of our other panelists?
I think we would call each of you the sustainability heroes of tomorrow, to that point. We need someone in procurement thinking about — it’s no longer leather, for climate reasons or other things; it’s no longer this — and them feeling empowered to take that on in whatever their role and function is, and to take off. Yes, we’ll be reference points, but we’re not going to get it done with one or two of me in every organization — forget it. It’s every one of you thinking within your particular sphere of influence: what is it that I can do, and my teams can do? And go for it. And I think the time is very short, in many ways.
Yeah, just to add on this: you clearly have to prioritize. So, usually you start with the materiality analysis in order to understand where you have the biggest leverage at the moment. What we see is that impact accounting is changing the game: treating sustainability-related data as currency-level information in the economic system is going to change the game. It is also a driver to impact procurement and supply chain issues. And coming back to some of our homework issues as well: taking responsibility for sustainability within IT itself — it’s a considerable spender on energy, and it also comes with social responsibility. So that, plus helping with business transformation, allowing for more sustainable business models that are not dependent on growth just for growth’s sake, are the levers that we tackle.
And Rob. Yeah, thanks — perfect. So…
You need a carrot and a stick — regulations and incentives — but that’s really only enablers for change. What really needs to change are the organizations, and they’re quite slow; they’re risk-averse. People are worried about losing their jobs. But they have to get on with it quite quickly, otherwise it’s too late. Sustainability needs to be at the core of what they do, at the center. It’s not about a report or an action plan, and sometimes not even about a strategy. It’s just people and their organizations caring about what they’re doing. And once they do that, it allows organizations to do two things. One is they can deliver the same service and the same value to customers, but in a sustainable way, with sustainable processes. But also they can expand their value proposition to say, “Now we’re something green, we’re sustainable,” or “we can offer data on ESG,” or something like that, which is good for customers and investors. So actually this change allows for a lot of good things to happen for organizations as well. But yeah — it’s systems, it’s organizations, it’s change; it’s difficult, but it needs to happen quite quickly, actually.
Awesome. So, we’re going to go and continue this conversation. And literally — I promise, the last sentence for me — is: whatever your position, in your organization, in your industry, in your ecosystem, help, quite frankly. And I think that’s come across, ideally today, or in the very near future. But, no — thanks so much, everyone. Thank you.
Your account has been created. You can continue exploring free AI insights while you verify your email. Please check your inbox for the verification link to activate full access.
With the exception of our Horizons reports, most of our research is available for free on our website. Sign up for a free account and start realizing the power of insights now.
Our premium subscription gives enterprise clients access to our complete library of proprietary research, direct access to our industry analysts, and other benefits.
Contact us at [email protected] for more information on premium access.