# Think - Thought Leadership

Data: 11-01-2025 21:44:45

## Lista de Vídeos

1. [Empowering women entrepreneurs in India | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6Cl9BNADVk)
2. [What are the benefits of private equity firms to business owners? | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHRRQQOX09A)
3. [How to avoid a recession in peak uncertainty | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSf9frdo0r8)
4. [Why should businesses look for a sense of purpose? | LBS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSnBGTPcV7s)
5. [Brexit and Business - WAC 2019 | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbug4nFyRIo)
6. [Prepare for the worst. Hope for the best | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxjSN1WTY8k)
7. [How do businesses succeed in an interconnected world?  | LBS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuiCQQMhxlc)
8. [How can AI begin to improve productivity of a workforce? | LBS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kylOFPpGkl0)
9. [How can businesses prepare for the challenge of climate change?  | LBS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6XpAb14lM4)
10. [A conversation with Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30Av0zWNy28)
11. [Shaping the world we live in through responsible investing | LBS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0wWHyvyLR4)
12. [Business and climate change: from argument to action | LBS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XePSYT-FA5w)
13. [Academic insights in striving for gender equality | LBS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ejn57hEdSOo)
14. [LBS Live - Demystifying the language of numbers | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpUPZPSPM5g)
15. [LBS Live - Using numbers made simple and easy | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwWhunfaJvs)
16. [The art of negotiation: Six must-have strategies | LBS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKbcmlKb81c)
17. [Six must-have strategies for negotiating | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI2VBvAiZ_M)
18. [A view into what psychological literature says on debiasing judgements and decision making | LBS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXx8obhvrCs)
19. [Pandemic Lectures: Gathering the Facts | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKtWYe9DxDo)
20. [The Epidemiology of a Contagion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZcE8fVR_dE)
21. [The Economics of an Outbreak](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv5JD0Invjc)
22. [How to communicate through a virtual working world | LBS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oY6vVUnKIk)
23. [Leading through a pandemic: Making difficult judgments in coronavirus times | London Business School](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBTmc35QuGY)
24. [Reshaping 2021: Charting a course from disruption to growth | Think Big](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5r1jEzw920)
25. [think ahead: Ripple Effects - The Global Economic Impact of the US Election](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9870bYAiZfE)

## Transcrições

### Empowering women entrepreneurs in India | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6Cl9BNADVk

Idioma: en

[Music]
they're my life said you don't owe so
much helium which I think are given an
equation for me both mom I love you
don't go yet that was over you okay it's
easy for I carry or watch Republican was
yoga research project that I'm doing
together with Dharma life looks at the
impact that being a sales entrepreneur
has on the individual and in particular
we're looking in a context in India
where rural women get the opportunity to
become an entrepreneur and to start
selling social goods towards villages
surrounding them and how is this going
to impact gender empowerment Emma life
was a initially and a student project
during my MBA it was conceived in one of
the entrepreneurship classes and then a
group of my classmate came to India the
idea was how can we create livelihoods
for unemployed or underprivileged men
and women in villages since then we
moved to a women first model as Tara
life and when we identify women
entrepreneurs they usually are from
various backgrounds but mostly the
underprivileged either from an income
perspective or there would be women who
are not really in the forefront they
don't you know leave their houses
they're part of the family and there's a
lot of you know kind of gender biases in
the communities we work in modulo
capellini two people found out yes
butcher globe but we can a person katha
temuco in cynical titi toward our
topology to be voyeur as I kept the key
ei Bosinney McKinley 2013 III keoki a
cage cancer and subscibe barnacle number
Anushka lotta uncle New Zealanders can
Akiko she's caring it when American
geeky quick but the government developed
new locks creature of the handle a lot
of the women here cook on fire so of
these dharma life entrepreneurs educates
rural women on the need for clean
cooking and after educating the women on
this need they offer them with the
opportunity to buy the skin cooking so
it's including full service
my local title listen to nothing like
the will of those key polymer some janky
to light a lot Kyoto security program or
they do all diets are coming out the
toxic air whatever incapable team which
I came musiah like a political party or
loose a gag demolish a scream program
budget Vietnamese Fisker induction
guidance karaage talk or problem you'll
hear pop can you people a deceptive lots
of jobs just say keep on K which elastic
to tool up gas automata Lhasa to up what
we see with the rural Dharma life sales
entrepreneurs is that the women get very
empowered they're exposed to new context
they have to interact with different
people and all these dimensions actually
to create empowerment so as example we
see them creating own identities in the
village getting more respect but also
dynamics within households change so the
woman gets more states and actually
takes up more leadership activities
within the community
I've met all my life me to do the same
kid cold problem Tino Lucas Olga - I'm a
Russian bagheera hiddenville data copy
got it Logan - would you do me a girly
be each other ok Nemo patata don't man
manicotti cup including me put curly so
jess mmm cachaça will fill my name not
have to charge a magic I could achieve a
in Coney milk rocket not right yeah just
a minimum koshihikari toe whoa look who
me I am what the count on it kick in
quinoa too many pandas no kata curcumin
chimera Sweden opposed very oh sorry go
Mia ROM Sarah who eructation in duration
70 who he is a measure to volocopter
mega tuna Tobar keratin or IPM de volta
a key but up
a bottom on top cetera in digital user
load button lagana person cadet Emmet
it dealt a sum and a terrible
[Music]
[Music]
you

---

### What are the benefits of private equity firms to business owners? | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHRRQQOX09A

Idioma: en

first private equity funds bring the
much-needed capital that companies need
also financial and operational expertise
their professionals have many years of
experience in the field and they can
also access very wide business networks
that can support the long-term growth of
these companies private equity firms
bring a long-term perspective to the
company their funds our ten-year funds
and therefore the focuses on capital
preservation and taking risks carefully
additionally private equity investors
prefer to partner with a business owner
letting them run the business as they
see fit
instead of getting involved directly in
management they prefer to provide advice
finally the incentives of the private
equity firms are fully aligned because
of the business owners private equity
firm have a direct stake in the success
of the business
you

---

### How to avoid a recession in peak uncertainty | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSf9frdo0r8

Idioma: en

[Music]
third key challenge facing the global
economy right now is how to avoid a
recession when the down part of the
global business cycle so some major
economies are contracting growth has
peaked in the US and China so at this
point in the cycle what you really don't
need is downside risks and that's what
we have we have the us-china trade war
there's also brexit all of this
uncertainty is making the risk of a
recession greater so what we need to
know is what can policymakers that
central banks with interest rates and
credit and governments what can they do
to ensure that this slowdown which is
pretty normal booms and busts doesn't
turn into a prolonged recession or worse
a crisis that's the key challenge for
the global economy of this year
[Music]
the business a financial community
should really be looking at whether
their balance sheets their customer base
their business plan can withstand a
recession and also whether their supply
chains their distribution can withstand
well disruptions from geopolitical risks
like the us-china trade war and brexit
which is all compounding a global
economic slowdown right now but there's
also opportunities any business that can
get itself in a good position through a
downturn or recession there's quite a
few examples of those doing pretty well
when the economy turns around so in that
sense a recession poses a lot of risks
certainly for all businesses but for
some they may just want to say how can I
get myself looking more medium-term and
if I can make it through this recession
I'm probably going to be able to tap
market opportunities in the coming years
[Music]
you
[Music]

---

### Why should businesses look for a sense of purpose? | LBS
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSnBGTPcV7s

Idioma: en

[Music]
a key challenge facing global business
is its responsibility towards wider
society so we as a society are facing
major challenges such as climate change
income inequality and automation but
many businesses focus narrowly on
short-term profit paying scant
attention to these wider societal issues
and this concern is a major force behind
populism in the world today people just
don't believe that the current system of
capitalism is working for ordinary
citizens so key challenges for
businesses to recognize their
responsibility to society but
importantly to also make sure they
remain profitable while addressing those
challenges businesses are not charities
and making profit is an important part
of a well-functioning
economy
businesses can prepare for this
challenge by having a clear sense of
what their purpose is so what is purpose
purpose is a business's reason for being
it's the role that plays in the world
and it's how it contributes to human
betterment so a purpose might be to make
medicines to transform human health or
to make toys that both educate and
entertain children now importantly a
purpose should not be to make profit
however making profit is a by-product
out of serving your purpose doing well
at making medicines or toys but it's not
just sufficient to come up with a nice
purpose statement it's important to put
it into practice so for a company you
need to think about what measures you're
going to have to gauge whether the
company is actually fulfilling its
purpose and to make sure that you use
this when making decisions and
evaluating employees that moves beyond
just short-term profits
[Music]
you

---

### Brexit and Business - WAC 2019 | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbug4nFyRIo

Idioma: en

[Applause]
thank you very much hums in France white
such a pleasure to be here tonight to
discuss or maybe try to discuss brakes
it before I invite my very distinguished
panel members to come on stage I would
just like to start by sharing a little
anecdote with you I would like to tell
you the true origin of a word breaks it
I want to do that
because it has actually something to do
with London Business School but very few
people know it so the reason it has
something to do with London Business
School is that shortly after I joined
London Business School I had a brilliant
PhD student called Ibrahim Hawaii who
graduated and then went on to work for
Citigroup and whenever I'm was oneiza on
his job at Citi it was the time of a
Greek crisis and every day he had to
comment on the Greek crisis and so after
a while it coined the terms brakes it
and he was talking about Gregory all the
time and after that crazy became italics
it
Craig lit and moved slowly into brexit
and this is where it comes from and this
has to do with LPS and Friends so now
that we know via technology please may I
ask my panel members to come join me on
the stage
[Applause]
we are fantastically lucky to have
tonight with us so on my on my left row
is T watt with Member of Parliament
since 2010 we've had several ministerial
appointments many very distinguished
awards has been trekking in Afghanistan
has been very concerned about the
turquoise mountain he has written many
books and been a professor of a practice
of human rights at the Harvard Kennedy
School and in any case anyone paying
just even a tiny bit of attention to UK
politics we know really very well to the
left is Dale Murray with an Allen she
has a very distinguished career in
entrepreneurship in the tech sector in
particular and she has also served on
the task force of David Cameron on red
tape of the EU in 2013 she was a British
central investor of a year in 2011 and
she's a partner in founders intelligence
which is a digital strategy consultancy
she's also on the board of of several
leading companies and were very left
where Sebastian Mallaby who is a senior
fellow for International Economics at
the Council of Foreign Relations and
he's also a columnist for The Washington
Post and offer of several great books
including recently one on Alan Greenspan
which won the Financial Times and
McKinsey business book of a Year award
in 2016
so with that I think we should crack it
tonight
but since I am a professor of
international macroeconomics we are
going to start by watching a few charts
of data here we go
so this first chart shows you the
dollars telling exchange rate and when
it goes down it means the stunning goes
down as you can see the referendum where
in June 2016 watch the clip when it goes
down really quickly and then we have had
a little bit of recovery and then again
we have been on the downside for a while
now the next graph is about growth and
here we are comparing the growth
performance in the recent years of the
UK the US and the euro area in real GDP
and you can see so the UK is actually
the dark blue bar you can see that in
recent years the UK has underperformed
both the euro area and the United States
now why is that so one clear possibility
of what is happening and to explain the
macro economy is the level of
uncertainty that has been inflicted upon
the economy because of a whole break did
process and to back up this plausible
hypothesis we have some actually
academic work which just came out with a
survey of UK firms where UK firms I've
been asked whether breaks it makes it in
the top uncertainty concerns and here we
can see that in the recent period about
60 percent or most of UK firm put it as
a very important factor of concern in
terms of uncertainty and this is
increasing where in the recent period
now this is the microdata based on
survey but how does that translate into
the macroeconomic Rhianna where we can
see that here when firms are more in
certain did not invest as much and on
this chart you have a comparison of the
UK investment over time which has been
tracking the GCM
investment up to a point which is
roughly a referendum after which you see
this gap opening and you see that
investment in the UK has actually slowed
down quite noticeably compared to the
other g7 economy so what's a macro
manifestation of the uncertainty that
we've seen in survey data in the
previous slide and finally so we saw but
in in the investment slide the bracket
date had an effect on on on investment
but we also see it in migration so if we
look at international migration in U
versus non EU we see that the migrants
from the EU half tend to go down the
number of my gosh I've got down quite a
bit at from the date of a referendum
which is the dotted line whereas when on
EU migrants have gone up but not one for
one so that there's a total decrease in
the number of of migrants now these are
the macro data but we have also asked
you to answer a couple of questions and
we know you are not a representative
sample however it was still important to
know what you thought about the proceed
process and whoever you have you know
any major decision in your business that
you have delayed or changed because of a
process of break it and here is the
answer quite overwhelmingly yes 56% of
you have changed a decision because of
breaks it's a major one and what is the
decision well a lot of you it's about
investment so we can see here in the
survey data in a way what we saw in the
macro data as well it's it kind of fits
together but also a quarter of you
answered decision about hiring which is
also very important a very important
thing that one can be delayed when
there's a lot of uncertainty
now the question to was about your
private life what about the effect of
brings it on your private life not only
on your business and there so
interestingly
you've not been affected as much because
only 36 percent
said yes and in which we are have you
been affected well again investment so
here I suspect that a lot of real estate
decisions and housing decision but also
passport while consumption behavior has
not been affected that much
very good so now that we have seen all
visa this data both macro and and survey
we are going to go to a panel and both
comment on visa and with issues and also
of course broaden very much the topic of
a discussion so maybe let us start with
you Sebastian the overland
so you've seen all these you know these
graphs about uncertainty going up both
in survey data and in in macro data
you've seen sterling a part of sterling
so what what what kind of comment can
you make on this I mean what what does
that tell you I'll try to comments you
know one a bit light-hearted and one a
bit more serious on the light-hearted
side you know you had this slide about
whether it affects your personal life
I'm told that 37 percent of remainders
in one survey said that they would be
upset if a member of their family
married somebody who was believer so
actually this is kind of infiltrating
into people's romantic lives and I've
also seen stuff about marriage
counselors saying that in breakups in
the last couple of years
disagreements over brexit have actually
been one of the causes and so it is
something where and we'll probably get
to this later but you know the
incredible thing is that some
significant chunk of Britain didn't
really have a view one way or the other
on the EU until after the vote 4 out of
10 or something took their position and
after the vote but once the sides dug in
people adopted tribal identities on
either side in a very very intense way
such that although only I think half of
Britons say they have a clear view on
which religion they identify with 87
percent have a clear view on whether
they are
so that's that's just one thought on the
personal thing it is actually getting to
people in a visceral way but more
seriously I'd make a quick comment
perhaps a risky one on the currency
chart that you put out because I'm
struck frankly by how firm sterling is I
would have expected it to be weaker and
the reason I say this is that a few
years back I wrote a history of hedge
fund trading and this one of the central
ideas I got from talking to macro
traders who do currencies and and and
kind of big macro trends is the idea
that asymmetric bet so any of you are in
the market so familiar with this but the
notion is you could have something where
it could go one way it could go the
other way you think it's kind of a 50/50
but the implications of a move in one
direction could be 5x or 3x how much it
would move in the opposite direction and
Sterling feels to me like that right now
because in some sense if you imagine the
best possible outcome from where we are
today with brexit where you know somehow
Boris Johnson gets this revised deal
both through Brussels and through
Parliament in my view that would be a
miracle but let's just suppose he he
managed that which would be kind of I
think that the softest landing that any
of us could posit and what should that
be implying for sterling well under
tourism a sterling bounce around between
133 and one to six to the dollar the
Johnson deal would be a harder brexit
than the May withdrawal deal so I think
that implies that one to six would be as
strong as sterling should be it should
probably be one to five it's that one to
three now right so if you bet
short sterling you're the most you could
lose would be a couple of points from
one to three today back to about one to
five hundred six but if we had a crash
out it could go I would say at least ten
or fifteen points the other way so I'm
thinking it's a it's it's it's a it's an
asymmetric bet I've tried this on
various friends in the markets I'm not
quite sure why learning isn't weaker
than it is
well but if we do crash out then and if
we lose this you know 10 to 15 point
which similarly stick to me so what's
going to put also the Bank of England in
a difficult situation isn't it yeah
absolutely I mean I think one thing
people perhaps underweight is that you
know there was so-called project fear
before the 2016 referendum people
projected that there would be a big
problem for the economy there wasn't
well why wasn't there and basically
three reasons the world economy was
pretty strong monetary policy was
supportive because the Bank of England
cut rates and the exchange rate
corrected immediately which provided a
macro boost to the UK economy so the
reason I mean your chart showed that
investment has suffered but there wasn't
an immediate growth or employment effect
straight away because of those three
factors now could the Bank of England
repeat that rescue act I don't think so
and the reason is that you know
inflation is already a bit above target
you've already got a situation where the
weak currency means they're importing
some inflation if the currency weak and
more weather with their crash out
there's a limit to what the Bank of
England would be in a box so I agree
that project fear so-called was over
hyped I fear that next time around it
may not be wrong to believe in fear
Thank You Sebastian
so they'll from Langston in your
business so do you see all these costs
playing out in the same way or do you
see different things in terms of cost
and benefits of the break the process I
think the answer is that it very much
depends on the business so I work
predominantly with technology companies
and predominantly in the software sector
so what these types of companies need is
they need capital they need money from
venture capitalists often and they need
access to talent they need people so on
the first point venture capital is still
widely available
is for a good business you should be
able to raise funds to build your
business there was initially some
perception that access to talent would
be limited after the referendum but I
don't think that's played out terribly
well it hasn't played out badly what has
happened is the government continues to
offer visas so there are ways in which
talented migrants can come from other
countries and still come into this
country and operate in the tech sector
in the world of entrepreneurship of
course entrepreneurs are pretty good at
adjusting to their environment so I
think with the referendum absolutely a
bit of a shock but then they found that
you can still get capital they can still
get people and what they do is adjust
their business to where the opportunity
is now that it has gone on a little bit
longer than anybody envisage or hoped I
think the investment that we see on your
chart we see that prolonged period of
delayed or investment or no choice has
been made that's beginning to have a
little bit of a drag I think on all
businesses now that I see there is a
they're tired obviously they're
exhausted they are finding that if
they've got very large corporates that
they're selling to decisions and not
being taken now that's really happened I
think in the last three to six months
everything is beginning
my sense is beginning to seize up so
that means of course that more people
won't get hired which means that the
government's tax receipts will lower and
you won't get the job creation you won't
get the innovation but generally
generally actually it's more of an
optimistic an optimistic view because
entrepreneurs as I say they'll just spin
towards the the best opportunity and so
in terms of hiring talent in your new
industries how much do you say about
reliance on veu workers so for example
we we have seen between VH in many
trades in the NHS if we look at nurses
and doctors as we know drop in you
nurses and doctors coming into the NHS
and we've difficulty to hire do you see
anything similar oh I think we see a
different thing actually I think we see
in the tech sector we rely on engineers
of course and we see actually that we
don't have enough engineers in England
and so what is often happening is that
we're putting pods of engineers or
buying pods or squads in places like
Portugal Hungary Romania lots of the
Eastern European states Georgia all
sorts of countries like that so those
universities actually they're the
further education and higher education
systems over there have been exceptional
at cultivating greats waves of talented
engineers and so what we're finding is
that the IP and the ideas and the
designers being created and held here
and controlled here where the capital is
in London but then they're going out to
to place the talent in those other
countries thank you very much so now we
turn to to worry and worry I mean I
think it's pretty clear that there is a
lot of uncertainty one could say even
maybe chaotic behavior in the political
class right now we've breaks it and so
we are all wondering whether you could
throw some light for us and put a bit of
structure on the scale so there is of
course I'm in this terrible behavior
amongst the political class but to some
extent of course the political class
reflects very much what the members of
parliament feel on the doorsteps in
other words they are trying to hold
their seats they're trying to respond to
their constituents and therefore the
hysterical behavior in Parliament is to
some extent simply an exaggerated
version of the historical behavior
hysterical behavior that Sebastian's
pointed to in the public at large that
the fundamental problem really
underlying bricks that I think if you
were to look back in 50 or 100 years
time is the refusal of the people who
voted remain averted remain right but
there are few sort of the people who
voted remain in the immediate aftermath
of the referendum to accept the results
or try to compromise on any form of soft
brexit which has effectively means that
within the house
comments it has been completely
impossible to generate a majority for
anything the way that if we end up now
with this new deal the Boris's proposing
I agree with Sebastian it's very
unlikely or we end up with a no deal one
of the reasons for that is the refusal
of people who were committed to remain
their refusal to vote for Teresa Mays
deal so ultimately there were nearly 92%
of conservative MPs voted for Teresa
Mays deal but labor that initially
claimed that they were in favor of some
form of soft breaks that ultimately
found themselves unable to compromise
them in any way and vote for it in any
way and I think this is an uncomfortable
message for those of us who voted remain
because we tend to feel very good about
ourselves we tend to feel very smug we
tend to particularly for economists feel
that we have all the economic data on
our side but fundamentally the only way
in which this is ever ever ever going to
be resolved is by people compromising
and it is this refusal to compromise in
a vote that was very close to begin with
that a stuffed essence particulate and
the members of parliament are simply
responding to that but so how do you
explain this turn to populism but we see
you know in the UK that we've seen in
the US and and what what can we do I
mean in terms of you know US business or
economists is there anything we can we
can contribute to to turn back to normal
politics so a populism is not inevitable
populism I think is a choice it's a
choice that becomes easier in a world of
social media so it's a choice that
becomes easier when you can create these
Wordle for communities of people who
agree with you and that allows you to
generate your Arab Spring or generate
your Donald Trump or generate your
brexit party Reggie becomes easier but
it's not inevitable and it is generally
a choice of leaders so there are two
ways of looking at the story which I
just told it's true that the public is
deeply deeply divided but it is possible
for politicians in a divided society
choose to take the risk of compromise
ultimately obviously famousy Nelson
Mandela was under enormous amount of
pressure not to compromise in Northern
Ireland as we approach the Good Friday
Agreement there will be many people who
would have been under huge pressure to
say just stick with your base what can
you gain from compromise and the problem
with in British politics at the moment
is that people haven't had the courage
to reach across right that is a failure
of courage by brexit politicians to
reach towards the remainders and a
failure of courage of the remaining
politicians to reach towards the brexit
is what can businesses do about this
well I think in a way businesses have
also been slightly to blame I mean it
was casting blame around and the world
of breath said it's a dangerous thing to
do because the fundamental people to
blame other politicians but I was struck
by the fact that when the brexit vote
happened there was not quite as much
constructive suggestions coming forward
from business on the shape of a soft
brexit in the United States I think you
would have seen businesses and other
institutions the Brookings Institution
the Council on Foreign Relations the
universities generating a lot of models
of soft brexit switch people could
debate instead of which in this country
almost from the moment of the results
there was a surprising reluctance until
quite recently actually the National
Farmers Union has only really come out
with powerful stuff against the nerdier
brexit about three weeks ago the CBI has
only really come out against the no deal
brakes said about five six weeks ago if
they had got into this debate two and a
half years ago we're against the no deal
brexit but we were in favor of a soft
break said I think it would have been
much easier to win that public debate
but there was simply nothing really
going on that she in the media to make
constructive voices for compromising
business as part of that story so if we
unless you want to react and I think
that's an interesting point that Rory
makes because when you have this
tribalism that has been created we have
these two tribes and politics we have
these two tribes now in society
and they are very very separate business
I think had always struggled to find
constructive and positive ways to engage
with politics it used to be a lot better
and now it finds itself a little bit
lost I used to serve on the board at the
department's of business and I used to
be on David Cameron's business task
force and I was always struck in working
on the periphery of Whitehall how
exceptional the civil service and the
political talent was but they don't and
I can't operate in a vacuum they must
operate with the good ideas and good
perspectives from the business community
and the you know the third sector and
other parts of our community at large
and I was always struck that so often
business people found it very difficult
to engage with their politicians or
didn't know quite how to war or perhaps
they brought problems rather than
bringing solutions and if you're good in
business you find solutions so as a
nation we need to find ways back to that
model where business can constructively
and positively help to bring solutions
to the table and work with our
politicians and indeed our civil
servants very wise word Sebastian do you
agree here so you ask the question
originally in the context of populism
worldwide and how should business
respond not just a brexit but to that
I'm struck in America by the following
there's been a remarkable shift the
Business Roundtable which is sort of the
top CEOs kind of declared that the role
of the company was not actually simply
to increase shareholder value but was to
serve multiple stakeholders and that was
I think about a month or so ago which
that when that came out and one been
hearing a lot about this kind of thing
from the sort of environmental social
impact stuff that boards care about -
there's other ways of signaling to
millennial recruits that you know you're
good guys and as
and I think that's been a very striking
shift but what hasn't gone with it is
sort of public policy shift where
business has responded to the fact that
even amongst Republicans in the u.s.
something like 40 percent tell the Pew
Research Center that companies should
pay more tax and the fact that you've
got this kind of cross-border tax
shifting which is made obviously so easy
by decisions about you can choose where
to locate your IP illegally and all that
stuff I think that is something which
stores up a lot of anger for business
against business and so this is this
disparity between a huge amount of
action and redefining the purpose of the
company visa vie stakeholders but not
much action on this issue of public
policy sort of interesting question why
businesses in the UK was so slow to
really define the brexit debate what so
it's partly I think lack of knowledge of
how to engage the politicians but there
was also a few so some rather odd that
they didn't get involved more in public
communication
I mean famously we're all supposed to
believe that the tobacco companies in
the 1980s were great masters and trying
to shift public opinion and their
economic interest so you would have
imagined that if you were the automobile
sector in Britain or the agricultural
sector you would have really gone out
there to sell a customs union and find
ways of focus grouping the public
advertising to the public shifting
getting on to social media rather than
allowing what happened which is in the
end 17 million people who had no idea
what a customs union was being convinced
within about a week that a customs union
was the worst thing in the world right
um and I don't know why that is I mean
what is it about businesses that make
them reluctant to do that is it partly
and this is something I was just
thinking on the stage I mean is it
partly that a great number of these
companies
- actually multinational companies that
don't really have their most senior
people in the United Kingdom and
therefore they don't really have the
leadership to make the very bold and
difficult decisions to seize a very
unusual political moment and really
throw themselves behind doing things in
a very different way either to shift the
key politicians or shift the public I
don't think they saw that this way I
don't think they saw that this was their
business this was a political debate
that was happening leading up to the
referendum it was a question posed by
politicians to the electorate and I
don't think they saw that it was their
business and also business works on the
on the strength of people and I think
they got the sense very quickly that
they could alienate potentially half
their workforce if they weren't very
strong in one way or the other half
their supply chain half their customers
in business that's not how we think we
think about you know making great
products and producing terrific services
in order to create value and create jobs
and sell at a profit and have some
commercial advantage and be sustainable
but we're not thinking about necessarily
whether or not we should sit within or
outside of that union so I don't
disagree that it would definitely could
have been useful for more debate to be
had I think that it's a very difficult
thing for a CEO CEO to get out there and
make such bold statements very
interesting because I would have thought
I mean insofar as Brooks that represents
a very significant threat to the
automobile sector right I would have
imagined that misson and others would
have put an enormous amount of energy
and money behind think-tanks behind
people generating soft brexit proposals
behind lobbying groups behind PR
companies behind media because it is a
fundamental threat to their entire
business model and obviously very very
belatedly in the last few weeks a little
bit of that stuff has begun to emerge
that we have to remember a very radical
experiment in d globalization I mean I
can't think of another case where you
don't just merely fail to do a new trade
deal you actually take you know 30 or 40
years of past deals and say well I want
to extract myself
and that that's very hard both for the
Civil Service to get his mind around and
hence the brexit planning took a long
time to get off the ground
it froze the civil service it froze the
political leadership and it first
business everybody was frozen by this
and you know I think if you look at the
way that consumer spending in the UK
initially went up there was this a
reaction that well we're not going to
save for this because it's so
unfathomable that hey we'll just go out
and spend and III think that the human
mind is just not very good at grappling
with the unknown unknown something you
haven't experienced before well you have
to give it to the academic economists
but 95% of the profession was pretty
much United in giving a message on the
problems of brexit and true I mean
forecast in macroeconomics you can never
get it spot-on and the timing is always
going to be a bit wrong but the basic
mechanism was there and explained but
more or less the experts were shut off
of a debate because a rejection but let
me let me come back on this because I
think this is to disagree with my chair
for a second look you're focusing on
pointing out the problems what was
lacking was you producing really
exciting constructive solutions
proposing what would have been a better
soft brexit that's what was entirely
lacking in this there's any number of
people pointing out that people perhaps
should not have voted to leave the
European Union right but it's not very
useful when people have already made
that decision what would have been
helpful is you shaping the debates about
what a really good soft brakes it would
look like we had a number of menu items
on there like you know the Norway
Switzerland Canada plus Canada plus plus
so we were all kind of you know things
that had already been explored more less
by trade economists and in some sense I
mean it didn't get really fruit of
public debate maybe because indeed these
are really complicated matters and as we
know just a server brings it referendum
there was southern realization but a lot
of people they don't really know what
the single market was what the custom
union was what all these things were and
it was just too sudden in a way for the
public to absorb all that so the
communication was really broken and I
don't think of a really powerful
exciting product from academics or
public intellectuals proposing
Switzerland or Norway or turkey or I
mean they didn't seem to me that I I can
think of any of your colleagues who
produce the great bestseller saying this
is the solution this is where we're
gonna go
what I noticed was everybody pointing
out the problems why you should never
have left in the first place the economy
start to boring what can I say sorry if
we want to build on on what on what you
have said and what also Dale and
Sebastian said about so you know what
what were you K could look like I mean
if we if we in the case of of breaks it
so if we if we try to look forward and
ask ourselves so will value K transform
itself into you know the famous mythical
Singapore on things you mentioned you
know the issue of tax paying so are we
are we going towards the low tax
jurisdictions we are we going towards
the lightly we regulated jurisdiction
and then what's important in your
business also for what's going to happen
with data for example is the UK how is
the kid gonna deal with you know GDP are
and ve you and then some other thing in
China some other thing in the u.s. so
which way is it gonna go
I mean how are we how are we seeing the
future from what point of view there any
I see zero evidence that the UK
political system is moving in a
free-market direction I mean zero
obviously the labor market is Labour
Party's moon to the left and the
conservative party both under Theresa
May and as Boris Johnson is more in a
sort of one nation centrist
sort of let's help the just about
managing and that was to resumes pitch
and that's now Boris Johnson's with his
public spending spree
you know it's it's an appeal to the
center the country is not of a mind to
deliver some sort of Singapore on tents
it's just I kind of discount that I
think they're kind of more interesting
question to ask about you know the
future of the British economy is you
know are the core strengths which I
would list as you know remarkable
openness to immigration and immigrant
allant you know which you see in in in
the academic sector and then you see it
in the business sector you see it also
even in the government sector Mark
Carney being a prominent example but by
no means the only one that this country
does Hoover's up talent from all over
the place it's an incredible strength
will that be preserved there's one
question second kind of strength is sort
of the the rule of law and respect for
property rights which makes it great
place for investment will that be
preserved and and then I think a sort of
social cohesion and a kind of trust in
the civil service a trust that this is
basically a decent place with enough
which makes it a kind of stable and and
functioning social democracy and I think
you know you can ask questions about all
of these things I would quickly say that
you know on migration it's been nice to
see that attitudes towards immigrants in
polling have kind of snapped back there
was a low around the referendum in 2016
because they've been a surge of inward
migration the timing of the referendum
was unfortunate from a remain
perspective in that sense and now I
think that you know surveys are showing
that immigrant tolerance of immigrants
has become back to where it used to be
equally there was a surge of
anti-immigrant or an T or some racial
violence in the six months or 12 months
after the referendum now that's going
back to trend so those things have gone
back to a good place which is great on
the rule of law I mean you can construct
a pessimistic story that when you have a
prime minister who says that all 11
justices who rule against him on the
prorogation issue all of them like it
was an 11 to 0
I think decision that all 11 were wrong
I mean that doesn't
encouraged respect for the courts I
didn't think when he says that he will
not ask for an extension notwithstanding
a law that requires him to do so it's
not great for the rule of law either but
I do kind of see these as sort of
extreme things that are going on because
of the brexit politics and that probably
will snap back to normal I think on the
sort of social glue that's where perhaps
one might be most worried that this
really has been an experience over three
years that has kind of started to undo
some of the binding glue between
Scotland and England which was already
frayed between the the metropolis and
the the rural areas of Britain between
the young and the old
these cleavages have very much been
exposed and you do wonder if it's
possible to put that genie back into the
bottle yes so then when you think about
this you know vision for future Britain
something like light regulation how do
you see the relation also with the
Commonwealth the u.s. I'd like to happen
nobody knows what will happen but um I
went to Brussels with David Cameron and
I met people like Angela Merkel and with
my colleagues proposed a number of
measures to reduce business bureaucracy
many of which this was in 2013-2014 many
of which the EU moved on nonetheless it
was insufficient with everything else
that David Cameron did to persuade the
electorate to stay so we are where we
are now I sit on boards around the world
and I attend board meetings in San
Francisco and in Sydney and in Auckland
and there is a great big world out there
and we as a country have lost our
optimism at the moment and when I go out
of the country and go out and do
business there they are very optimistic
you know things are looking good in the
rest of the world I was born
raised in New Zealand which is a tiny
country of only five million people but
in the 1970s when Britain first joined
the common market New Zealand which is a
primary produce country or at least it
was then apples pears sheep milk lamb
butter it had a lot had lost its its
export market it lost Britain as the
place where it could send all of its
products too so that the economy was
very shocked and it retracted and there
was a huge period of change in that
country but then they moved towards
free-market policies and became
importantly critically very very outward
looking New Zealand in 2008 was the
first developed country to sign a free
trade agreement with China and now New
Zealand trades its biggest trading
partner in goods is China now you can
imagine for a small country like New
Zealand which is geographically closer
to China than it is to the motherland of
Great Britain how impactful that free
trade agreement was so that tiny country
had an optimistic outlook they looked at
what they could do really well they
looked at the market of the world and
decided to position their there are
advantages towards those markets that
wanted them I really really hope that
our leadership in this country that our
business that our politicians can get
behind this idea and reshape Britain to
look beyond Europe because of the very
big world out there we do so much that
is brilliant in Britain and we will
continue to do so and let's just make
sure that the rest of the world can
trade and the great stuff that we do a
boring trade economist would say
geography matters these evens not not
that close to China it's not it's a
minute it's really not that close at all
yeah yeah yeah yeah but but her
implication is that Britain is too far
from these places the trade no I agree
Britain is not too far to trade so I
mean I I think there's some a number of
things going on I mean it what are some
just a sort of a footnote on Sebastian
to challenging not to do this again
Boris Johnson is not a one nation
conservative that is a tradition of well
it's effectively a socially liberal
inclusive non divisive type of
conservatism he's a populist who spends
a lot am i spending a lot of money is
not a sign that you're a centrist it's a
sign that you effectively he he does not
believe in fiscal discipline he wants to
write big checks and that that isn't one
nation conservatism and I don't don't
allow him to claim to be at one nation
so there's no evidence that he's in one
nation conservative except that he
writes big checks duly noted
the Fed actually almost every one nation
self-proclaimed one nation conservative
in the party he's thrown out I mean he's
just chucked out the 22 corps members
the one nation conservatives and the
reason he threw us out is that is not
just the disagreement about Breck's said
it's an entire disagreement about the
type of party the conservative party is
he's shifting his entire electoral
strategy around to a trumpian base he's
chasing these votes up and all these
this isn't a one nation strategy at all
it's it's the reverse trumpian strategy
however there is a question going beyond
Boris about what could happen after the
opinion in for Britain and one of those
questions is of course about whether
Britain would wish to make significant
supply right-side reforms is it
interested in significant deregulation
does it want to return to those kinds of
debates the 1980s it would have the
possibility of doing more of that if it
went down the route of no longer
participating in a single market then it
would when it remained the European
Union at the moment as Sebastian says it
doesn't feel as though as much
we'll for that the general instinct is
the government's just going to end up
spending more and more money and indeed
possibly as spending money it's just
going to lift straight from the Bank of
England and push out the door but my
suspicion is that that is not an
inevitable in a lack scible trend and
that one of the things that of course
drove most of the most ardent brexit
ears is that there are real fiscal Hawks
very very interests in supply-side
reforms and they will begin pushing back
hard within the Conservative Party in
that direction whether they can get
anywhere remains to be seen and could
you say just a word maybe about for the
type of partnership with the United
States briefly and then we'd open forget
you any time purchase United States well
I think that's gonna be very difficult
if we're talking about a free trade
agreement I don't think that Donald
Trump is famous for an America last
policy I don't think he's famous for his
win-win generous negotiations and I
think if if Britain is in a position of
weakness outside the European Union it
will be very difficult not least because
even if there's actually if I'm not
being flippant for a second even with
goodwill from the president the u.s.
bureaucracy that does trade negotiations
is famously hard-nosed and tough and
then you've got to stick Congress into
the picture all of which makes me think
that it's unlikely that there are going
to be significant advantages to Britain
President Elizabeth Warren would be
altogether more favorable towards a free
trade deal probably not so before I open
up a question just two quick round so we
also asked people at which date we
fought essentially the UK would get out
of the EU so I'm gonna ask you the same
question what is your best forecast
sebastien April the 30th 2020 okay to
provide the logic we're just thinking
we're just aggregating wisdom at this
stage there's no wisdom but if you have
a strong logic for April you
you make just thinking that the the
extension from the end of October goes
to the end of January and we'll get that
and after that maybe the other three
months and then I either Boris will have
crashed us out or negotiated us out or
if we're still in a hung parliament post
election I suspect that the French in
particular will get fed up with waiting
and in a way that does not leave their
fingerprints on our backs we will be
pushed out of the door I have simply no
idea at all my my ex-colleague George
Osborne's theory as is that we're never
gonna leave that it's gonna become a
sort of ritual that every year people
will say you know we seek an extension
it's gonna be in there like in a hundred
and fifty years time some man and a
strange frock coat will come and say we
seek an extension like this and all the
members of parliament go here here but
no III well Turkey negotiated forever
about joining and never joined right we
can negotiate forever by leaving and
never leave ya could let's see what
actually people fault here so the
question was you know what will you take
me out of EU etc a bunch of dates and
okay so beliefs are pretty widespread
but relatively few people think it's
going to be a 31st of October however
most people think UK will leave but a
quarter things never so I'm not sure
we're not wiser now so it's probably
time to get to some questions so I will
take both question here live from the
audience and we also have questions from
our virtual audience so I'm gonna I'm
gonna start with some questions from our
v actual audience so that you can think
about your question and if you have a
question you are there are mics going
around so please ask for a mic
so we we have someone here asking about
the role of the media in the break the
journey so have a media taken VI of over
aspects of the economy and society and
over focused on drama what is the role
of a media in the whole breaks its story
here and media I suppose you can talk
about both social media and also media
mainstream media well there's a member
of the media I could take a crack of
that I mean and I was a sort of
co-founder of a thing called in facts
which tried to correct facts factual
errors during the referendum and the
notion was that we had raised money had
some bright young guys who to check
through the news early every morning and
if there were errors we printed on our
website Corrections and we all knew
journalists and the mainstream media and
we pumped this out and the part as you
all know I mean correcting fax was done
people knew that viruses bust with a 350
million for the NHS was untrue and it
didn't matter and I think it didn't
matter partly because of the other kind
of media the social media and throughout
history I would say that the nature the
technological nature of the media has
had a marked impact on the conduct of
politics so if you think about the US
where the advent of radio allowed FDR to
do his famous fireside chats you know
there's nothing to fear but fear itself
then comes television and JFK famously
captures that in his debates against
Nixon and because his telegenic wins
that election in 1960 then you go
forward in time and up comes the cable
news and all of a sudden the bully
pulpit in the United States become the
bullied pulpit because these yakking
cable talk shows all the time attacking
the people in power and eroding trust in
government in a way that you can see
Kilian in so I think through time the
technology of communication has
influenced kind of respect for authority
and the type of authority that we have
and the advent of Facebook and social
media to declare impact both on US
politics and on British politics and so
I think in that sense the meteor is to
be blamed for what happened well I think
I mean just just to add to this I think
what one of the other things in in this
whole discussion is what are the nature
effects in political argument the we
make a great deal out of the fact that
the claim was made that we gave 350
million a week to the EU as you're aware
the net figure is 250 million but would
it have made any difference if they'd
campaign that we gave 250 million a week
to the Iran 300 my instinct is not that
most people hearing these figures these
are big numbers that does make much
difference whether it's 250 350 that the
basic point is that people were against
the idea of transferring money to the EU
and even if they said we're giving 250
million a year people might have been
against it let alone a week right so I
think it's some there's a sort of
assumption in some of the criticisms
around the campaign that if only these
lies had been called out the outcome
would have been different
I think that's extremely important
and I also think this is something
following on from the earthly challenge
which is very very difficult which is
for somebody like me who is passionate
about trying to build a center ground in
politics trying to get away from
extremes trying to get away from
populism how on earth do you do that
when you've lost the authority of the
the single news anchors that we're all
watching and we've collapse and with
these these tiny little communities that
aren't communicating with each other is
it actually possible to create any kind
of dignified politics at all now that
social media is routed yeah just to add
to what I mean something that if
striking Wow is but you know it used to
be what lying very openly was vaguely
punished
by the public opinion or by something
else you know and it seems to me right
now but lying is actually rewarded
constantly and that's a big change
I'm not exactly sure how it came about
presumably some kind of a foreign te
loss or something Iran but it's an
enormous change well I think so on that
it's quite interesting I mean I
completely got wrong I I said all the
way during the leadership campaign that
it was mad for Boris to keep saying he
was gonna leave by the 31st of October
obviously he couldn't leave by the 31st
of October because obviously there was
no majority in parliament for No Deal
Parliament would reject no deal and he
wasn't gonna get a new deal from
Brussels so he can't leave by the 31st
of October so I thought that because he
was saying something that was untrue he
would sit the 31st of October and then
he would be unbelievably punished and
everybody would lose their faith in him
I'm now beginning to realize that of
course that isn't the case he's gonna
hit the 31st of October he's gonna fail
to deliver what he promises he's gonna
come through and he's gonna remain just
as popular as he was before because his
supporters will not think this guy lied
this guy said what he couldn't do he
failed to achieve instead they will feel
he wanted to do it he was frustrated by
the evil Parliament and that actually
he's being judged not on the truth or
falsity of his statements he is being
judged on the machismo of his statement
so I got it wrong when he said we're
gonna leave by the 31st of October I'm
leaving by the 31st October he's not to
be judged on that on whether or not it's
factually true it's judged only as a a
swagger a sort of macho statement to the
world which people applaud and it will
be keen to blame other people just like
Donald Trump is doing Dave okay let's
run we have a question here who says you
know is it possible to stop break it if
so what other potential routes
is it possible of surprising okay let me
try that break quickly in the know
however and look it is possible to stop
breaks it but I think it would be a
deeply deeply damaging thing to do I
think it's it's now I think the horses
bolted if you think through what would
really happen let's imagine you held a
second referendum you voted 52 48 remain
you try to rejoin the European Union you
like somebody who spent three years
getting divorce
and then you say oh it's too expensive
I'm moving back into the bed right and
then you re-enter the bed and you are
even more aggressively Euroskeptic
Britain will really throw its weight
around because they will be very worried
about their voters he'll be very angry
about rejoining your opinion so they
will cause even more troubles in the
European Union and France and Germany
will say how long are you staying now
anyway because the third referendum has
started on the street there will be 17
million very angry people trying to
leave the European Union again so people
really need to understand this is not a
good picture this is not something that
people should be advocating for it would
have been much much smarter two and a
half years ago to work to try to get the
best possible soft brexit through that
trying to push to remain in the European
Union is storing up a world of pain and
not just political pain a lot of
economic uncertainty would follow from
that as well
investors would be worried I think I do
agree with that as well I think that the
the horse has literally bolted and I
can't imagine a situation in business
where if you were faced facing an
existential crisis that you had to day
by day by day try to negotiate new
agreements or or fix the problem in
front of the full glare of the cameras
back to your earlier point on media
Helen you know in front of your
stakeholders in front of all of your
customers your staff you know this
exposure
I would never happen in business what
you'd have in businesses you'd have I
would hope very strong leadership so
what we would what we need is that very
strong leadership and that in some way
is what our current prime minister is
offering some of the electorate he is
exhibiting those traits
I won't call them qualities I'm not sure
their qualities in his days but those
traits of leadership and that's what
people are grabbing onto nonetheless
with a strong leadership you know we
need to get this done and we need to do
it in a way that is least damaging as
possible to Britain and sets ourselves
up as well as possible for the prospects
out there in the wider world world and
the sooner we do that the better
thank you so maybe we take some question
from the room anyone yeah we have
someone in the back there thank you to
the three of you for for this talk my
question goes to worried spirits do you
see through brexit the implosion of the
traditional parties in the United
Kingdom so thinking about the
conservative of course and the Labour
Party thinking a bit back about the
French country where you've seen the
classic traditional parties also
dissolves in a way and same with Greece
where again the traditional parties have
they solved because of greg's it's how
do you see this evolving for the UK
where the brexit happens or not so I
think this whole episode has been deeply
damaging to these parts of course they
continue to have support base but
fundamentally what they've done is they
have lost the center ground so it is
absolutely extraordinary now as a
Conservative MP or as till recently a
Conservative MP that I felt in the last
election that I could almost guarantee
when I knocks on a door and open the
door and saw a lot of books on the
bookshelves that the person would not be
voting for me right this is not a good
feeling for me as a Conservative MP and
Corbin is driving an enormous number of
people out of the labour party I mean
there is a gaping hole in the middle of
British politics and it's a gaping hole
which where the possibility is to get
some of the most educated talented
imaginative people in this country young
people successful people thoughtful
people to get into that space and build
a different finer politics because this
thing they're doing this thing that
Boris and Corbin are doing which is to
try to turn America into the United
States still touchwood is false to our
traditions we are still a more
consensual country in the United States
we don't actually exist in these kind of
tribes in the u.s. Republicans famouse
prioritized terrorism in and and and the
economy Democrats prioritized health and
education here in Britain if you ask
people there's
questions the priorities are the same
with voters on the right and left we
should be able to use this to build the
center ground we don't need to give up
to this kind of polarization why would
you why would you now enter politics I
agree with you that we have this
evisceration of the parties and labor
not so Becks it have caused moment
momentous damage to their party we've
got this polarization there is no Center
ground I agree with you but I don't
understand now why somebody would go
into politics the young the successful
where they might have come from because
there's so much betrayal there's so much
scorn there's so much disrespect for
politicians and so you might look at
that as a learned or successful person
and think that's not for me I can't put
myself or my family through that why
would you well this is exactly the time
to get involved listen I'm in I mean
there's no point going into politics and
some weird bland Blair right world of
Alastair Campbell and technocrats and
consensus what's the point of being a
politician okay the points that go in
politics is when you have maniacs taking
over the wheels of the state when people
are proposing genuinely divisive and
dangerous policies when recklessness and
lies are taking over our country that is
the reason to step up right that's the
reason to provide a voice that actually
represents the fact that I think I still
think approached in the right way
communicated to in the right way the
majority of people in this country are
thoughtful dignified honorable
intelligent people who need to be
represented politics would be that you
were inspired by Rory Stewart
[Laughter]
that could be a great way to end but we
are still going to take one question
it varies anyone in the room ah yes we
do thank you so much for really
interesting discussion I am a little bit
surprised though that you think that
businesses would have come out with some
really wonderful discussion about how to
get out of brexit or whatever else
because it was never ever about a real
question a real discussion a real thing
I mean I remember when we were trying to
get into the common market Diggle he say
no and all that stuff and suddenly we
were in were there but Heath no one
known what it was and all the stuff we
had Margaret Thatcher and John Major and
mastic and all the rest of it everyone
hated they've always hated the Common
Market and the European units always you
know it's a thing that's what we do and
and so when it came to the referendum it
never was about something reasonable it
always was about forgive me but surely
it was about the Tory party it was about
what sort of identity the Tory party had
and what sort of party and political
infiltrators the you Kip people were
going to be I was a county councillor at
the time that you know five years ago
whenever and you know everybody ran a
Lib Dem County Council I should say and
everybody around you kit was the big
even then in a County Council you kit
was the big the fit this was never about
something reasonable about business and
so I'm a little bit surprised now that
you should suddenly think that you know
we're all going to have some sort of
sensible discussion about of course
we're not politics isn't about politics
isn't about something sensible it's
about politics and and so
and this business about being surprised
that Boris will you know Boris is gonna
win come what may he doesn't matter if
he gets a degree a consensus or not
because he's got a plan it's called
going to work so and it seems to me I'm
a remainer I'm a Lib Dem I'm protocol
I'm you know a federal Europe bring it
on for me but as far as I'm concerned
the best outcome is leave on the 31st
and for God's sake get on with it can I
just say when people say leave on the
first the first of October as if it's
after that you know things are so get on
with it it's actually the opposite
because if you live in a 31st of October
with no deal it's the beginning of a
very long very long period of
uncertainty but I mean I think let me
try to respond to this I mean of course
politics is not a academic debate it's
not it's a failed with notions of
emotion and culture and identity
it's about rhetoric it's about
persuasion right but you have to be in
that theater arguing and persuading and
people are persuadable right i guy came
up to me yesterday on the south bank and
he came over to shouts at me as people
sometimes do right now it's an old guy
and he came over and he said you are
absolute terrible you know you are
conspiring with the European Union la
casilla oh you know why did you support
Teresa Mays deals it's a terrible
vassalage and I said nobody it was a
customs union he said yeah but you know
I'm a greatest immigration I said no but
the customs union gave you control of
immigration right turkey does not take
free immigration from the European Union
at which point he said oh oh I didn't
know that um why don't you not why did
you not communicate that better right
now the of course this is a little bit
knife because of course he will then go
away and then over the next 2-3 weeks on
Facebook he'll forget the conversation
you have with me anyway back to where he
was before but this doesn't mean that
you can't change people's minds I mean
you
can perpetually change people's minds
look at Britain in 1979 so in if you'd
ask people in 1977 they would have
decided that the way the British economy
was run from the 1950s to the late 1970s
was inevitable it was the only way the
British economy could ever be run and
that nobody was ever going to vote for
the kind of supply-side reforms that
mrs. Thatcher was coming on with it was
inconceivable it was against their own
short-term economic interest why would
anybody do this but in the end people
were persuaded and people can be
persuaded to vote for things and I think
if you get of course you need the truth
you need to believe what you're doing
you need the rhetoric you need the
emotion you need the culture you need
the persuasion but there is a point
making arguments there is a point in
explaining what the customs union is
there is a point saying to people this
is the problem
dear Lib Dems about the idea that you
can just stand the European Union
without holding a second referendum and
the problem is this right that over 17
million people in this country voted for
this partly because they felt the elite
didn't listen to them and everybody
ignored them and suddenly you're gonna
come along and say okay we're just gonna
stand your opinion there's not gonna be
a second referendum we're just gonna
ignore entirely what she did it's a
problem okay so it's a problem right so
these things are there are truths there
are falsities not everything is relative
not everything's up it's not all a
pantomime and you can win smart
intelligent people over through argument
very good well I think on on this very
hopeful note
thank you to thank very much with
panelists because I thought that was
extraordinarily thoughtful and
interesting I certainly got a lot at
work out of what you said
so thank you so much
[Applause]
[Music]
[Applause]

---

### Prepare for the worst. Hope for the best | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxjSN1WTY8k

Idioma: en

[Music]
what is the greatest challenge facing
the global economy now the risk of a
major global recession we have problems
out there big problems with the trade
war with possible risks of Iran
exploding of various countries China for
example possibly having a financial
meltdown and so forth any one of those
risks could cause a repricing of risk in
the global economy interest rates going
up firms are highly leveraged now
governments still have very high public
debts a rise a major rise in interest
rates would be problematic for not just
firms and households but also
governments so the problem is worse
because governments now have much less
ammunition than they did in 2008-2009 to
deal with a crisis they are fiscally
stretched with much higher debt levels
and interest rates are already very low
close in some countries in some areas to
the affected lower bound of interest
rates so they can't really stimulate the
economy much if things go wrong so that
I think is the greatest challenge
how can businesses in the financial
community prepare themselves protect
themselves against the possibility of a
major global recession the first thing
is to stay liquid cut your leverage
reduce your currency exposures look at
your balance sheets
to make sure that there are no major
mismatches there those are the problems
that typically come up when there is a
major repricing a risk and global
downturn and above all don't panic
doctor cause the next crisis
[Music]
you
[Music]

---

### How do businesses succeed in an interconnected world?  | LBS
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuiCQQMhxlc

Idioma: en

[Music]
the key challenge facing the global
economy today is the fact that the world
is very interconnected and increasingly
so so this of course is an opportunity
that is also an immense challenge and
you know if we pick up probably the
number one problem which is climate
change we can see that you know what
happens in a certain region of the world
the for example desert apllication in
africa as a consequence of the climate
that has an influence on all kind of
other mechanisms for example refugees
refugees is a you know humanitarian
problem that is also an economic problem
and the challenge also for countries
which are more developed and of course
this impact that on economic social
political instability and so on will
require answers which are global in a
political system which unfortunately is
very fragmented
it's important that the financial
community understand in this contest is
to assess risk in a broader sense
instead of just looking at risk in the
narrow contest of a company of a single
company it's important to assess the
broader risk and they impact on the
company and of course climate going back
to my number one challenge it's
affecting a lot of different businesses
not only financial sectors of insurance
but all kind of different sectors and
you know this has to be taken in
consideration when assessing risk and of
course the other important thing is to
take seriously they issue of corporate
responsibility
[Music]

---

### How can AI begin to improve productivity of a workforce? | LBS
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kylOFPpGkl0

Transcrição não disponível

---

### How can businesses prepare for the challenge of climate change?  | LBS
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6XpAb14lM4

Idioma: en

[Music]
so I think one of the key challenges
facing the global economy right now is
about the health of planet Earth frankly
it's about in particular climate change
and I think it's a particularly
difficult challenge to tackle because it
requires most citizens it requires a
civil society to actually know about the
scientific fact and also to for decision
makers it would require to rely on
experts to solve a challenge but also a
particularly difficult challenge because
it requires some cooperation among the
key players of the global economy and
that's something particularly difficult
to get right now because we have a whole
host of populist politicians and when we
think about the long-term health of a
planet there's likely to be a lot of
short-term cost but a lot of long-term
gain in particular survival I think
everybody has to prepare for the
challenge of climate change and to help
with the health of the planet in general
but in terms of the business and finance
community I think what the finance
community can do in particular long-term
asset managers is what we should be
thinking very seriously about investing
in decarbonized indices in terms of a
business and in particular large
companies I think they really have to
think hard about their carbon footprint
and I think we should push for
regulatory norms in accounting that
would be more Green accounting that
would account for the carbon footprint
of themselves of their suppliers and it
should not be window dressing we should
be thinking very hard about that I think
that the government's should right now
invest a lot in fundamental research in
technological progress aiming really at
improving the health of a planet
we are in an environment with very low
real rate some governments are paid to
borrow it's a right time to invest in
research and in infrastructure for
energy transition for transportation
[Music]
you
[Music]

---

### A conversation with Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30Av0zWNy28

Idioma: en

[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
mr. Schwartzman as you say in your book
you've been through seven major crisis 7
major market recessions from the early
seventies to the latest one in 2010 we
all know that the markets are cyclical
and today we see a lot of science that
potentially another crisis is coming
what do you think is the key challenge
that you see in the global economy today
well there are a lot of challenges we
have a slowing economy globally we we
have a very rapidly slowing
manufacturing sector there everywhere in
the world and and we also have interest
rates that are as low as they have been
in my lifetime and in Europe there are
13 trillion dollars of bonds trading at
a negative yield so so this is all
signifying that it's time to be alert
because it's not quite business as usual
on the other hand in the United States
for example where manufacturing is only
11 percent of our economy 70 percent is
consumer yeah and the consumers are
doing really well we have full
employment
the most robust employment since 1969
were sort of slowly were running out of
workers which has led to wages going up
significantly more than inflation and
what happens when 70 percent of your
population is now getting wage increases
significantly more than inflation they
spend that money and at which then
creates a positive type of momentum for
the economy so so the US for example
will will do pretty well unless people
lose confidence and they don't normally
lose confidence because of an economic
cycle per se
they lose confidence for other reasons
whether we have a political crisis in
the United States or there's a
geopolitical crisis around the world
those are the kind of things that I
think one has to look out for
so how would one prepare for these
challenges I mean you've been a very
successful investor by noticing and
acting very quickly on the early signs
of a crisis I mean I remember in your
book talking about the real estate
company that you bought in 2006 one of
the largest buyers ever and seeing the
science you did if the deal very quickly
yes before the crisis started so how
should one prepare for this challenges
that you see at the moment well this is
sort of slow-motion mm-hmm at the moment
we haven't had credit really seized up
which is usually the when the patient
starts evidencing it's it's really
getting sick I think it's in time for
some caution you know in the private
markets which you teach we still can
find interesting things but we have to
work a lot harder that because of higher
prices caused by low interest rates you
know instead of having 20 things to look
at maybe there are four that we can get
to the end on so so because we don't
need to be fully invested at all times
unlike liquid managers we're lucky we're
like a basketball team that only shoots
when we have an open shot and we don't
have a shot clock that forces us to
shoot so we keep passing the ball around
looking for an easy shot there are fewer
easy shots but there's still some easy
shots
we just don't buy things we're not
liquid investors we don't have to be
invested and in fact in 2006 we cut our
investment rate by about 75 percent
because we sensed that something was
about to go wrong here here it's
for the most part soggy it doesn't feel
crisis yes just feels soggy you see the
very early science but another critical
one yet
yes that's right when I teach my
students in the class I show them a very
interesting graph and that graph shows
the number of companies that are in the
portfolio's of private equity funds and
the number of companies that are
publicly listed in the United States now
these two graphs intersected at some
point in 2007 but now we have about
8,000 companies that are owned by
private equity funds and only 3400 or
something like that publicly listed
companies in the United States so there
is a clear trend towards private markets
do you think that private markets are
better able to withstand a crisis yeah I
think what we saw last time in in the
worst crisis which I definitely do not
anticipate seeing again because of a lot
of changes that private markets did fine
there were no more insolvencies as a
percentage as less leveraged companies
so so I don't I don't look to private
markets to create systemic risk well I
think the reason for the difference is
is that medium-sized to small private
company really has difficulty being
public it's expensive yes and the
liquidity is low and there were a
variety of regulatory changes after the
crisis to make it really unappealing for
those companies to be public for example
you know in New York State they
basically took away the ability for
analysts to cover these type of
companies if you did any other work for
the business and basically I thought
and told people at that time would
result in people not wanting to be
public and you know as usual the
politicians sort of thought I was not me
in particular but but you know sort of
like trying to defend the indefensible
so so what they got is the statistics
exactly that you're talking about
because if you make life very difficult
for somebody they find another place to
go I mean to some extent they do have
access to longer term capital now maybe
because of the private equity funds that
are out there right yeah well that's a
good thing for them yes and and it's
it's good to be able to grow at a faster
rate so it would be interesting for you
to take a look at these companies to the
extent that you can get the data to see
who's growing the fastest is is it a
public company that's comparably sized
and I don't think there'll be that many
of them or is it a private sector I have
done one of those studies myself here in
Europe when the data clearly indicates
that companies and the private equity
ownership grow faster invest more and
they have better profitability margins
it's very difficult to find private
company data in the United States it's
impossible but here we have data on
private companies well this is great
because there there's there's all kinds
of missed understandings about the
private equity industry this is our
experience at Blackstone as well and
it's important that that actually facts
are used instead of you know people's
guesswork absolutely agree one last
question and probably you get this
question quite often what keeps you up
at night what is the one key risk that
you see with with Blackstone well I'm
usually up at night anyhow and the
biggest risk is political okay it's not
business risk okay a business risk we we
know how to handle and have been through
a lot of cycles political risk is when
you know sort of a country decides it's
going to go off in an unprecedented
direction and change its fundamental
views and and indulge in approaches that
have failed in other countries because
this time it's different you know that
that's my biggest concern obviously it's
a risk that is very difficult to control
that's that's difficult to control thank
you very much for your time and
congratulations on all the terrific work
you do thank you thank you for your time

---

### Shaping the world we live in through responsible investing | LBS
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0wWHyvyLR4

Idioma: en

[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
what do you thing is the role of the
finance community of investors more
broadly into this transition you want to
call it that way towards a more
sustainable or a more responsible
economy what's their role the investment
community controls the wealth of the
world that is a reality 80 trillion
it's the wealth of the world and that
which does not control directly in terms
of for the shares or capital in terms of
lending bonds it actually controls
indirectly owns the shares of the
companies that generate the loads that
goes to companies so the investment
community controls the capital of the
world in other words we have it in our
hands to shape the kind of world we want
to live in and what do you want we want
a world that is better that we can live
in better now when we talk about
responsible investing what are we
talking about we're talking about
investing in such a way that is
sustainable over the long term because
my point is that irresponsible investing
is bad financial investing because it's
good in the short term but in the long
term it creates problems both financial
problems non sustainable businesses and
societal problems which takes away your
licence to operate and therefore in a
long-winded way of saying the investment
community is crucial it holds his hands
the tools with which we can shape the
future of our society and we have a
choice we can do it in the right way
which is beneficial for all of us in the
long term that's responsible investing
more socially equal if you like with
better purpose so all we can decide
simply to behave as if we're in a casino
which I would argue is a stupid thing to
do yeah so we feel that entire community
though I think we see a wide diversity
of approaches towards this idea of
responsibility and as you said you know
you can imagine those that are green
washing and putting a label just for the
marketing aspect of it all the way to
investors that truly integrate the SG in
what they do or the quality is G at
least so what is unique about what
you're mez does in this in this play so
Hermes is unique because of its history
so it's nothing to do with me and its
composition in terms of its history I
think there are two things that it
decided very early on one
because it was the money of the
pensioners who worked in the bt pension
scheme and because there was an equal
representation of the workers on the
board it wanted not only to make money
with its investments but to do good that
integrated the idea that doing good
ESG actually is part of what we do by
2007 one of my predecessors came up with
idea let's measure if that detracted
value or added value it turns up
actually it added value financially the
second thing that happened is because we
were one of the first to have an index
fund ever in-house in 1985 we discovered
that actually owning shares is about
stewardship it's about owning
responsibility for the shares and
therefore we integrated it so we
integrated in what we do now other
people as you rightly say have now taken
this up which is good even if it's green
washing it's good because eventually
it'll become the real thing but there's
still something unique about Hermes and
this is what's unique when you come to
Jordan Hermes you sign a pledge it's not
a Hermes pledge it's a personal pledge
it says some of the things that you'd
expect but actually people in finance do
not sign I will act ethically I'll put
the interest of my client before the
interest of my business I will work for
the environment
I will help society around me and we pay
half of our bonuses for people being
nice meaning actually adhering to the
pledge and over time what that has done
is we've created essentially a community
which remember asset management and
investment is a harsh community where
people tend to rub against each other
the wrong way but a very collegiate one
where people are cooperative where they
do produce and where the performance is
outstanding and where they feel they
have value and purpose and it turns out
that's exactly what the clients want and
so we've grown our business
exponentially it turns up being good
it's just good business I think you
bring up a fascinating topic because I
think this idea of incentivizing people
is quite intriguing so you you do this
as a as a company and we can see a range
of companies that now introduce
non-financial objectives into their
bonuses into the remuneration and so on
which takes us of course to the broader
issue I think of governance right and
the
they're all of investors into the
governance of companies so I wanted to
ask you another question which is about
you know there's a lot of discussion of
whether investors should engage with
companies and therefore you know enable
them to vae themselves become stewards
of the environment for instance or they
should just you know a step back divest
especially when we talk about seam
industries or contested industries so do
you have any views about these this idea
of divestment versus engagement what is
the purpose of what we're trying to do I
would like for example for coal
companies eventually to shut down
operations and hand stopping spot stop
investing in Hamburg the money to
investors now how can I achieve that if
I simply divest because so much of the
world now is essentially in index funds
I'm not doing anything if I campaign to
make people not want to use school I can
influence the regulator that's possible
if I campaign with the companies and
convince them to give me back the money
rather than invested that's helping the
final objective so I don't believe in
divestment precisely because I believe I
won the end objective I want to stop the
warming of the planet I don't want some
companies to produce sinful stuff and
the only way I can do it is if I engage
with them right I wonder though in your
experience in your multi your experience
in this in this in the investment
community what is the the type of
changing mindsets that you have seen or
shifting mindsets perhaps because some
would say oh we need to make ESG
mainstream and others would say well
actually it's the mainstream that needs
to go is gee how could you possibly
invest without accounting for this
factor so it's it so the approach would
be the other way around so what in your
chain is what's the sort of the shift in
the mindset and and and the attitudes we
have seen it's been fascinating and
let's separate slightly the Europe from
the US and I'll come back to this
because this is an important one um six
years ago when we talk about Herrmann's
because we integrate is you not we do in
armies the the Financial Times ran an
article about me which very kindly
called me hippy now I'd like to have
been happy but I'm six years too young
so I missed it now the point that we're
trying to make is we were out there
right today when I go to the investment
association with all the great and the
good of the sea in iOS and CEOs of the
company all of them in London they all
of them believe in ESG all of them right
now why because there's a demand do I
really believe they integrate it no do
they say that they they integrated yes
they do what are they doing they're just
ticking boxes but it's okay
it's like greenwashing right once you
start the journey you'll continue on it
and the reason is that society is
demanding it so there is a societal
shift that you can see this in the
change in regulations in Europe in China
for example it happened because
President Xi in 2017 in a conference in
Shanghai in the summer said that finance
should do more than just make money it
should provide service to society that's
a shift the United States remains the
outlier because of the particular
definition of fiduciary duty which is
just to make money
the Milton Friedman concept and we are
all doing in the United States that yes
but the only way to do that is to
integrate history so ultimately you end
up at the same space and as managers
want to go there because the clients
want to go there it's interesting
because a lot of the people usually they
pose a trade-off between ESG and
financial performance and that you know
companies that integrate ESG they're not
actually profit maximizers but actually
if what I hear you say is well we all
agree on the objective the the question
is the way to get there right so it's
the question of whether an exclusive
sort of shareholder focus will get you
there versus a broader perhaps
stakeholder focus and and I'm glad you
mentioned this idea of the fiduciary
duty because I also wanted to ask you
that what are some of the institutions
whether we talk about regulations or
governments and so on what are some of
the institutions are the factors that
you think enable up investors to do that
to integrate really into Gradius tree
but also what are some of the factors
that we need to address that perhaps put
obstacles in the way that perhaps other
investors going to do but they just
can't or they think they can't so one of
one of the obstacles in Europe until
recently in the passing of the new year
law was that investors believed if there
were trustees that they couldn't take
ESG into account unless those specific
classes to do so typically by somebody
very wealthy that has been removed so
that then opens the debate between
people like us and others perhaps but
the dwindling and people like us say
well actually to get my
swimmer returns you've got integrity sg2
ask that the discussion is about time
horizon it's about time horizon if you
are truly an investor over a ten year
time horizon five to ten years there is
no other way but integrate it if your
time horizon is 20 years which is a
typical time for investing for a pension
scheme you have to take the
environmental concern because that's
essentially a fat tail risk and societal
disruption that's fat tail risk as well
and social license so we I can't see how
you cannot integrate it the other
obstacle is teaching a new generation of
business people that actually business
skills are not just the skills of the
balance sheet that's important I love my
P&L and I understand it intimately but
actually that's secondary it's
understanding the people you work with
it's understanding the people you serve
because at the end of the day businesses
all businesses serve their customers
just like all CEOs serve the people who
work in the company all companies serve
the customers and by serving the
customers that create the wealth that
serves the shareholders that's the link
it's about service and about being
responsible to each other so the skills
that the new generation has to learn I
think is the importance of people
because ultimately this is all about
homo sapiens sapiens right and our
interaction and that then allows you to
invest responsibly and by investing
responsibly
in fact your response is investing for
the long term and it turns out that's
how you maximize your return so I'm not
disagreeing with Milton Friedman yeah
I'm just disagreeing with his
methodology and say calling into
question and saying the right way of
doing it is actually to integrate
society and I think like you mentioned
the the skill set that's needed going
forward so I was wondering if you were
to you know speak to people that are in
business schools today that are students
today they're doing their MBA or their
masters in finance or any other degree
today and they they want through their
own careers to have a positive impact
whether it's through finance were also
more broadly what are some of your key
pieces of advice so the first thing I
said that they've chosen right career to
impact because finance does shape the
world that is the reality the second
thing I think I say is bring yourself to
work whatever business you do whether
you join a business or create your own
business bring yourself to work
don't leave your morality your values at
home your workplace should reflect your
values and don't join a firm in which
you cannot fully live your values you're
saying about just right and wrong I'm
saying as a person as a mother as a
father as a sister as a husband as a
wife as a partner all of these are your
values why you're more productive that
way and the third one is understand
businesses do not exist in vacuums
businesses exist in society your client
base is society your colleagues our
society your stakeholders why do our
society learn to understand society the
best businesses are those that integrate
in society have survived for a long time
the shortest living businesses are those
that live in a vacuum that's the reality
wonderful so thank you very much for a
great insights and for this interview
thank you so thank you for having me
thank you it's a pleasure thank you
thank you
you

---

### Business and climate change: from argument to action | LBS
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XePSYT-FA5w

Idioma: en

[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
Emma welcome I would like to start our
conversation talking about board of
directors we know from some surveys that
a majority of corporate boards do not
actually discuss yet climate change do
not really engage with this whole idea
of how am I going to translate climate
change into business models into the
company's operations so what do you
think is the right approach for boards
what are their right questions about
climate change that boards should be
asking in order to engage really engage
with this issue I find it surprising
particularly given the the report that
was published last October by the IPCC
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change that boards are still not
discussing this issue this is several
years after the Paris agreement which
set a trajectory for meeting lower
carbon targets and at a time where we're
seeing this agenda rise up the the
things that investors are now discussing
and I think for every company they need
to approach it in the way that is
relevant to their business but really
understanding how their business
functions not just in the local
community the country its operating in
the world its operating in through its
what it is doing but through its supply
chain so it's very difficult to come up
with one specific question but I think
any board member needs to be asking how
best to address climate change as an
issue and an opportunity for a business
so you personally have experience not
only now in government but also an
entire career in the financial services
sector so picking up on that what is it
that perhaps the government or perhaps
the financial sector or a combination
thereof can do to sort of enable these
board members to ask the right questions
for their particular context we know
there are attempts at materiality of ESG
issues for instance across industries
and so on I think one of the issues that
has really gained momentum over the last
year
also is the Task Force on climate
related disclosure interestingly this
came back from powers that were given to
the environment secretary in the Climate
Change Act which gave him the powers to
all Hertz the powers to ask different
bodies how they were approaching and
responding to the issue of climate
change when the governor of the Bank of
England received a request to report
around this it led him to think about
responses for the financial sector and
ultimately to this task force but it's
still what the task force on climate
related disclosure is doing is talking
about disclosure what we are so needing
to take place is a movement from
disclosure to action and again there are
just many many ways that individual
companies can respond as the Environment
Agency we are responsible for
environmental regulation in England we
also have responsibility for flood and
coastal Risk Management and one of the
things that we are very keen that
businesses understand is their
responsibility to think about the
physical risks of climate change and
whether their businesses should be
looking at how they are best protected
from whether it's flooding or droughts
heat waves etc so I I think one of the
challenges we face is this is so
multifaceted we have to develop a very
simple language and set of metrics so
that we can really understand the action
that is required the language of risk is
particularly important I think because
that may actually propel companies to do
what you mentioned move from the
transparency disclosure sort of argument
or actual action and I will assume that
in some circumstances dealing with those
risk is about investments right
investments in the transition investment
into adaptation perhaps to climate
change so when you think about let's say
the overall level of investment that you
observe as an Environment Agency are we
making progress there do you see
companies making those investments
well investment takes place in many many
different forms if we're thinking about
investment in infrastructure in
I look at the current spending review
for this spending period for this
government our budget on flood related
infrastructure is a relatively small
fraction of the overall strands of
spending in infrastructure whether it is
public or privately financed for all of
that infrastructure we need to be
thinking not in separate buckets about
is it relevant for the low-carbon
economy we also needs to be thinking
about resilience we need to be
integrating our thinking as to how to
make sure that any investment we're
making is fit for the future both from
the low-carbon world we're hoping to get
to but also resilient to those physical
risks flooding heat waves things I've
already talked about that are coming our
way so that those investments don't
become stranded in the future it's
interesting because I would assume that
for that integration to happen right for
decision-makers to see these issues as
essentially two sides of the same coin
right you cannot make infrastructure
investments without accounting with this
for these issues it is it requires a
mind frame change we requires a lot of
change in the way we look at this
investments in way we think about these
investments and perhaps requires a a
change in the time scale that we think
about this investment is right we often
associate things like environmental
issues and climate change as long term
although obviously the effects are
already in the short-term so in your
experience what are some of the reasons
that may accelerate the change of those
mind frames but also what are some of
the impediments I think one of the
issues has been about time frames a lot
of people are still thinking that
climate change is something that is
happening in the future as opposed to
happening now I think that the the
language around fiduciary duty hasn't
necessarily helped aisle and the chair
of the investment committee for the
environment agencies pension fund and we
have been looking at our portfolio
through an environmental sustainable
she lands and climate change lends for
over ten years we're delivering strong
performance as well as it being a fully
funded pension fund so I feel very
strongly that as a trustee of a pension
fund I'm able to say that the
performance we have brought to the
pension fund is because we're looking
through this long-term lens and
environmental sustainability lens and
indeed I would be in breach of my
fiduciary duty if I wasn't taking these
things into account so those are just
two of the areas I was part of the UK
government's Green Finance task force
and the UK government is due to publish
a green finance strategy later this year
I think one of the things that came
through that piece of work
facing both into the business department
and into the Treasury with the
complexity of the financial system and
you need so many parts of the system to
change to fundamentally make sure that
people are looking at climate change as
a as an investment issue there's a
perception out there right that there's
a lot of stick in other words we're
pushing and pushing companies to go to
as low carbon to become more responsible
and so on and that's all good and fine
because we need right we're running out
of time but there's this other school of
thought that would say look in the past
companies especially large companies
iconic companies have failed in Polaroid
never became digital and he had to shut
down for instance so much smaller
changes have caused essentially
corporate deaths a transition to
low-carbon economy it's a much bigger
challenge right and there's those who
say that if we only push instead of pool
in other words if we go with regulation
taxes and so on which is what I would
call institutions of push then we're
going to get a lot of failure along the
way and we cannot afford to because
we're running out of time we sort of
need these companies to implement change
to avoid catastrophic climate change so
the question there is in addition to the
stick you know in other words in
addition to the taxes and the
regulations and so on what's missing in
terms of institutions of pool in other
words institutions
help enable companies to transition
without a threat but more about more
about help in change management I do you
think the balance has to be got right I
think we want to be working with the
responsible end of the industry to
encourage that change I think there's
things that we can be doing through
procurement there are some wonderful
initiatives that are about the business
community going a hundred percent
towards renewable energy making sure
that their fleet is electric vehicle and
putting out those commitments and saying
you know setting a timetable I think I
think deadlines are incredibly important
to drive change
but say by this time as a business we
want to achieve this and hopefully we'll
get there even quicker is another
fundamental way of really illustrating
that that is where we need to go and can
get there whilst delivering prosperity
as well that's what we need is still
prosperous communities and countries to
make sure that we we thrive as a society
what do you think is the the key skill
set this key qualifications if you like
that a business student today would need
to acquire you have a positive impact a
positive environmental and social impact
through the way they do business through
the way they they work for government or
run organizations so this is going to be
key to any students rest of their career
this is something that we're all going
to be working on for the rest of our
lives I think collaboration and
partnership is absolutely key and
unusual ones and I think that is where
we'll get those solutions co-creating
the world that we need to live in is
about you know going thinking outside of
the box and just being prepared to join
up those dots and I think that is a
skill set that you can learn
particularly if you're in business
school but at any stage of your
university career to really make sure
that you're looking at
all of the different disciplines and
understanding them enough not so that
you're an expert but you so that you
know who to go to and which set other
sectors to go to for those solutions I
think it's important in your career to
work in both the private public and
third sector so that you understand the
different ways that they're operating
and understand how to take the very best
of each of those sectors to make sure
that we're coming up with good solutions
in business you mentioned unusual
collaborations did you have any any
example of a collaboration that you
would call a bit unusual or
out-of-the-box thinking in terms of how
how this is done yeah I I have seen some
businesses work on projects with some of
their biggest critics from the
environmental movement now some NGOs
will not be prepared to do that but for
others sharing that passion to come up
with a solution if the business is
really about reinventing itself can
deliver a very very strong partnership
but also understanding that you as an
organization don't necessarily have all
the skills that you require I can think
of one investment product that our
pension fund invests in which is a
collaboration between an NGO a fund
manager and a property developer those
thoughts of skill mixes will be that
will provide the solutions and the
performance that we need in the future
it's interesting that you mentioned the
NGO space because now we see a number of
active and activist organizations
literally buying shares in companies so
as to at least have a seat at the table
at shareholder meetings absolutely
there's a lot going on and I think we
all as leaders need to be thinking about
what can I do today to make a difference
and to often I think individuals are not
making the most of their role as an
investor even if it's at a personal
level to ask some of the questions that
need to be heard my boards of companies
it's interesting right because that
information almost doesn't cascade I
don't know how many people
of general public perhaps including
myself would know and tell you precisely
how my pension fund is being invested to
what extent is it is G what are the
scores of the funds that I invest in I
wanted your views on one one more thing
there is a debate out there on this
whole idea of whether shareholder
activism in the in the in the sense of
engagement as opposed to divestment may
potentially be more impactful in terms
of actually changing corporate behavior
towards ESG issues some would say the
divestment is basically abandoning the
fight some would say that actually the
investment may D legitimize some of
these industries so in the long run it
might be a good thing and vice-versa for
engagement do you have any views perhaps
on divestment versus engagement so I
think the whole divestment movement has
been extraordinary for putting climate
change on the agenda and I think what
it's meant that if you as an investor
have chosen to engage on this issue it's
up to what you need to do and be able to
demonstrate to your beneficiaries that
you really are engaging on the climate
change agenda so the environment agency
pension fund alongside other investors
including the church churches national
investment bodies set up something
called the transition pathway initiative
we knew that if we were going to
persuade our beneficiaries that we are
making the right choice by continuing to
hold high carbon companies albeit in
many instances underweight
we had to demonstrate that when we said
we were engaging we really were engaging
and the transition pathway initiative is
one tool it's now supported by something
like 12 trillion dollars of assets under
management very quickly over a period of
about two and a half years it's growing
from a couple of small institutions to a
much more global initiative but I think
you still need to understand at what
point you will say I can no longer hold
this company within my portfolio because
it is at risk because it is not moving
transitioning
in time to meet with the Paris
agreements and I think that is something
that you have to mean it if you are
going to engage and decide at which
point you say we're not making a
difference we need to make an investment
choice on behalf of our our
beneficiaries so in a lonely a binary
choice but there is more dynamic and
progress concerns that want to take into
account before making that decision of
where do you stop the engagement because
perhaps it's not as effective as it
could have been absolutely absolutely I
think that leads this needs to remain a
very live discussion and to your point
of individuals not understanding where
their pension fund is invested I think
we've clouded the language of investment
in terms that rendered it really
impossible to understand what you're
invested in we say you're invested in a
growth global equity fund as opposed to
you're invested in global companies and
this is what we're doing so again I
think therein in encouraging individuals
to understand more about their
investments we need to simplify some of
the language I think this speaks to the
broader issue of these artificial silos
right so understanding they're all of of
each individual person not only as a
consumer buys us as an investor and as
an employee as an as a member of the
community or a broader community is also
quite quite important absolutely but I
think I come back to every time you can
get overwhelmed by the complexity of a
situation and why we're not seeing
progress to thinking about you know what
can I do in my current roles to make a
difference and then start concentrating
on that and as all taking responsibility
for the roles that we play and our
involvement in either delivering change
or not wonderful so thank you so much
Emma for this very insightful discussion
thank you very much
you

---

### Academic insights in striving for gender equality | LBS
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ejn57hEdSOo

Idioma: en

when I was a boy about 10 or 11 I was
speaking to my mother
about the factory didn't go to
university and I asked her why because
she told me she was a straight-a student
and she very pragmatically talked about
when my mother and father went to
university they figured out they
couldn't afford to send both of them and
one of them needed to drop out and
support the other and my mother said it
was obvious that it should be her
because my father's earning potential as
a man was so much more than hers as a
woman and I remember thinking at the
time like that's just wrong
so that's motivated me to do research on
gender and diversity for Jean the last
25 years one of the most exciting
developments in my career is I've been
invited to join the UK National Board of
UN Women I'm very very excited to take
that role on and to do what I can to
make a difference for women everywhere
UN Women is a global organization with a
very clear mission which is to empower
women and girls around the world and
ultimately we've gained gender parity
you know a lifetime persuading
businesses governments stakeholders that
this is a real issue and needs to be
addressed needs proper research which
gives data to make the case Randall's
background and his knowledge and
experience of that makes him a very
valuable contributor to the board the
research he's done in this topic was
very appealing as a credible source for
information that would lead to advancing
the conversation around gender equality
my hope like any of us is that my
research will actually make a difference
that it will mean fewer women have to do
what my mother did which is for the
interests of your family subordinating
your own career because if only one of
you can go to school it needs to be in a
man we are looking for a track record in
helping to make change half
organization and to help an organization
and in particular charity to grow and be
sustainable in its growth we're looking
for people who are prepared to stand on
a public platform and be counted
whether that's speaking at events
whether it's speaking in the board
meeting and Randall hits every single
one of those boxes in spades
so his knowledge and commitment and
passion to gender equality is there for
all to see
the diversity work that he does and the
research work that he does he will be
able to draw on as we think about our
strategies and our policies and how we
engage with the communities that we
serve if I look back to the world that
my mother was talking about it's changed
not enough but it's changed and I hope
and believe that that progress will
continue it isn't inevitable it only
happens when lots of people work hard at
it and I want to be one of those people

---

### LBS Live - Demystifying the language of numbers | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpUPZPSPM5g

Idioma: en

numbers why would you have an accounting
professor come here and talk about
demystifying numbers well because I
guess a lot of the mystery is created by
my profession or my colleagues or those
of us who really really care about
numbers then we find them quite
straightforward but the point is really
to to demystify them really it's about
making them easier to understand and the
way I feel about the need to demystify
anything is really it's gotta be either
obscure it's gonna be unknown
there is something difficult to
understand it but oftentimes the point
about needing to demystify something is
also explaining why one should bother to
know something and I think oftentimes
with my subject accounting and the
outcome of the process that we sort of
put information through and generate
financial statements I think what is
generally lost is the connection between
the underlying economic events and how
they are translated into numbers so when
I say demystify numbers the session the
way I interpreted my job for this
afternoon
is to really make a case for numbers why
should you worry about numbers or care
to know more about them okay and then of
course numbers and I don't want to sort
of be saying negative things about
numbers because I don't think all
numbers require demystifying so there
are some famous numbers we are all
familiar with I suppose you have heard
of the number pi before you know what it
is if you divide the circumference of a
circle by is diameter you're gonna get
this constant which has many many many
many non repeating digits then if you
use a lot of computational power you can
get more digits add it to it but we
don't need to demystify that number we
know that some other famous numbers we
know number 10 Downing Street again
requires no demystification
well famous infamous I don't know how
you feel about it these days that's for
you to judge and but it's a famous
but I don't really need to tell you what
happens behind those doors we see that
on a regular basis another famous number
this is I must plug this in this is a
request from my son who is 12 this is
his most famous number number 12 those
of you who are celebrating American
Thanksgiving today
happy Thanksgiving he's a he's a
quarterback with the Patriots he's
pretty good apparently I'm told I've
seen you a few games he's not bad anyway
number 12 and then and then of course if
we sort of bring it back closer to home
some famous people in numbers I kept the
title some famous number so this was in
the FT a few days ago a couple of weeks
ago to be specific November 9th she and
her husband took a tour in Australia
which is my second home and they
obviously took with them many things
including her wardrobe and the FT being
the financial press summarized the
events in numbers okay again doesn't
require much demystification it's about
the cost of her wardrobe and variety of
numbers of things she's used and things
she's done again requiring no
demystification so why do I really need
a session of an hour which I will spare
some of it for Q&A at the end why do we
really need this whole thing about
demystifying numbers and many times in
my role as as the academic director of
one of the courses here actually finance
for non finance executives and some
students that I teach in the degree
program sitting in the same seats that
you do today I get this sentiment either
in their expressions or in their literal
verbal declarations of how they feel
about the subject I am NOT a numbers
person now I don't think there are types
of people to be honest you might like
numbers you might dislike numbers but I
think the reason I hear this from
anybody is because I didn't bother
immersing myself into the types of
numbers you talk about this would be me
the financial statements I haven't got
sufficient familiarity and I feel
uncomfortable looking at them because I
think I'm behind some of the group that
I'm with okay so that's one reason or
when I see X
with this attitude or declaration of how
they feel about the numbers it is
generally the senior executives who are
taking part in variety of
decision-making actually being in charge
of numbers but not necessarily feeling
confident about their mastery of the
numbers so my job at the school many
times that I appear in front of my
students the pilot audience is about
breaking the ice with the numbers okay
so what I will try to do is give you a
reason as to why you shouldn't really
say I'm not a numbers person or I really
couldn't be bothered looking at numbers
but sort of at least one reason why you
might want to what you might want to do
so here is the type of numbers I'm
talking about and I intentionally put it
small because this is the impression we
give to the outside world when we give
them a financial statement that looks
exactly like this in an annual report
okay this is one of the main financial
statements it's called a balance sheet
I'm sure you've heard of it before talks
about different resources a business has
and then how the business gets access to
those resources using different types of
funding so that's that's what it is
so besides it being fine prints at this
point even if you were to sort of zoom
into it and I just took the assets
section of the balance sheet where you
get to see this business and I'm gonna
reveal in a second who that is
regardless of how big how magnified how
neatly it is presented any tease we do
care about the format by the way you're
gonna see things underlined and sort of
indented etcetera to group them together
together clearly we think they are still
not sufficiently clear unless you have a
reason to look at them okay it's a
collection of numbers they come from
underlying events and transactions so
that's that's a bigger font using the
same information and it's the total
resources this particular business has
and perhaps to some of you is a surprise
maybe it looks no different than this
picture right it's a list it has some
squiggles on it as
actually when you look at it in this
small font this essentially is the same
as what I just showed you this is a
Sumerian balance sheet okay
I wasn't really joking when I said they
look similar they are similar this is
the farmer who is listing its cattle etc
and sort of how it changed over the
period so they are the same but at face
value when we don't speak the language
they might as well literally be the same
right so how do we sort of go about
thinking in terms of why should we
really approach the numbers and approach
them with purpose okay right so the
previous numbers the actual number is
not the sort of Sumerian tablet
carvings that I showed you what the
actual numbers came from Aston Martin
their most recent financials and the
reason I picked them is something that
we like doing at this school is using a
really current information so I picked
Aston Martin because very recently they
listed themselves on the main market at
the LSE London Stock Exchange and they
have as a part of that process they had
to obviously go through a lot of filings
and produce a lot of financial
statements so if you are like me from
outside right the public member of the
public if you really wanted to know a
bit more about Aston Martin's financial
conditions one opportunity you will have
is when they file these documents and
you can sort of dig deeper into them so
those numbers came from Aston Martin and
they list basically the kinds of assets
the resources that Aston Martin has is
at the time of their reporting and if
you and if I sort of quickly go back and
I'm not going to do back and four too
many times but if you look at their
assets without worrying about the label
definitions because this is not going to
be a crash course on translating every
accounting label on a balance sheet but
if you look at them they have a lot of
long term assets non current assets as
they are expected to last them for a
long period of time large chunk of which
okay is what is called intangible assets
so these would be their brands etc that
are aggregated so this company you would
expect to have good brand recognition if
their number
translate into the financial statements
reported that is if they have of course
acquire them through transactions all
right and of course they have some
current assets one current asset we will
want to X we will expect to see in
pretty much every balance sheet is going
to be cash and cash equivalents and then
of course if you really want to think
about the balance sheet and its strength
you might say okay do they have enough
cash to cover their near-term
obligations information which I haven't
sort of flown out to show you but it was
in the fine print slides if you want to
look them up again all right so that's
just sort of a few things from Aston
Martin and a bunch of information listed
in a tabular format and I still haven't
yet told you why would you want to look
at any of this now let me try to make a
case for numbers okay I would like
people to think about numbers my type of
numbers then I gave you some examples
from outside of my expertise right the
the introductory warm up with numbers
aside I would like people to think about
numbers financial information in other
words that's what I mean when I say
numbers as a language a language for the
business and like any other language it
has some tools game tools like alphabets
tools like words and of course as you
put them together you construct
meaningful sentences okay and that
counting information of financial
information is really no exception to
the way you might think about language
and it the way people feel about seeing
an unknown language or hearing
discussions in a language they don't
understand I think is very similar to do
way people feel when they are faced with
numbers not knowing where to start in
terms of how to use them okay so making
a case for numbers and making a case for
why should one acquire this language
sufficiently so that they can be
involved in a conversation with people
who do speak the language
okay that's basically what we try to
achieve in some of our teaching here
right if you were to develop more
fluency in the language you will be able
to have improved communication
within the organization and I'll take
that case a bit further in the remaining
time within but also it allows you to
see the business your organization your
work with the eyes of those outside of
the business and that's also important
especially if you have outside funding
for a business that you are making
decisions for now so when somebody else
provides your funding they'll want to
know how you're doing and being able to
appreciate and communicate in this
language sufficiently allows you to also
understand the concerns of those outside
who might have funded the business in
addition to it's very important function
of course helping people communicate
within the business in terms of setting
targets in terms of making progress
towards those targets etc so I think
really again with that feature it takes
the box in terms of it being a language
and we do this in fact taking this
language approach the way we motivated
etc we do this definitely for finance
for non finance executives the course
that I wrecked I direct here which runs
a few times a year four times to be
specific and of course we can do it in
other formats too but when we approached
my colleagues I'm the subject area for
accounting when I or Michael is going to
a classroom really we need to not just
teach somebody a list of words that's
not that's not the point right
everybody's time is limited our role is
really to make a good case for why this
would be helpful for people to actually
have sufficient familiarity so that they
can go on making decisions making right
decisions for the business in in
collaborating with others who do speak
the numbers and also control the
resources - all right so how do numbers
or how can they help you ok so what what
is something and that we can get help
from from the numbers so now the
objective as I said trying to break the
ice with the numbers and getting sort of
this mindset onset of this I feel
anxious about numbers I'm not a numbers
person I've never studied accounting
that's okay there are many people like
that in the world they they just do fine
it's more the mindset of
numbers person and I don't want to see
them and transforming that to I'm
open-minded about numbers and I think
that's the first step okay you want to
warm up to numbers then I think a short
course on numbers definitely achieves
that in my experience having taught here
for ten years now in that program but I
think it I'll take it one step further
okay and I'll make it I'll make it even
warmer numbers are your friends because
every time you come up across not come
up become a process situation when you
are discussing resources there is always
numbers behind those resources and
somebody it might not be you but it
could be you too controlling those
resources so the moment you sort of feel
comfortable about numbers and feel that
you can communicate using the language
you are able to take a more critical
part in those decisions and feel more
confident about those decisions and
that's what I feel quite passionate
about and I think my colleagues and I
find that quite an exciting
transformation when we see our students
participants arrive here and say really
I really didn't want to spend any time
looking at numbers all my life here now
I find myself about to take a food see
listed CEO role well I certainly need to
know the language and this is really
high time that I get comfortable with it
and I think they certainly see the
payoff all right now I'm gonna skip not
skip switch to this one case I wanted to
talk about and as I said I will want to
leave some time for your questions at
the end
I picked performance measurements as a
case for numbers okay so performance
measurements so measuring how somebody
is doing somebody when we think about
individual performance measurement but
it could be a team measurement it could
be a divisions performance it could be
overall company how is the whole company
doing so performance measurement as a
case for numbers and the reason the
reason I take this it has relevance for
both within company decisions but also
of course the way outside's views the
business because depending on the
company some of this information is
shared with the outside world the
stakeholders the investors etc so
keeping track of how a business does is
relevant for internal decision-makers as
well as the capital providers okay but I
would like to approach it from the
internal perspective for the for the
moment so I gave you Aston Martin as an
example just to show you some small
print numbers and then I blew it out and
told you that they have a bunch of
assets the resources so these assets our
resources in accounting speak in fact
resources that a business has rights to
control in undertaking its business if
I'm being very specific all right so
when Aston Martin has accessed those
assets the resources the likely scenario
is that they would have used some
external funding or at least some of it
and especially given that they've
recently listed themselves they have
gone through an initial public offering
of the company which transformed the
ownership from private equity ownership
to at least some public ownership okay
so that's sort of back drop
institutional detail in small quantity
now when you look up Aston Martin and
what this business is striving to do
what's their vision this is what they
say okay when I have on the screen is
what they stay and they they say that
the group so Aston Martin Maher Aston
Martin group's vision is to be the great
British car company that creates the
most beautiful and accomplished
automotive arts in the world okay so
that's their vision Thanks their
aspiration this is what they are they
are saying this is what we are set out
to do now of course that's a very vague
statement so if you think about sort of
going about your business on a day today
yes that is probably guiding principles
but you're gonna have to have something
a bit more concrete to work towards all
right so how do you think Aston Martin
is planning to achieve that kind of
vision or that aspiration how could they
make it a reality now of course
companies go through different time
periods and then come up with different
strategic priorities or plans
the most recent plan they have
in place which they put in place in 2014
is called second century plan second
century plan and they've been
implementing it for some years already
it comes in three settings or three
pillars I think they refer to three
phases okay first one is business
stabilization okay that was the first
couple of years they've achieved that
and then the next one is core
strengthening and the last one is
expanding the portfolio product
portfolio so they have a strategic plan
in place that will be obviously a
medium-term thing about five years or so
and they would like to achieve this plan
by 2020 although last I checked I think
they are going to extend that a little
bit by a couple of years the innovation
is coming along but maybe a little
slower than initially anticipate so they
are being quite ambitious so these are a
bit more tangible when you go and look
at the details of those in fact the
first one the business stabilization is
put in place because Aston Martin has
gone through a turnaround so it wasn't
doing that well in terms of being able
to generate profitability for the
investments the company has has had in
place they needed to be turned around
and in fact that Midna stabilization
phase has been successful according to
their own statements since 2017 they are
reporting a profit okay at least as one
of the objectives as coming back to
profitability that has been that has
been done now core strengthening is
about putting in the right processes in
place and everything so that they can
enable the innovation coming down the
line as well as strengthening their
dealership networks etc and then
expansion of product portfolio is
becoming innovation focused again so
that they can bring to market new things
and and so that they can sort of claim I
guess leadership in the target market
that they identified as high I think
high luxury sports cars etc okay all
right so that's their strategic plan now
how am i tying it to performance
measurement now if that's your plan if
you say in say five years or so
I would like to as the business so we
would like to achieve these expectations
or plans you would also need to
obviously having placed some control
mechanism how well are you doing towards
the objectives that you set out okay so
performance measurement now if I put on
the screen what they have themselves
stated as part of their corporate
performance targets key performance
indicators and few examples are revenue
growth so they would like to increase
their market share increase their sales
again on the back of selling exciting
cars again alright and then they would
like to improve a bit down margin so if
that sounds like a random collection of
initials put together it might be the
case earnings before interest taxes
depreciation and amortisation
it's sort of a it's sort of a summary
measure or an approximation measure
people like using to proxy cash flows
although it's not a cashflow measure
it's not a cash measure but it's the
reported profits before depreciation and
amortisation and so they would like to
increase that they would like larger
operating profits in other words I guess
that's how we could in a simple word
translate that and then they would also
like to keep an eye on the dealership so
they want to enhance the dealerships add
to the dealerships that they want to be
able to have that I guess a sales floor
capacity so that they can then plan to
grow the revenues more sustainably right
so those are the three things that they
highlight now you probably have already
noted that all these will be numbers
yeah number of dealerships this is a
number from the income statement the
this number divided by sales and revenue
growth is last year's revenue compared
to this year's revenue in a percentage
okay so these are all numbers but only
two of them the first two are financial
indicators okay because they come from
financial statement so that's the
distinction in terms of when you do
performance measurements when you come
up with indicators of course performance
measurement as the word measurement
implies you're going to quantify some
progress okay so whatever measurement
you will do it will result in some sort
of a number it doesn't have to be the
sort of quantity like number of
dealerships it could be from a scale
from one to five how well did this
employee do five being excellent that's
the number two but it's always about
quantifying some progress or some
evaluation but only two of these the
first two are financial numbers and the
other one is a non-financial indicator
still relevant of course for the
business given that it makes and sells
cars okay and what we will see of course
in in practice many companies use a
combination of the two with especially
for top management with financial
indicators so the bit that I'm looking
to mystify demystify to make a case for
the financial indicators having a larger
weight okay so that's a reason to I
guess think about the numbers being
relevant to keeping track of progress
towards strategic priorities and plans
and of course that strategic plan being
in place so that the business can make
progress towards its aspirations and its
goals okay so it's not just about
measuring performance it's about what we
can learn from those indicators so that
we can redesign any sort of elements of
the strategy or set new targets or
incentivize people in in a different
kind of way
that might be your preference then you
can also suggest to them that that might
be putting in perverse incentives I want
to come to that in a minute you're
absolutely right and not every number
that we see in a performance measurement
sort of table if you will for top
management or even individual
measurement is necessarily capturing the
sentiment that you really want to have
in a performance measurement and just
having another building that's open so
they can have instead of 160 for next
year 165 is that the right thing to do
not necessarily unless it also comes
with profitable properly allocated
capital that's generating sustainable
profits absolutely yeah because they
have picked it this is this is them
saying things not me advising aston
martin what to do and because i could
spend the afternoon with you so but i
have i have in the company and i have
not like that yeah yes of course of
course
yeah it gives you that's why yeah that's
right so if you're defining the ways to
achieve targets and that being a channel
through which that performance target
can be facilitated it would still make
sense provided you having a careful look
at at what cost are you adding another
dealership and what are the gains you're
getting from it right so
for Aston Martin if they are going to
sell these really expensive cars that go
really fast and they look awesome and
you can only click on the website to say
maybe I can book one for a test drive
and you want to do this in many places
in the world maybe it's not that easy to
scale up the sales so you need to have
physical presence and in a period of
turnaround I suppose sometimes what
happens not sometimes quite often is you
would close a bunch of those dealerships
that are not profitable but now that
they are coming back to being strong and
reporting profits they can now scale
back to the way that they think their
type of product is best sold or it
marketed to a larger group of target
customers ok revenue growth a bit
emerging a number of dealerships and I'm
going back to just to wrap that up
two of them are financial indicators one
non-financial although measurement
implies what you see in front of you
will have some numbers behind it okay
but I think when I see I'm not a numbers
person people tend to complain about
these two rather than measuring this
because I mean that doesn't come from a
financial statement so you don't have to
deal with the accountants okay anyway so
those are indicators and we want to know
what these things mean and that comes
from getting a bit more familiar we
with with the numbers now I did already
give you some of these this is again
them saying I didn't this is a public
document that they put on their website
for public consumption it's their third
quarter update of what's happening in
this year and this Kohl was also last
week or something very recent and they
what day what do they need to do so this
is now going back to financial
information being relevant for internal
communication so going back there
staying there from another moment this
is about you know how is the business
doing now we could find out about this
externally which is I'm going to show
you in a second but this is also what
the business will want to keep track of
themselves if they say our aspirations
is to make the most beautiful car out
there be the greatest British company
that makes the car art or whatever it
was I'm not it's up there I won't do
justice to rephrasing it you see
they will want to know how well they are
progressing through the strategic plan
and whether they are being consistent
with that objective or the vision
internally you're going to design tasks
to facilitate that kind of vision
pursuit you're going to design obviously
performance measurement so that people
are on the right path and you have to
set the right targets etc but taking it
to the outside you also need to sort of
give an update in particular because now
you are publicly listed to in this case
you are going to give an update in some
shape and form and in their case it is a
conference call that the CFO and the CEO
are live at a certain point in time
after their third quarter closes and the
information is out and they go through a
slide deck like this I only brought you
one one page if you curious about the
business you can look at them yourself
but the thing that I wanted to emphasize
is the outside world also cares about
your numbers right so they are gonna
come and say a few things in sort of
bullet points nature telling people
those who care about their numbers in
terms of the progress they are making
towards that strategic priority is the
plan that they have established so
I have been able to report a revenue
growth that's related to that first
performance indicator I showed you okay
so they were able to report a increased
revenue 80% of revenue growth they were
able to report digit triple digit growth
in Americas and Asia Pacific including
China year-on-year triple digit growth
and this is in units sold just to be
clear because obviously growth in what
it matters these are not dollar values
sold but in terms of the number of
cárcel just to be clear and then the
other few things are about that
innovation plans and they come up with a
they put out the refresh model for one
of their cars and they have been able to
reach the milestones for their SUV
apparently this is an SUV and this is
this is this is them becoming a
competitor to Tesla which is another
company we could talk about in the
context of numbers and their and their
CEO and commenting on their on their
numbers quite passionately in different
in different venues but this is a a
plant where they will start producing
electric cars okay so they have that in
place to inter part of their innovation
plans and then this last one is this
slightly bad in bad news it's not bad
news but remember when I said the
strategic plan was good for the next
five years that the second century plan
so in that fifth bullet point they are
saying that product portfolio expansion
is not pushed till 2022 so slightly
delayed slightly or not so slightly but
anyway so that's basically how what
businesses do you so words the pipeline
yeah yes yes of course of course yes of
course you always have to me so this is
my other hat if I put my investor
relations and corporate communication
hat all those words are very very
carefully picked right and we need to
know exactly why they use that word as
opposed to some other word in the
context of understanding the numbers too
yeah so there's always more to the word
and more to the numbers and whether they
match is there actually the the thing
that makes the numbers quite
understanding the numbers even more
powerful okay so that's just one example
of performance measurement I think I
gave you a very sort of overview picture
of in what context numbers are relevant
from within the business it also is
relevant to the outside world so
hopefully that makes a case for knowing
more about the numbers now why is it
useful okay I showed you an example of
sharing information on performance
measurement and how a business goes
about doing that but really why is that
useful for an organization it will
obviously enable the business to
organization to link the actions to
strategic plan right so how are you
going to prioritize things otherwise if
you don't have a plan in front of you
that is guided by resource allocation
okay so enables linking actions to
strategic plan this is performance
measurement using using anything but as
I said in practice a lot of the times
especially as you go up in the hierarchy
of organizations when you are making
decisions that control resources - you
are likely to see more financial
information based performance indicators
than non-financial ones and then of
course paring aside the issues we just
discussed anyway in terms of volume
related things and square footage
related things if performance
measurements or having controls linked
to performance measurement and keeping
an eye on how people are are doing
towards their set objectives also allows
delegation now that's actually a very
powerful thing because you can be a
start-up and if things are going well
and you're scaling things up and you're
going to start letting go of some of
that control of doing everything by
yourself and making all decisions
yourself as as you are able to capture
the important elements of how to pursue
the mission that you set your business
for array as you're able to define tasks
or define jobs that would support that
without you doing everything so of
course then the need of being
able to see how others are progressing
towards that sort of common set of
objectives is a very important thing so
doing good performance measurements
allows you to come up with a good sort
of definition of rules and and and
keeping an eye on how that all fits
together in achieving those objects so
performance measurement is not
measurement for measurements sake just
so accounting professors can get some
exciting discussions by showing pictures
it's more about facilitating business's
function properly in achieving their
objectives and then of course when you
have set those targets and when you have
been able to identify those rules you
are able to then incentivize the type of
behavior the type of action that you are
looking to have in place so that those
strategic plans are are achieved or more
likely to be achieved and on the back of
that people can be rewarded and
motivated and this need not be by the
way taken in the spirit of if you do
more of performance generation you
should always generate more monetary
rewards incentive design could not need
not just rely on more money more bonus
more that but having a understanding
behind what sort of activities should
tie to the strategic priorities gives
you the kind of understanding that you
might want to design em and why use
financial information in performance
measurement because we had a brief
discussion already about non-financial
indicators - we could just measure
performance in any way we'd like why not
pick number of stores which we discussed
or you can also say okay we would like
to reduce carbon emissions which you
should I can say that that's my opinion
and and you should definitely have
measures like that - but why in the
context of having many things we can
measure when we're at it why put in
place financial measures - okay so what
do we gain by using financial
information it's their relevance and
reliability the accounting language okay
so that's my language my group sitting
upstairs there this is our our thing the
good thing about it is is that it
captures underlying economic
transactions it's designed to capture
what's happening to the
economic resources and therefore it's
relevant for economic activity now I
also put another word their reliability
now it's also about these numbers being
looked and checked and them being
according to certain rules and standards
okay
and therefore rather than me sort of
sitting there and coming up with random
ways of measuring things if I really
want to capture economic progress
towards some objective using resources
when we know that the rules are there to
report how resources are used in a
consistent way I think that gives them a
a strength in terms of being relevant
for performance measurement okay so they
are reliable and of course not to
mention there is the auditor out there
who comes in looks at our financials and
science and if you would like to give me
pushback about the audit profession we
can do that over the coffee break okay
now another good thing about financial
information is that it is comparable
comparable again this links back to
something I just said the rules guide
how things are reported now the rules
don't really differ much and I'll just
have to say much because sometimes
they're depending on the industry there
might be a different treatment but for
the bulk of what happens on a day to day
for a business the rules are such that
similar things that happen across
different times or similar things that
happen across different companies are
reported
similarly okay and that results in
comparable information and that's very
useful that's very useful when you want
to think about how a business is doing
over time because obviously this is not
a one period game where you really want
to report profits just once and then
you're done it is about sustainable
business developing certain returns to
the capital that's being invested okay
all sustainable performance however you
define it so you want to be able to
compare performance over time but I put
down across the field as well because
when you are thinking about making a
decision you
generally choosing out of alternatives
okay so it can be about investing in a
business it could be about investing in
a different project it could be many
things but at the end of the day you are
always making your choice the choice
could be also making nothing doing
nothing right so it's always a choice
about how best to use resources and
therefore when you make those decisions
you want to be able to say okay can I
really evaluate these decisions all men
people from outside look at the business
and I did show you the quarter three
earnings call when investors in fact the
analysts are asking questions to Aston
Martin because investors would love to
know
it's about investor or other capital
providers looking to say instead of
Aston Martin if I invested in Tesla what
would have happens okay it's about
comparing performance across the field
as well yeah so it allows financial
information allows comparison across the
field this may be my last picture I have
a couple more slides and this is my
analogy and this is sort of the analogy
I try to make when I talk about
measurement so there are some famous
numbers there in particular I guess
Usain Bolt in the third plane there this
is London Olympics hundred meters men's
final so when I think about performance
measurement it's also the objectivity I
try to think about okay so when you
think about a hundred meter race now the
objective is a guess for the individual
athletes to cross that line the first
for some it might be breaking the world
record it could be many things it could
be doing your personal best I mean you
go in there I have no idea how you're
going there I'm not an athlete but I
certainly admire admire athletes who
compete at this at this level but the
good thing about something like this is
its objective there's a clock unless the
clock messes up you know exactly you
have a line you know exactly who's
crossed it the first time so this sort
of across the field comparison is easier
in some settings then in looking
financial statements
yeah because you might think okay this
is one big
this is another business I don't know
exactly whether they are comparable but
the fact that they are financial
information the fact that they are built
on the back of rules that are
consistently applied allows you to make
those reasonably objective comparisons
okay so that goes back to the
reliability and how well you can measure
things if you are if you are looking to
looking to use information now of course
we can also think about well rules can
allow for some judgments and those
judgments can be used in a way to
manipulate outcomes and therefore maybe
we want to stay away from numbers but I
would still push it back to knowing
sufficiently well about numbers gives
you the ability to ask the right
questions about challenging the
assumptions that go behind reporting the
numbers ask the questions ask the ask
the ask your finance colleagues who
might be putting the numbers together to
push them as to why that assumption is
opposed to something else right that
always is a very powerful thing to have
unless you speak the language you don't
challenge sufficiently enough and then
and then of course we might end up with
not so awesome decisions being made all
right our approach here to teach this
sort of how do we demystify how do we
teach people numbers we sort of take the
perspective that resources are limited
your resources your time is limited too
but when you go back to your business
the businesses live there resources are
limited it's both time and money both of
them right so then you need to think
about how best to go about making the
decisions with respect to allocating
those resources both time and capital
time and funding and then of course how
do you once you make those decisions how
we ensure successful implementation of
those decisions by speaking the same
language so that people are aware of the
kind of performance targets set in place
why they are set in place because
numbers or targets are really not
helpful if they don't make sense why do
they make sense why are they the right
performance measures to put on the
plates given the city
priorities and given the vision so that
linking through the whole chain of
thought I suppose is far more fruitful
if you are able to converse in in
numbers so here we start with the basic
principles really we appreciate the
accounting is an information system and
embrace that okay so we really
appreciate the fact that yes it's
according to a set of rules and
standards but it requires still
assumptions in judgments then we need to
embrace that so that we can give you all
the power to be able to go ask the right
questions okay so we do really care
about the principles of the information
itself but then we define performance
okay what is the best way to think about
performance given limited resources and
time and how do we go about tracking the
performance of using those resources the
right way and then of course we embrace
the fact that we need to think about
making comparisons this is sort of the
athletes running the same race all
together but also businesses looking to
gain further market share in the same
same sort of a sector or something or it
could be you as a business being a
potential target as an investment to
someone who is looking to save their a
hard-earned pension pot right so it's
it's relevant regardless of what
perspective you take in terms of as to
why you might care about performance
comparisons that important and then we
also take it back to the operating
decisions to having a strong
understanding of the cost of a business
is really really important and how you
think about activities that generate
cost and how they map into the different
areas that you're looking to achieve for
example more dealerships generate more
costs but aren't if they are generating
the right kind of profitability or the
market share that's the target market
that the company's expecting to achieve
or intending to achieve and they are
able to do that successfully actually
that's that's a good type of cost that
you want to manage but not necessarily
be sort of rushing to cut right so all
that is really really important because
if you think about costs is just numbers
you don't want numbers you don't want
cost that's a bit of a narrow minded
approach to
to go about go about business and
decision-making so we really spend time
thinking about how cost are structured
and how they need to sort of be
accounted for to be able to make the
right operating decisions and then we
also integrate investment opportunities
into our decision-making because that's
obviously one of the big areas of
decision making especially as you have
more control over resources should you
pursue that project or the other one or
should you go after that business that
startup or another or should you start a
business from it even even the first
principle question is this the right
thing to do given time and resources are
limited again what sort of expectations
should you have so investment
opportunities and then we'd come back a
full circle when we teach this sort of
numbers for none numbers people kind of
content we come a full circle and then
think about how this understanding that
we brought through time in that course
would feed into setting the right
strategic priorities because numbers are
important if you give them a purpose
okay so we don't just teach numbers for
numbers sake we bring it back to why you
actually have some strategic priorities
and how you best think about identifying
the right kind of measures to sort of
incentivize for okay so with that I'll
conclude so I'll just wrap this up as I
hope you leave this room thinking
numbers are a language okay and whatever
the mission or the vision of the
business or organization is that it will
never have unlimited resources both time
and funding will be limited okay so then
the ability to communicate in the
numbers language my type of language
financial reporting to be specific it
really does enable both fairness and non
finance people to have more ability to
collaborate and work together to
identify the strategic priorities but
also achieve them okay so with that I'll
conclude I hope I made a case for
numbers besides the famous numbers were
all familiar with and I will now open up
for further questions
thank you there's a history to astronaut
okay so it was apparently bought by a
private yes it was devious older okay
and then it's turn into the homes okay
and then it's like you yes very recently
so you yeah you get advance she does
information what would you be kind of
looking at particularly in the view of
not history to see you know how solid
this turnaround was I would say it would
be too premature for me to comment on it
because I haven't actually gone and done
a proper analysis of its but I looked at
it in the corner yeah
what would I want to know I would want
to know how sustainable all that is I
would want to know how much of the work
they put in place they say there are
eighty percent done with this work how
much with that work they put in place
they are able to sustainably generate
reporting the results they've just
reported prior to the IPO now I am happy
to take any pushback about reporting so
IPO is a time where obviously you're
gonna want to portray the company isn't
the best light possible and I would want
to know this recent reports off
profitability for example whether that
was a rush to the IPO and accelerating
certain things being on the financials
or is it something that's actually
legitimately there which it might be but
not temporarily so that that it will be
and to be able to do that I would need
to look at further data then just look
at that balance sheet but absolutely
right I wouldn't just by looking at the
balance sheet I wouldn't I wouldn't be
able to conclude anything they also want
to generate you know they have their
eyes on free cash flow generation
capacity etc so that's only one of the
many financial statements I'm sure
you're familiar with and I would
definitely look at that income statement
I would want to forecast some future
earnings I
want to see what their cash flow is
doing all that this wasn't appropriate
for my mandate but yes I would
definitely want more more numbers I
would want more numbers thank you it's
been a pleasure to be here this
afternoon I hope you have a case for
numbers and that you are a bit more like
I don't I'm open-minded about numbers
okay yes thank you
[Applause]

---

### LBS Live - Using numbers made simple and easy | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwWhunfaJvs

Idioma: en

financial information is very useful
when we need to identify priorities for
actions when we operate with limited
time and resources but what is my
session about my session is about the
importance of financial information in
performance measurement with a view to
evaluate how well these limited
resources are utilized having a better
understanding of what financial
information can capture enables finance
and non finance executives to work
together in identifying and achieving
strategic priorities
[Music]

---

### The art of negotiation: Six must-have strategies | LBS
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKbcmlKb81c

Idioma: en

so this morning I'm going to be sharing
some you know theory with you so to some
extent I'm glad I have you early where
the caffeine is still kicking in what
we're gonna be talking about this
morning Society of influence and
persuasion and when I say theory the
reason why I say theory is because
there's actually a rich this isn't a
rich area of research there's a lot of
science behind it and I want to share
with you just a little bit of that
science now you know here at lbs we
believe very strongly that there's no
point throwing theory at you if it's
also not simultaneously practical to you
so while I'm gonna be talking about
these ideas of influence and persuasion
and the science behind it simultaneously
I'm going to be giving you tons and tons
of examples right whether it's in the
business world whether it's in the rail
social world just try and make these
ideas come alive and the other thing
about my style of sort of like teaching
and being in front of a class is that I
really don't know what to do if I'm just
hearing myself talk endlessly so I do
hope and expect that you guys will
participate along with me and you know
bring in things that you think are
pertinent as we talk about these ideas
of influence and persuasion so on I
think big picture we all appreciate the
idea of needing to influence people
right so you know many of you guys may
be very senior in your organizations and
yes it may be the case that you can go
around just telling people to do
something but as you may well experience
telling somebody to do something might
result in them just kind of complying
with what it is that you want them to do
which is all fine and good but it
doesn't necessarily result in them being
committed to what it is that you're
thinking about wanting them to do and
the course of action that you're
pursuing um and as a result of that
these ideas around influence and
persuasion are really really key because
they move beyond getting somebody to
just simply comply with what it is that
you're requesting to actually being
truly committed to the course that
you're setting for them such that when
you're not in the room when you're away
at LBS attending a course or at a
meeting in a different organization
these individuals are still doing the
things that you want them to do and that
in some sense is a big reason
we have these ideas and want to think
about these ideas of influence and
frustration and as I said there's a very
very large area of research around this
and I want to share with you just six
basic principles around how it is that
we interact with people right so this
work is really being influenced by a guy
called Robert Cialdini he's a social
psychologist and he he came up with
these ideas these six principles and
thinks of them as a sort of like
interpersonal principles of influence
and that's kind of what I'm gonna be
doing this morning sharing these ideas
with you so if we start off just kind of
at the top and work our way down if we
think about the idea of reciprocity
reciprocity is this very very powerful
sense of that when I do somebody a favor
they feel a compunction to do a favor
back for me in return I'm sure that you
can think of many many instances in your
own lives when when you're trying to get
somebody to do something rather than
just making request after request after
request it may actually be easier to do
them a little favor first
and then all of a sudden they're
actually much more likely to do
something back for you in return right
so in negotiations we know this very
very well that if for instance we want
the other side to share information
about their priorities actually a really
really good way of trying to start that
process is to share a little bit of
information with them when we do that
that kick starts this process of
reciprocity and then hopefully and
usually people then feel a of a duty to
respond in kind and give you some
information back in return on I have
this thing here on anybody know what I'm
talking about what this is it's very
popular in the US so these are like
mailing labels so return address labels
and I don't know how many of you guys
have experienced this but sometimes
charities will send these out so the
gentleman is at the back is nodding so
tell me a little bit about this
in the US that yeah Ennis I mean this is
exactly they're trying to work on this
principle reciprocity okay um did you
ever donate out of curiosity yes okay um
so so you're more generous than I was I
was when I was in the u.s. I was always
a starving student so I would get these
in the mail and starving student as my
excuse I never I never donated but this
is the principle that they're working on
right so they're printing out these
return address little stickers and and
obviously this is incredibly cheap for
them to do you can only imagine that all
they need is a color printer they need
to have bought some stickers from from
Office Depot and then they're printing
them out on mass and then they send it
to you and now you'll receive this thing
and oh my goodness it's a personalized
gift how thoughtful of them and then
they kick in this idea of reciprocity
and now you feel a slight need to do
them a favor in return
ah there are many other examples of this
so you know this is a decide of like is
it really a free gift in the mail I
mentioned this idea of reciprocity
negotiations right giving some
information to get information but I'll
give you another example so this is a
study that was done some years back and
then we're trying to figure out how to
get people to respond to surveys so I
don't know how many of you guys I have
to do customer surveys or even in-house
service when you're trying to get your
employees to respond to you but this is
an interesting one so this company was
interested in trying to understand it's
not this company sorry these bunch of
researchers were interested in trying to
understand how to get people to respond
to surveys so what did they do
they had two groups of people and one
group of people they sent out this
survey and they said hey we'd like for
you to complete the survey is really
important for us you're all part of this
organization we want feedback from you
and if you complete the survey and send
it back to us we will send you a check
for $25 okay
I mean $25 is it's not a small amount of
money it's a decent amount of money
you know I could get a very nice lunch
or simple dinner for that okay I can I
can work with that and then in the other
condition what they did was they send
out the survey and they said hey we
really really like for people to
complete the survey here's a five-dollar
track it's yours to keep whether you
complete the survey or not but we really
like for you to complete the survey
people were much more likely to complete
and return the survey in this condition
now
Synnex in the room are probably going
hang on a second I've just sent out like
a lot of five-dollar tracks am i in a
lot of trouble now interestingly no
people in this condition tended to be
honest they tended not to cash the check
unless they actually completed the
survey so this idea of reciprocity was
one more effective and to more cost
efficient then this idea of hey you do
something for me then I do something
back for you in return right so this
idea of reciprocity is quite powerful
any ideas that you guys can think of
around reciprocity ideas or how you've
seen it play out in your lives or in
your organizational lives
if you get promoted sometimes in some
situations it may be that you've had
this credit of trust from your boss or
whatever yeah no I can see that right so
interestingly enough you've done the
work to get the promotion but even then
they're giving you this promotion and
now there's this sense that oh my
goodness I really really need to do good
by them for giving for putting their
trust in me okay thank you anything else
that you guys can think of any other
examples that you can think of I'll give
you a funny example but this also gets a
little bit at how as we start thinking
about how to use influence it's also I
think interesting to think about how it
is that we make sure that it's not being
used against us okay so this one's a
funny example that puts those two two
ideas together on I'm Singaporean
originally I know that my accent is now
completely muddled I lived in the US for
a long time I lived here for a long time
I don't know what I sound like now but
in sample one of the things that we
celebrate is Chinese New Year and during
Chinese New Year and this is a very
Singaporean custom it's not even an s
necessarily a chore broadly Chinese
custom but in Singapore when you
celebrate Chinese New Year you go visit
all your friends and family which is the
same across China but the unique thing
in Singapore is that when you do this
you bring two mandarin oranges to your
host home okay and it's two mandarin
oranges because the word for mandarin
oranges are in in Chinese sounds like
gold sounds like fortune so in a very
Chinese way they're playing on this
linguistic thing to say I'm bringing you
fortune okay so what happens is that you
go to your host home you bring to our
and just for with you you give them to
them and they now immediately feel the
need to do you a favor back in return so
what do they do
they go to their kitchen put those two
oranges down take two oranges and give
them back to you so
you started with two oranges now you
know five minutes later you you're back
with two oranges so then you repeat this
process as you visit the houses right so
you visit the next house hey you still
have two oranges so you give it to your
new host your new host gives you new
oranges back in return you still have
two oranges so you keep doing this
process of giving favors and then
reciprocating such that at the end of
the day you still have two oranges you
started in with two oranges and the end
of it might not be the same two oranges
but you still have two oranges and it
really is this a very ritualized version
of this reciprocity process okay but
it's also how it is that people are
trying to now out the effects right so
if people are trying to do your
favorites and curry favor with you
this is this is an instance of how it is
that you defuse these reciprocity
influence tactics can you guys think of
how else you might you know try and
diffuse these tactics if they're being
used against you Cole thank you so so so
so okay for those who are not in on the
on the details to tell me a little bit
about okay okay
that she's bringing Olimpico okay I
think it's called first I see okay
okay good good evolution of a tradition
okay other ideas of how you can see this
sort of like if somebody is trying to
use this influence tactic against you
how you would try and now also these
sorts of reciprocity influence tactics
mm-hmm so you could you could pay for
you could just decline to accept it but
my guess is that in an organizational
situation well in most situations that
could come across as kind of rude right
so yes you can try that okay but be
careful that you don't offend your your
your counterpart other things that you
could do absolutely right so there's
just a sense of tit for tat you know
down the line I remember it's my turn to
pay for lunch or dinner or whatever or
drinks yeah
somebody had a yes yeah yeah so exactly
right okay yes aye aye I don't dispute
this so in some sense as we go through
all these different types of influence
tactics that is the the advice that will
be consistent for many of them but I'm
gonna present to you some research that
basically says you know what sometimes
that doesn't work as well as we'd like
to think that it would and in that
regard it's therefore even better to
have other ways of tackling them my
guess is that for instance within an
organizational setting many many many of
you guys will have rules within your
organisation set that say I can accept
this gift but not this gift a certain
value of gifts or there's certain things
that I can't do these organizational
boundaries are there in some sense
because sometimes just uh saying I
understand what they're doing and I'm
not gonna fall prey to it is not
necessarily sufficient yeah so some
things that we can do as I said you
could try and reject the gift but it
could be it's not necessarily easy it
could be seen as impolite we could be
exactly this right accept the gift but
kind of be wary of what's going on and
again that can't work don't get me I'm
not trying to say that it won't work but
I'm just saying that it's not as easy as
it might sometimes be and uh that
whatever this happens to me I I
generally like to have a ready excuse
you know somebody want I go into a shop
and try and buy
I'm trying to buy something and they
offer me a coffee or whatever it might
be
thanks I just had breakfast I don't need
anything right now that doesn't
necessarily stop them from still trying
to really like foist and stuff on me but
at least if I have a ready excuse that
potentially helps me to overcome their
their influence tactics that's
reciprocity let me give you some other
ideas to think about um another tactic
that she'll Dini talks about is this
idea of commitment and consistency and
the idea of commitment and consistency
is that once we make a decision and we
head down a particular path of action we
feel the need to be consistent with that
course of action and this can happen
even if we get negative feedback about
our actions and is particularly
effective if the commitments are done
sort of like in a very active public way
right you can imagine right so if you
stand up and immediately start saying
things about you know I am going to you
know New Year's is coming and I'm going
to make a resolution to start going to
the gym if you make that sort of like
public commitment it becomes much more
effective in ensuring that you become
consistent with that course of action
down the road so I have another example
a bumper sticker right so not as common
here again but again this is potentially
a bit of a u.s. example but when I was
in the US I remember seeing bumper
stickers for every which cause that was
out there but beyond that for children's
schools right always like proud parent
of you know whatever whatever school why
do people do that why why are these you
know bumper stickers so prevalent and
then come election time also very very
prevalent why are they out there
okay and then what happens when that
brand comes knocking on your door for
for money or current you know or your
time commitments or something like that
you've defined this is exactly you're
exactly right right you're spot-on
you've defined yourself as that is part
of your brand so when that brand comes
saying I need your help
in terms of time whether it's for your
children's school or money for saving
the whales or whatever it might be
you're much much more likely to do that
right another example and this one is I
like this example because it really kind
of combines these different a couple of
these different influence tactics and
one of the things to think about if
you're trying to go around influencing
and persuading other people is that if
you can tap into multiple of these
principles
whatever you're doing becomes ever more
powerful because it fundamentally means
that it's leveraging off of different
psychological ideas simultaneously okay
so example how many of you guys have
been let's say on the plane and you're
reading some sort of magazine and you
see in the magazine this little tear off
thing that says you can get three weeks
or three issues or free of this magazine
and then after that you know you have to
stop paying how many of you guys have
seen that yeah how many of you guys have
signed up for that okay and tell me a
little bit about you did remember
counsel well done you so how or why did
you remember to cancel but that's this
to large extent is this idea of like
commitment and consistency but there's
also reciprocity going back to what we
just talked about right they're giving
you three free issues or whatever it
might be and then there is also the hope
that hey I'm reading this I'm reading
you know whether it's National
Geographic or The Economist or whatever
it might be and especially come on let's
say the Economist okay I'm reading it
now Wow
I'm feeling so smart for reading The
Economist okay and and you know what you
know what I want to be that smart person
who reads The Economist so when it comes
time to renew my subscription sorry to
actually stop pay
for my subscription I'm quite likely to
do it because I've coded myself as a
person who reads The Economist but
honestly speaking I don't know about you
guys but the Economist is like comes out
what once a week it takes me a month to
read each issue right so there's just
like giant backlog of economists sitting
on my desk and I'm still shelling out
money because I've coded myself as
somebody who reads The Economist other
examples that I have for you for the SIA
T of commitment and consistency so we
talked about bumper stickers petitions
are very similar in nature has anybody
heard of the foot in door technique I I
hear laughter so I'm hoping there with
our with our new guest who's just joined
us feel comfortable sharing a little bit
with no no no sorry I'm putting you on
the spot but you were laughing so do you
want to tell us a little bit about this
foot in door technique make sure you're
on the inside before they people know
actually what you're talking about
kind of yeah anybody else familiar with
this tack tactic you're selling brushes
yes yeah
housewife obviously they do that by
saying yeah so thank you that that's
pretty much this idea that it came about
when people used to go door-to-door
selling stuff whether it's brushless or
whatever it might be and the idea is
simply that hey if I can get my foot in
I can get the rest of myself through the
door okay because once you've committed
to letting me just you know get in a
little bit I can open that door further
there was a study done in and this is an
old study but it's a beautiful study
done in the 1960s to examine this wooden
door technique and I have to tell you
about it because it's really um it's
kind of amazing so this was done in
California and they were interested in
getting people to put a big ugly sign
saying drive carefully on on these
people's front gardens okay um and they
were kind of curious about how to get
people to comply with this request and
so in one condition they knocked on a
bunch of doors in a neighborhood and
said hi we're very interested in people
driving carefully in your neighborhood
would you be willing to put this big
sign which was very very ugly on your
front garden people looked at the sign
and so we're like
not so much okay 17% of the people here
said that they were willing to put this
big ugly sign on their front Gardens the
other condition they knocked on the door
and said hi we're very interested in
people driving carefully in your
neighborhood would you be willing to put
this little sticker sing drive carefully
on your window everybody said yes I mean
this is a neighborhood people had
children they wanted people to drive
carefully so absolutely everybody said
yes two weeks later knock knock knock
what do you be willing to put this big
ugly sign saying
drive carefully on your front lawn 76%
of the people said yes right verses 17
from the other condition so think about
a time when if you're trying to get
somebody to do something for you and
their initial response is no no no think
about whether you can make a smaller ask
initially because that may be the way to
try and get them to do the big off later
on this is this idea of commitment and
consistency how do we prevent from well
I'll give you one my idea the there's a
very very powerful area of literature
that talks about something called
escalation of commitment
okay escalation of commitment refers to
a phenomenon where if people make
investments are typically money but also
time or energy in a particular cause of
action and then they get negative
feedback people typically feel people
typically reinvest in this failing cause
of action because they feel the need to
be consistent with their initial choice
right so from an economic standpoint
this is considered irrational it's
considered throwing good money after bad
you're supposed to ignore some costs and
people are honoring some cost and this
escalation phenomenon has been used to
explain anything ranging from R&D
investments to commitment to personnel
right so you hire somebody there
not working out quite right well we
could ask them to exit or we could give
them more training well let's give them
more training and more training and more
training even though maybe we should be
thinking about exiting them gracefully
it's been used to explain the Vietnam
War it's been used to explain even
things like the amount of time that
basketball players have on court
so these analyses try to control for how
much how good these players were but
even then if these people these
basketball players were recruited with a
big lump sum of money they ended up
having more more playing time on the
court understanding all of this how do
we try and prevent some of these things
from happening how do we ensure that the
decisions that we're making are good
decisions and not bias by these initial
commitments that we make
agree so being very concrete and
objective in your data I will say that
research has found that the way that we
look at the data becomes bias to because
of this right so I hear you and I agree
with that the stop-loss is like this
bottom line this reservation prices
reminder that I need to stop which I
also agree with so this is very
difficult to prevent and you need to try
many things so these are good but may
not be sufficient all the things that we
can do very good idea right so what's
happening is that if I make the initial
choice to invest resources in the course
of action I'm the one who feels as
though I need to be consistent but if I
have a neutral third party make the
reinvestment decision so a colleague who
can help me with my thinking help me
analyze the data that can be very
helpful because this colleague is not
burdened by the same need to be commit
to be consistent with initial
commitments other things that you can
think about this is one of those where
we say ignore sunk cost right so this
gentleman was very very rational and say
well we need to kind of understand that
these things are happening to us and we
just need to say no and my dissertation
for many many many years ago was looking
at exactly this idea when it comes to
these sunk costs can we just say you
know what we just need to ignore them we
just need to understand that they're
there and ignore them the problem is
that we don't go around saying ooh let
me look out for sunk costs ooh let me
beware of sunk costs and then the next
thing you know the sunk costs hit you
and then you feel this this this need to
be consistent this is why these
principles are as potentially tricky as
they are yeah so some idea is there let
me give you more things to think about
so we talked about reciprocity we talked
about commitment and consistency there's
this idea of social proof which is this
notion that when the course of action is
Caesar
what was interesting as I'm coming you
know this is this is this is something
that happens in the collaboration and
actually you can I can see when she sits
something out loud I'm like yeah that's
gonna be as a public commitment he's
gonna kind of reinforce her so they're
there any tips for us so so without
asking for more specifics which I'm not
sure I can deal with um I would say that
you want to try and find an a graceful
exit right so so a graceful exit a
graceful way to back out from that
commitment but the other thing too is to
find an alternative so a lot of these
types of commitment and consistency
things it be in your head it becomes go
no-go it becomes invest not invest it
becomes let the person in don't let the
person in but if we can think of an
alternative path and also another
acceptable path then all of a sudden the
thinking becomes different and it's not
so binary it's not so oh my god I have
to do this to be consistent there's wait
hang on second maybe there's this
alternative thing that I can do instead
so without the gory details those are my
suggestions yes yes yes in a face-saving
manner yeah for you as well probably
yeah okay so so so proof social proof is
saying that when the course of action is
not completely clear we very often look
to other people around us as to what it
is to that we should do and we follow
them right we're much more likely to
follow people who are like us who are in
close proximity to us and this can
result in a lot of
interesting things so I I had the the
difficulty with doing these sessions is
that I have so many examples to share
with you and I'm like picking and
choosing amongst my kids but this one I
have to choose so laughs tracks do we
know what those are the canned laughter
right so and a lot of TV shows a lot of
these sitcoms says this canned laughter
in the background who here finds it
annoying yeah okay
but why do sitcoms wider the studio's do
this because it works and it's
particularly effective if the show is
ambiguously funny if somebody else is
laughing you find that funny too so it's
just something to keep in mind how do we
get somebody to do something well tell
them everybody else is doing it and we
see this happening a lot of times right
it's like this happens with trends it
happens with a lot when in marketing
where they try and say look everybody
likes this and when that happens since
the senses oh I must like it too within
a more business example and the source
of social proof ideas have a lot to do
with both actions and themselves so if
somebody's bidding right you're not very
sure whether this has value or not if
somebody's bidding okay you bid too but
then that as a result of that they have
it has implications for things like M&A
so my husband's a banker and what do
they try and do if you can get one
interested party to interest the party
you're done there will now be a whole
slew of people who are interested in
buying this company because these ideas
of social proof kick in please
I'm afraid somebody else you're trying
to get me social proof to say exactly
exactly
yes absolutely right and and then very
often too it goes beyond social proof
but we pair it with this idea of we pick
the people who whose quotes we use right
it may be a celebrity or somebody very
cool because we want to be like these
people so it's again pairing different
types of influence tactics together but
absolutely yeah the best thing to do is
just talk to each of them before their
meeting yeah
and present the new idea to each of them
yeah them to think that idea is great
yeah presented as new
yeah old meeting yeah there's more
chance that's going to be accepted yeah
and so so so thank you for this and but
it's it's not just I mean I know that it
may be particularly relevant in a in a
Japanese culture but it's true the world
over right if you're trying to sell an
idea trying to sell it first time in
front of a big group it's not
necessarily the easiest thing to do
whereas if we can get a bunch of people
off line to buy into your idea then to
hopefully publicly support one or two of
them to publicly support you in the big
room you're much more likely to get a
momentum of people who are who are
voting in your favor again bringing
things like brexit where it becomes
pertinent um how do we prevent some of
these things from affecting us
unfortunately the research doesn't
necessarily have great ideas here so we
just have to kind of say looking cut you
need to understand your motivations for
doing something don't just follow the
crowd right and I write I say this for
those of you guys who have kids I mean
this is really particularly pertinent
right so kids just kind of follow fads
and trends and and and you're trying to
give them to be individuals and to
understand what's going on this is
consistent with some of these ideas
this one's easy to understand but really
really powerful we like to say people
who we like to say
yes to people whom we like which means
that we want to be likeable in some
sense and what makes us likeable well if
there's a lot of research to show that
people who are physically attractive are
more likeable people who are similar to
us are more likeable so if somebody
comes from the same town same city same
country as you more likeable if somebody
has the same name as you research has
shown that even if you just tell them
same name all of us you don't know
anything else you're more likely to
trust them okay for I don't know why but
there you go we like that we like our
name so we like other people who have
the same names as us people who
compliment us people who are associated
with positive things I'll give you some
funny examples who are these guys Arnel
I'll be back who's the other guy
some what some other know Cruz
Bustamante okay now you might remember
that our our I'll be the terminator
became the Governor of California right
this happened during the this recall
elections and the other there were a lot
of people who ran for these recall
elections but the the other big
contender was this guy Cruz Bustamante
now Cruz Bustamante as it turns out was
extremely qualified for the position he
was the Lieutenant Governor he'd been a
public servant for many many years in
fact up until that time he was like of a
highest-ranking Latino in public office
okay but he didn't win the elections the
famous Hollywood star won the elections
right I mean and this goes towards this
idea of liking especially in especially
since the vote was happening in
California I mean this is a Hollywood
wall people know him people I mean like
him he represents all these cool things
he's married into the Kennedy family or
was at that time was okay and then
things happened on another example some
of you guys might be aware
this in the presidential elections in
the US the taller of the two candidates
tends to win the electoral vote it's a
little bit nastier with the with the
other vote but we like tall apparently
or tall symbolizes I don't know power or
authority or something and we tend to
vote in the person who is tall which is
really bizarre right I mean it's like
what if somebody is height and I feel
bad for myself have anything to do with
somebody's ability to be president not a
whole lot and yet the taller candidate
tends to win the US presidential
election now some of you guys then are
thinking of world leaders who may not be
as tall Sarkozy comes to mind or you
know when he was in power and I don't
know how much how much you know about
Sarkozy but one he first of all he was
quite short but he tried really really
hard to make himself tall okay so there
are pictures and you google it you'll
see it there are images of him standing
on on boxes in front of podiums right so
if there's like a lectern and a mic and
everything he's standing on a box yeah
there are press conferences of him in
like some sort of like company like
opening a new factory or something like
that and the the the the story goes they
called around the entire organization
looking for the shortest members of the
organization to be in the photo shoot
with him so that he wouldn't appear
quite so short right so there is the
sense that I want to seem tall and being
tall conveys good things that people
like bizarrely enough
so yeah I don't know whether he had
heels shoes but yes I mean here again
notoriously short right um I was just
about to say Kim jong-il Yi there are
pictures of him with with these like
lifts in his shoes but it's to try and
appear tall thoughts questions examples
so very good question right so at least
with regards to these data it's I mean
except for the last elections is always
with men between men so we don't know
and then the comment in the caveat that
I often give especially with these data
is who knows nowadays because it's
becoming more complex with gender coming
to play with race coming into play that
said a big picture there's generally a
big main effect where and this is very
unfortunate and a whole different story
men are generally perceived as more
competent so it is going to be like for
like but there's also us just a sense
that men are more competent than women
which I beg to differ on but several
story going to share with you two other
principles the second last one is
Authority we tend to say yes to people
who are in positions of authority or
seem like they're in positions of
authority
okay so studies have been done and is
really scary where somebody dresses up
like a doctor so they put on a lab coat
they put on Scrubs they have a set of
scope and then they'll go into a
hospital they'll find a nurse and start
giving random instructions to the nurse
on how to take care of patients and the
nurses very often say yes and follow
through with the instructions
obviously they stop the nurse before bad
things happen but the idea is this
person's seam is like an authoritative
figure and therefore people say yes to
what they're saying or what they're
asking for same things
opens with regards to a lot of these
when people start investigating what's
happened with airplane accidents on very
often it has to do with the dynamics
between the copilot and the pilot right
so you guys may remember some years
maybe five years ago there was the plane
that I was I think was a Korean Airlines
plane that landed in San Francisco and
thankfully people were generally not
hurt there were not that many fatalities
and the plane managed to land fairly
safely and what happened is that they
they found out that the Sun was in the
the pilots eyes but the copilot didn't
want to put down any sort of shades or
wear sunglasses because he thought that
that might be disrespectful to the pilot
and as a result of that these sort of
like crazy things happen now I put out
these examples and we especially for you
guys I think is useful to think about it
from two ways one is huh how can I get
people to do the things that I want them
to do okay but simultaneously I think
it's important to realize especially
with with with people who have a lot of
a seniority and manage other individuals
your own seniority your own authority
could be suppressing your employees
abilities to think creatively to voice
their opinions because they're just kind
of concerned hang on I better not speak
up against my superior against my boss
right so we want to think about it from
there two ways um example that I have to
mention when it comes to Authority
anybody heard of the Milgram experiments
okay this is a good one oh I actually do
have a little bit of a picture for you
okay so what happened in the 1950s and
1960s a guy by the name of Stanley
Milgram wanted to try and understand why
the atrocities of World War two happened
and one school of thought was look
they're just some people who are bad and
they're bad and that's what it is okay
they're bad apples and that's there's
nothing we can do about it there's
another school of thought that said hang
on a second there was something about
the city
situation that made really good people
do some really bad things and stanley
milgram was of that opinion so what did
he do he ran a study in New Haven Yale
and where he brought in a bunch of
people off of the street to be teachers
okay
and they were supposed to teach a
student who is this guy who's actually
working in collaboration with
experimenter and the this participant
was told look you're the teacher that
person's a student okay and every time
the student gets the answer wrong you
need to give them an electric shock okay
and the this student as you can see was
hooked up to a bunch of wires and then
the the teacher had control of a big box
that had a bunch of flipchart one that
had a bunch of levers on it from 15
volts going all the way to 450 volts
okay now they asked a few psychiatrist
beforehand so what percentage of the
people do you think would go all the way
and the psychiatrist said no no no no
very few very few okay people are good
it's only the nutty people the
psychotics the sociopaths who are gonna
do that so what's the percentage of
Psychopaths and sociopaths 1 to 2% of
the population
those are the only people who are going
to go all the way to 450 volts what
percentage of the people do you think
went all the way to 450 volts very close
to thirds 2/3 of the people went all the
way to 450 volts when the student who
was not very good at learning got the
questions wrong again and again this
person just kept on pressing these
levers from 15 volts up up up up up up
up up up they didn't stop when the
student was screaming in pain faking it
they didn't stop when the student
shouted that he had heart condition
they didn't stop when the student
fainted dead away right they just kept
on going why did they do that because
this guy who was the experimenter was
standing there in his white lab coat
with a clipboard there and he never held
a gun to the guy's head and said you
have to go nothing like that but just
prompts along the lines of the the the
the experiment requires you to continue
please continue right so they were lots
of there were verbal prompts but it was
never anything physical that said you
have to do this now
these um participants they were stressed
out beyond their minds they were
sweating profusely they were shaking
they were traumatized from doing it but
they still did it this is the power of
authority I will give you one thing to
think about though keeping in mind the
idea of commitment and consistency
imagine if the study had started off
here my guess is that you would have a
very different result you probably
wouldn't have had two-thirds of the
people giving him a 450 volts of shock
which by the way was also marked with
xxx so again combining different types
of principles can be very very powerful
I have just a few minutes left with you
so I want to give you this last idea to
think about and hopefully that's
enticing ideas which is that when
something is limited we want it more and
that limited can be limited in time
limited in number it's particularly
valuable if it's just limited and and
you'll if you think about it now almost
all these sort of like places online
where you can buy tickets do that right
and even Amazon does that when it's just
a few more they'll tell you three more
like by now right or for airline tickets
you know four more seats at this price
it's trying to tap into this principle
of scarcity getting you to say get the
sense of I need to get in on this action
now before that opportunity goes away
auction fever which I study a lot is the
perfect sort of combination of this
there's scarcity because in auctions is
typically one unique item there's time
pressure because you have to bid very
quickly on the item goes away and then
there's competition with other people
right so this competition increases the
sense of the scarcity of the item so all
of that makes it really seemed as though
this item is really really scarce in
general we really need to be where this
adrenaline rush especially in a sort of
like auction type setting take a break
think carefully confer with your
colleagues but fundamentally understand
your motivations for buying something or
doing something is it just because it's
very very rare and very scarce or is it
because you really wants it now I bring
this up example give you just a second
and to something I hadn't realized that
how perfect the timing for this is but
even I mean the Black Friday sales which
are on right now in the UK and then
they'll start in the u.s. properly
tomorrow it's all about this idea here
yeah please
so they're actually not the buyer
themselves yeah
and you give them obviously target price
restrictions around what they do today
also they might they might because at
the end of the day if they're watching
all of I mean first of all in theory
you're asking a professional to do it so
one might hope that they're there for a
little bit
yes yes that I have not no I have not to
see how an agent would do in this
situation but your example is
interesting because when I said
professional then I'm saying okay they
know something when auctions they know
how to do all this and in theory there
should be better off then you asked me
specifically then I'm gonna be obnoxious
to say well I know about scarcity I know
how to like guard again so in theory if
you train somebody then you're better
off so but you could train yourself you
can train an agent does that answer your
question
yes understood so that's a very good and
important distinction right you're
basically pointing out the fact that
there are different psychological
motivations for you as the buyer versus
an agent as a buyer and for both parties
there are things that will motivate them
to keep going but different types of
things that will keep them going so for
each of the parties you need to be
careful of of what the bottom line is
but you need to put in place different
safeguards to ensure that they're not
taken over by auction fever
if you ask someone to go to the auction
for you if you tell them up front that
you want that item
you know they will feel kind of
compelled and they will feel this
implicit liability towards you that if
they miss out on that item and someone
takes a problem it's an issue because
you employ them to get that for you so I
suppose if you don't tell them what the
outcomes you want is then probably you
can eliminate well I mean I think it
goes back to something that we've said
before right have very clear bottom
lines right so that will prevent you
from getting a bad deal but it may not
help you to get a good deal yeah I saw a
hand up yes please
that's a lovely example thank you yeah
yeah yeah it taps into all these
principles which is why it becomes very
powerful when you're using all of these
different principles simultaneously I'm
at time but can I please give you my
favorite example diamonds so pretty
yeah timeless classics Beauty fire love
brilliance women tend to like them what
do we know about diamonds scarce
are they really scarce tell me more
control
[Music]
married engagement rings we're not
something nineteen twenties thirties
when I think was to this young men get
married buy an engagement ring when is
one month I'll be honest at this law
revenue ticked up very nicely
they thought we're all something yet nor
six that's not some campaign it's
brilliant though okay
I mean it is genius so that's exactly it
okay so I mean look time is there are
tons of diamonds in this world they're
just loads and loads of diamond in the
world but De Beers holes control the
support of the supply of diamonds it
limits the supply it makes it to be a
perceived value combined with some
clever marketing and biggity bam-boom we
really really want them now I have to
say this because it's important we're
looking at the women in the room going
oh yeah we want these diamonds but you
guys have the things that you want to
okay I don't know whether it's the
iPhone or the watch or the stereo or the
gadget or the limited edition print or
whatever it is but you guys women and
men have things that they covet because
of scarcity yeah let me just end with
this final idea here when we think about
influence and persuasion I've talked a
lot about these ideas there are other
things that folk that fall into how it
is that we can influence and persuade
people the bottom line if you don't
remember anything else remember this you
guys have been trained to strategically
and think about the content of your
message yes the content of your message
is important but when you're trying to
influence and persuade somebody think
also about how you're creating that
relationship how you're framing the
information that you're conveying
because that has a huge impact on how it
is that you influence and persuade
people I'll stop I'm happy to take
questions or thoughts but I know that
I'm also over time
I think that works from company to
person perspective if you're doing and
if you're the one who's doing ago she
ate you and you're going to someone to
say yeah they might get caught on the
consistency but it's in there in danger
that they'll think actually already done
you a favor
right but the way that I'd actually
think about doing it is if you're trying
to get in with a company it's hey can I
have a meeting with you to have a chat
about something can I buy you a cup of
coffee right and then from that coffee
it's the biggest sale after that so it
doesn't yes they've given you their time
but you've bought them coffee right yes
yes
please
yeah I guess I what I'm just trying to
choose to summarize this idea that the
ideas of influence and persuasion are
all of this stuff is not necessarily
around what you're saying so think about
politicians okay and these like type
things that we're talking about are the
attractiveness things about it's not
that the their actual political
positions that they're conveying yeah
okay there's something there but people
are being persuaded by other things like
their attractiveness their height so
that's what I'm trying to convey to you
that that the message is important and
the message is particularly important if
people are motivated to listen to you
and have the cognitive resources to
listen to what you have to say but
especially if they don't have cognitive
and motivation resources there you want
to focus on how you're getting to them
buying them a coffee asking for a little
bit of time and then asking for more
time doing them a favor those kinds of
things and you can question about some
of the actions off to us well the trap
comes across as a big some small uncouth
people don't listen to them exactly
right so there's a message component but
there's also how you're delivering it
absolutely let me stop thank you guys
very much for your your time and I hope
you have an interesting rest of your day
[Applause]
you

---

### Six must-have strategies for negotiating | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI2VBvAiZ_M

Idioma: en

whether you're in the boardroom or
discussing things with your employees
one of the things that we know about
negotiations is that you really need to
be able to influence and persuade other
people in my session I'll be talking
about six must-have strategies that you
want to be thinking about during any
discussion so that you can focus beyond
what it is that you're saying to how it
is that you're saying it

---

### A view into what psychological literature says on debiasing judgements and decision making | LBS
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXx8obhvrCs

Idioma: en

good morning so what I'm going to talk
about this morning for about 20 minutes
is is a short and really idiosyncratic
summary of of the efforts that
psychologists have made in attempting to
D bias individuals so I was just sitting
outside when when the last question -
Nick was about D biasing and and the
possibility that human beings are going
to to operate in a in a slightly less
biased fashion than than they have in
the past and so that's that's something
that that I'm going to be addressing and
just tell you what the state of the
literature is about that eventualities
so let me just begin by by saying by
noting that the literature on biases is
his large okay it's it's it's huge you
can just go and you can open up any kind
of a web page and type in into Google a
behavioral biases and you'll probably
get hundreds of them and maybe even
there is a bias that's that people are
just discovering as we're speaking so
this is what psychologists do the
literature on D biasing on the other
hand is is is fairly small you know it's
so you have like the literature on
biases you have the literature or D
biasing and it's very small there are
many reasons for it the first quite
frankly it's it's more fun discovering
biases than attempting to to D bias
people you know so and psychologists
like having fun so that's that's part
and parcel of the way that the the field
has progressed but more seriously in the
last about thirty odd years there has
been there has been an assumption which
began with the early kind of efforts at
D biasing where people looked at at many
kind of like ways of D biasing and
concluded that D biasing was really hard
was really difficult and was context
specific and bias specific so what do I
mean by that there are many many biases
as I noted and
if any kind of a fix for a bias was only
a fix for that bias and not for anything
else you can imagine the cost of
attempting to train people out of all of
the different biases that are out there
which is why I like you know at some
point in time people said okay let's not
focus too much on the D biasing itself
okay so that's part of like the serious
kind of a response for what what's
taking place there
so in today's talk I'm just going to
give you a short history of these D
biasing kind of efforts and I'm also
going to like come to two to modern
approaches that are a little bit more
promising than what what had happened in
the past okay so so let me begin by just
putting down a few kind of assumptions
here okay a few kind of notes here the
field if you're thinking if you just
look at the field off of D biasing it
broadly constructed there are four
different aspects to it okay and I'm
speaking as as someone who's surveying
the psychological literature on it okay
so this is and a lot of the
psychological literature literature is
in the field of of medical decision
making and D biasing doctors and D
biasing patients so a lot of the
literature is there much less so in in
the in the financial space so broadly
speaking there are four different ways
in which we can think about and we can
construct our D biasing the first is is
this notion of incentives
okay so broadly constructed so I've
added the note of accountability there
because incentives are not we're not
just talking about monetary incentives
but we're also talking about people
managers leaders policymakers and so on
who are accountable for the different
kind of decisions that they're making
and for the judgments that they're
making and there was a notion that if
you incentivize people appropriately and
if you hold them accountable for
processes and outcomes then maybe that's
one way in which we can devise them and
we can get decisions which we Ted which
tend to be a little closer to the
normative event benchmark a second kind
of a way in which people were thinking
about it is
training and education and we look at it
and for those of us who are in education
the punch line really is that that
education is not that helpful in D
biasing okay so so it's it's it's
sobering for those was for in this field
and then we look at at the two new
approaches one which is much much more
famous you know so this is there was a
book which which came out which captured
a lot of what was going on the book is
nudge and you probably have read the
book you've read books related to nudge
which was choice architecture so we take
Pisces as a given and how do we design
systems and how do we design like you
know decision kind of tasks so that we
work with the biased individual and we
try to move them towards making the
right decisions despite some kind of
cognitive deficits and the final one
which which which doesn't get a lot of
attention but I hope it does is what
what we will refer to and we call the
frugal heuristics kind of an approach I
talk about each one of them in in turn
but I'll also map them onto something
which which is is useful a framework
which was developed in the early 1990s
and said that that it's not very helpful
for us to think about the 175 different
biases and attempt to like map them on
to particular training regimes or
particular kind of de biasing regimes so
let's think about what the underlying
psychological causes of like a class of
biases are and there are three kind of
like you know classes that that are out
there so what I'm going to do is I'm
just going to look at I'm going to map
on each one of those for D biasing
tactics that we're talking about or the
for D biasing like techniques that we
taught that that I want to talk about on
to these three different categories off
or the psychological kind of reasons why
we have these biases and tell you what
the impelling empirical literature is
going to say as I noted the literature
itself is not vast okay so when I'm
saying that I'm giving you a summary and
I am giving you a short summary but I'm
giving you a short summary of a fairly
short literature okay so this is
this this is the reality of this
literature so so let's just get some
definitions out of the way okay and I'll
try to be as as joggin free as possible
okay so I put some jargon up there but
I'll try to be as jargon free as
possible so the the there was an
influential review paper that was
written in 1991 which put put together
and said let's try to like you know look
at what the psychological causes of a
whole bunch of like the biases are and I
think it's fairly accurate despite the
fact that you know so take a bias that
Nick was talking about take bias which
we refer to as overconfidence there are
multiple determinants to overconfidence
but the most important or the one that
we would think about and we'd say of the
different kind of determinants of an
overconfidence bias we will refer to and
we will say that Association based
errors you know so classifying them as
Association based errors which is some
kind of problems in the way that that
memory accesses the different kind of
information that is there in the head
okay so we're looking at how the brain
accesses information and the
differential accessibility of that
information will probably be the most
kind of important underlying cause so
the idea that that the human the human
brain organizes information in a manner
where we're related constructs influence
one another by like you know activation
is useful for human beings because that
is how we generalize that is how we
learn you know so by by looking at and
by making the different kinds of
connections about related constructs but
it can lead to biases in the following
manner so let's just look at
overconfidence okay so just take
overconfidence overconfidence and we
will use a particular kind of like you
know definition of overconfidence
because there are different definitions
depending upon like you know the kind of
like the field of psychology you come
from there are different kinds of
definitions that are there but let's
just say that we will define the
overconfidence that we're talking about
as people making a prediction about the
state of the world and then assigning a
certain probability to
whether they think that that state of
world is right or wrong you know so just
looking at right or wrong and people
being overconfident about the
predictions that they're making which
means that they're assigning higher kind
of probabilities to the event actually
happening than what what takes place
okay so and there are ways in which you
can measure that but let's for a minute
assume that this is a real bias and then
people are have measured it accurately
so the psychological or the Association
based error the way that we would
explain that is is to say that when I'm
making a particular prediction about the
state of the world you know so I make a
particular prediction about the state of
the world then my mind starts recalling
or thinking about like related
constructs which tell me that my
prediction about the state of the world
is correct so there is a differential
accessibility about information which is
consistent with my prediction rather
than with information that is
inconsistent with my prediction
after the once I recall all of those so
whatever like kind of my first response
about my prediction that is there it
gets reinforced by the activation of all
of those related kind of constructs
which is why when you then ask me how
confident are you I have recruited so
many different reasons about why I'm
right
it ends up me giving you a probability
estimate this is a little higher than it
should be so this is like you know the
functioning of the brain and the
differential accessibility of like
information that is out there it is not
as though I cannot recall information or
I don't have information about like the
state of the world what I'm predicting
could be wrong it's just that it is not
immediately accessible when you are
asking me to make a judgement about like
you know the probability estimate so
that's what we refer to and we call
these associate Association based errors
and they refer to the way that memory is
constructed the second of the errors are
what we refer to as psychophysical
errors and and you'll recognize this you
know so this is very simple so I saw
that Nick had put up this the prospect
theory curve but also for those of you
who have been exposed to any kind of
notions of diminishing marginal utility
you kind of understand that the
translation of some kind of physical
stimuli or any of any other kind of
stimuli into a psychological response is
not linear okay so it tends to be so at
the center of any kind of a scale we
have greater sensitivity when we go
towards the extremes we have like lower
kind of sensitivity and so on so and
this is also again this is functional
this is a functional kind of a response
but it does lead to a certain kind of
errors when we disband we look at and we
think about when depending upon what
kind of a reference point that we have
chosen and depending upon like you know
whether we are viewing something as
being in the middle of the scale or
being at the edge of the scale and it
leads to like you know certain irregular
kind of preferences that we show or
preference reversals so some of those
those kind of ideas are also it's just
very simply related to the way that like
you know the brain processes physical or
other kinds of stimuli and translates
them into a into a psychological
response and the third kind of errors
are strategy based errors which you will
recognize you know to a large extent
what these are it's very simply that
because the brain prove it it uses so
much of our information we are all like
you know somewhat miserly in the way
that we use our cognitive like resources
that are out there and if there is no
strong reason for me to make the right
kind of a decision and to actually to to
do enormous kinds of calculations and
and do something out there then what I
would think about is that I would I
would look at and I would say that I
just make a heuristic or a rule of thumb
kind of a decision okay so these are the
three kind of very blah broad classes of
of psychological causes of a whole range
of biases that are there so very quickly
okay
so the first of those so as you can
imagine and despite what you've heard
psychologists are interested in money
and are interested in incentives okay so
they look at and they say is this some
way that we can D bias people by
providing them with the incentives to
get the right kind of answers in the
many laboratory studies that they do and
the answer is not really
okay so so we we look at and we say that
more often than not very highly
incentivized experiments do not result
in better kind of decision making than
those experiments that that are not
incentivized okay so providing people
with incentives it
doesn't seem to result in people making
better decisions other than on very very
very simple kind of tasks that are out
there so within the class of errors that
we're looking at it would be the the
class of errors that we would call the
strategy based errors where if people
you know so if people know the kind of
the right decision rule they are not
motivated to use the right kind of this
a decision rule giving them incentives
motivates them to do that so you can
like you know get people to make the
right kind of decisions when the biases
are fairly simple of course you know so
and one kind of a criticism about this
line of research is that you measure
them in at one point in time you give
them incentives and one point in time
but what if the incentives are like you
know in the long term so you incentivize
people in the long term people will want
to learn more skills ok so that's that's
something that that's that's not been
adequately tested within this literature
a second kind of an incentive is
accountability where once people make a
decision they are held accountable for
the decision that they've made in two
ways one they need to express the the
kind of like you know what is the
process that they've used when they're
making the decision and the second of
them is they need to for any kind of an
outcome you hold them responsible for
the consequences that follows from the
decision that's there here to the kind
of the findings are not hugely
impressive we can get rid of a class of
errors which we refer to as simple kind
of errors where people show some kind of
insensitivity to the sample size you
know so looking at and it's looking at a
small sample a large sample and they
don't differentiate between the outcomes
of one versus the other so very very
simple kind of rules with a simple like
kind of like an exposure to statistics
training then accountability or
incentives it seems to reduce those kind
of biases training okay
so training is very particular the kind
of training that we are talking about is
really is about it's not awareness you
know so simple awareness of biases is
not enough to correct any kind of like
you know the biases that people have but
telling people about the bias he is
telling that the direction in which like
you know the thought leads to a
particular kind of a bias giving people
feedback and information
which then tells you that really you
know D biasing requires an environment
that produces immediate kind of feedback
and the final one is actually helping
people have some kind of mitigation
strategies it results in some kind of D
biasing but also the D biasing that it
really tends to do is a little better
than the incentives but again it tends
to be about like you know simple kind of
strategy based errors so again it's not
these these by inner themselves I don't
want to like act as though these are
like you know trivial because simple
strategy errors also have like like
pretty important consequences so
training people to get rid of those some
of those simple errors are probably
somewhat useful in what people do but
they are not really good in reducing
some of the errors that we're talking
about which we referred to as the
psychophysical and association based
errors those of you who've read
Kahneman's book on you're not thinking
fast thinking slow you probably you know
you can map on the errors that i'm
talking about to the very useful but
somewhat controversial kind of like you
know typology that he created of system
1 versus system 2 thinking okay so both
incentives as well as training they tend
to operate and they trying to correct
for like you know wherever the errors
happen in the at the system 1 then
system 2 kicks in and it starts like
undoing some of the errors that are
created by the system 1 thinking a
particular kind of training that that is
useful is is what psychologists refer to
as as analogical training and so this
this particular training is is one where
you allow people to discover the errors
for themselves and then you are you get
them to extract the principles from the
specific errors that they are making so
once again to go back to it it's it's
environments where people can make lots
of decisions they get immediate kind of
feedback and based on the specifics they
are able to generate some kind of
principles that allows these people to
get to debase themselves in other kinds
of environments to education so there is
some evidence that says that if you are
i lee educated if your numerate there
and if you have like some kind of
coursework and statistical training then
you tend to make much less like you know
errors that are out there but the
canonical kind of an the example that I
want to give to you is that even that
tends to be very domain-specific for
example some of the most well calibrated
experts in the world believe it or not
are weather forecasters you know so
they're really really good at the jobs
that they do but you take them outside
the domain of their expertise and you
ask them to make predictions in other
kinds of domains they're just as good or
just as bad as the rest of us you know
so they have expertise they have
training so they're very good in their
domains but it turns that those are not
generalizable to other kinds of domains
so having gone through like you know
some of the bad news let me get us go
through some of the good news ok so
let's let's just look at it so there is
a literature that that's out there that
deserves a lot more attention than it is
getting today it's it's a literature
that grew out in the 1990s by and mostly
associated with a German psychologist by
the name of GERD gigerenzer and he
refers to and he calls this the fast and
frugal approach the idea is it's behind
this this kind of research is really
that that when we think about heuristic
wins when we think about rules of thumb
that people are using it doesn't always
lead to biased decisions because a lot
of times the heuristics and the rules of
thumb have like you know so evolution
has equipped us with these rules of
thumb so in a lot of different domains
and across like you know different it
generalizes across domains the use of
these like Google these kind of
heuristics it leads to good and
effective kinds of decisions the second
kind of like you know an assumption
behind this is that it's not just
evolution it's through experience also
that we can develop some of these
heuristics and what we find problematic
in the way that people make like
statistical inferences and so on it goes
away if we align the way that we present
information to people which is
consistent with the way that the brain
has trained itself or the brain has
evolved to process information so if you
like present information in that fashion
or if you can train people in that
fashion that would result in bed
of outcomes so let me just walk you
through a couple of these examples okay
so the first of them is a very famous
kind of a task it's called the Wason
selection task which was used in the
1970s to show like a particular kind of
a bias that human beings are susceptible
to it's variously referred to as the use
of something is called a congruence
heuristic it's called the confirmation
bias and so on but let me just walk you
through this okay so very simply so you
bring in people into a laboratory and
then you give them this task and you say
all that you need to answer right now is
there is a rule it says if there is a D
on one side it has three on the other
side okay so it's a very simple rule and
there are now four cards for you where
you're seeing the alphabet on one side
you're seeing the number on the other
side can you tell us which of those
cards do you need to flip over in order
to check the rule okay so and and when
been people given this and really like
you know smart undergraduate students
are given this task and you can also do
it in a classroom you can do it in lots
of different places most people get this
wrong okay so they of course they turn
card D you know to see what's behind
that they ignore card K you know because
they think that's irrelevant but they
completely they fail to turn card 7 you
know so they don't turn card 7 to look
on the other side whether there is a D
on the other side you know so they just
fail to do this and so many many kind of
like demonstrations of this however when
you give them something that is a more
sensible kind of a task okay so when you
give people a very sensible one
and when I say sensible this is like you
know to a psychologist this is sensible
it might not look sensible to you but
let me just walk you through this so
what they do is that they bring in
people into a laboratory and say let's
just assume that you're playing the role
of an immigration officer you have a
rule in your country which says that
everyone entering into your country
should have been inoculated against
cholera okay so they needed to be
inoculated against cholera so now there
is a form H which they filled in that's
out there and you're seeing four forms
that are there which of the forms will
you actually turn over you know so I go
to turn over so obviously you turn over
the card to the form that when people
are entering but here people get it
right more often than not they also
turned like
you know the last of those cards just to
turn it around and see whether when
people are entering the country they
have actually been inoculated against
cholera okay so what I want to just
point out to you is that an abstract
problem becomes solvable when you give
it in the form that people actually
consider and think about and say that
they have like reasoning kind of schemas
either through experience or through
evolution they have developed that kind
of a schema they get this problem right
another way of looking at it okay so
we're just looking at it is so we are
notoriously poor at making any kind of
so the following the Bayes rule is
something that we find incredibly
difficult okay
so just I give to you like two different
kinds of ways in which you can present
like information to people when you are
actually asking them to make a diagnosis
so oftentimes you go to a doctor you get
a diagnosis there are like you know
false positives there are false
negatives and a doctor will tell you
that if there is a positive what is the
probability that you actually have a
disease okay so this is this is the kind
of this is the nature of the problem so
the first of them is the way that you
would generally describe a problem in a
textbook is generally is what it is this
information that is presented to a
doctor the second one is breaking it
down into its natural frequencies not
talking in terms of probability it's
just talking about like you know in
10,000 cases here are the ways you know
so he's just looking at it here are the
numbers of people that will you'll have
false positives here are the numbers of
people you'll have false negatives when
you present in the form of frequency
okay people get it more right then when
you present it in the form of
probabilities okay so this is this is
again there are evolutionary reasons why
one can think that this is the case you
know so you can work down there are
evolutionary reasons that this is the
case but very simply it's the exact
problem but represent it differently
that results in people having much
better kind of like the rates of being
we are following the Bayes rule so what
this suggests is something very simple
okay so and there are these are the kind
of efforts that are out there you train
people to convert probabilities into
frequencies they tend
at that point in time to be able to
generalize beyond the domains you know
you train them in problems that are
associated with disease but then you
give them problems that are in another
domain completely but just training
people to convert probabilities into
frequencies makes it much like quicker
you know or makes it much more likely
that they get these answers right so now
I'm just giving you one kind of an
example of this but the fast and frugal
heuristics approach walks through a
whole number of ways in which we can
think about aligning the way that we
train people such that it is consistent
with our evolutionary kind of ways of
thinking the last of them is what we
refer to and we call choice architecture
is to say that you know we take by C's
as a given you know we take biases as as
a given what do we now do beyond that
you know so what do we do such that we
can use people's biased decision-making
procedures but guide them towards making
the appropriate kind of decisions the
fame is kind of an example for this or
what we will refer to and we call
defaults you know about this okay so I
just want to very quickly go over the
most famous of these examples is this
study which you know Johnson and
goldstein published about like 15 years
ago where they talked about the
different kinds of jurisdictions in
which you the people who became organ
donors where it was an opt-in system
whether he wanted to obtain to become an
old organ donor or he wanted to opt out
off like being an organ donor and you
can see there are vast vast differences
in the countries in which people needed
to obtain to be organ donors that take
up or they're like you know percentage
of people who are organ donors was very
very low the percentage of like you know
the countries in which it was opting out
into the default was that you are going
to be an organ donor and you needed to
make an effort to opt out it turned out
that those were the current countries in
in which you had like you know vast
number of organ donors so just very
quickly if you go through the last of
this so you look at this this is the way
that you know you can think of like
designing systems such that the biases
are that people will choose a default
option so why don't we make the default
option one that we would like people to
pick okay so that is the way so choice
architecture
or nudge is takes advantage of people's
biases but moves them towards the good
kind of decisions within psychology this
is a very very robust finding so it's
not just in the case of organ donors but
across like you know different domains
that like you know the choice off like
when you pick a default people likely to
end up picking that but a particular
default option is very very high but it
isn't without controversy okay so and
I'll tell you so I'm not going to show
you the slides I'll just skip over the
next two slides but it's isn't without
controversy even within the organ donor
case you might have heard that recently
when I say recently about six months ago
the Dutch parliament you know the two
different houses in the in the
Netherlands found it incredibly
difficult to make this the default to
make organ donors the opting out the
default they found it very very
difficult to do because people said had
all kinds of issues with the way that
you would design what the default would
be and also who is the person who's the
right kind of a person to do that and is
that is that paternalism in the right
kind of a fashion okay so when we are
talking about choice architecture there
are lots of controversies about who is
the policymaker do i do i do my
incentives aligned with the with the
incentives of of the policy maker so
quickly you know so what I want to just
note is this when I'm summarizing across
the literature incentives and
accountability training and education it
gets rid off they're very very simple
strategy errors that are out there the
frugal heuristics approach
addresses much much more complex and it
is it is really very promising and has
none of the controversies that are
associated with what we will refer to as
the nudge approach the nudge approach or
where we are like you know so a
policymaker designs the choice that they
present in front of people so that
people will pick the default or will
pick the option that is consistent with
the bias has its controversies but it
tends to be the most powerful way that
we can guide people towards making the
kind of decisions we want I'll stop at
that I've taken more time than I should
but we have a few few minutes for
questions
[Applause]
No
my question is if they're trying to
factor in this work you know these
findings into design for example
computers or robots to overcome the
problems you described so you're asking
is there research that is everything to
do that and you know in in the context
for example AI yes so some of the so the
Giga reigns's lab right so the the
frugal heuristics well so I'm not
talking about the first one so today
I'll take a step back the cottage
industry off of biases which looks at
heuristics and the bias is that that
follow from that is not hugely
systematic so it's all over the place in
terms of like the heuristics the and the
mapping onto specific biases the more
promising one or what we refer to as the
frugal heuristics okay so the the one
that I pointed out which if it says how
do we take the brain is prepared like
through evolution to use certain kinds
of heuristics so we learn some of these
heuristics through education some of
those heuristics are the ones that are
being used to train to train machines
you know so it was the basis of I mean
you're too young to remember but so some
of these like expert systems in the
1990s when people were talking about
expert systems but those are the ones
that they are happening and they're
happening a lot in the health field and
you tend to find like you know really
good outcomes in terms of prediction of
of things like you know from the
symptoms on to prediction about like
whether someone is actually having a
heart incident and so on they tend to be
much much more accurate than doctors
themselves so you do have some of those
that some of those that research that's
happening I want to be cautious though
you know so I mean these are early kind
of findings it isn't as though like you
know this this solves all kinds of
problems but it is it is very promising
Thank You professor you mentioned for
instance doctors or how to improve
decision-making in that in Natron but
regarding the administration of justice
which is very important issue in our
societies I'm wondering if if there is
any advance or any way to improve
decision-making of judges or lawyers or
these kind of things yeah
so so the literature on sorry so the
literature on even jury decision-making
right so there is a large literature on
on juries and the kind of like the bias
he's that they're prone to the American
Psychological Association actually does
have like a position which says that
that juries and the way that they are
currently constructed is it doesn't
result in injustice
well that literature has not had a huge
impact on policy okay so it's it's not
it's not really had that so when you're
coming to judges and maybe you're
referring to the kind of you know so
that there's this very famous paper that
was published in science which looked at
at lots of data in in Israel and looked
at the judges and said some simple very
very simple finding was that as judges
got hungrier they were making poor
decisions okay so this is and and one
would have hoped that that that would
have at least you know the fix is fairly
simple is don't have them hungry right
so one would hope that that that has
some kind of an impact but part of my
long-winded kind of a response to this
is that you know a lot of times when we
are talking about like the fixes you
know so either in the form of nudges or
in the form of like you know these
frugal heuristics we are we are walking
on uncontested philosophical terrain
where we are talking about autonomy of
actors we are talking about you know the
technical versus the political you know
so we we can think in terms of there are
like technical solutions to this problem
but the way that societies are
constructed is a lot of these changes
can only be brought about by persuasion
and by you
getting people to like you know work on
one side versus the other to think about
one side versus the other and the belief
that there is no right or wrong you know
so that that's not there so when you
when you come to come to this and and
and and justice
tends to be the most contested terrain
of all okay so because what is justice
and what is not while we might think
that there are objective right and wrong
there and I have like in an earlier life
and I will come back to this now I've
written quite a bit about like these
notions of fairness and they are very
very subjective these notions of
fairness these notions of of justice are
very very subjective so training people
there in that particular domain about
decision biases I think is a going to be
a really long way away you know so it's
not going to happen
immediately it's a really really long
way away because that that is human
beings we or our societies have
bracketed that into a domain where we
think that you know we are not talking
about technical rationality anymore we
are like discussing issues of like
politics there I'm sorry for this kind
of long-winded answer but but I think
that's part of the nudge movement is
there right now because there's a lot of
like discussion about this about the
rightness of what they're doing and the
correctness of what theater I'll stop
here I have taken up more of your time
and but I believe there's a break so
we'll make good decisions because you're
not going to be hungry after this okay
you

---

### Pandemic Lectures: Gathering the Facts | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKtWYe9DxDo

Idioma: es

Soy Paolo Surico, catedrático de Economía en la London Business School.
Con mi compañero Andrea Galeotti, hemos preparado una serie
de cuatro miniconferencias a modo de guía del usuario para el COVID-19.
Hoy, presentaré la primera parte, que trata sobre la recopilación de datos.
Voy a describir lo que haremos y lo que aprenderemos en esta conferencia.
Presentaré pruebas básicas sobre la pandemia
e intentaremos identificar factores y datos de investigaciones existentes
que se puedan haber pasado por alto.
Explicaremos qué impulsa la capacidad del sistema sanitario de un país.
Después de esta conferencia, comprenderá la composición demográfica
de los portadores y pacientes críticos.
Podrá usar una comparación entre países para evaluar las ventajas e inconvenientes de
las distintas estrategias de políticas sanitarias que se han adoptado en países de todo el mundo.
También podrá medir e identificar la capacidad del sistema sanitario de un país
y qué tipo de política puede ampliarlo.
Para empezar, resumiré brevemente las pruebas que conocemos hasta ahora.
En este gráfico, se puede ver un eje vertical con el número de casos de infectados
como una función del número de días transcurridos desde que se declaró el caso número 100.
Todos estos países se normalizaron a cero, así que se puede hacer una comparación entre países.
Esta curva indica claramente el momento
en que el número de casos tiende a incrementarse exponencialmente
en todos los países, que tarde o temprano suelen equipararse a China.
Sin embargo, hay algunas notables excepciones: Corea del Sur, Japón, Singapur y Hong Kong.
¿Por qué son distintos esos países? ¿Por qué, después del mismo número de días,
tienden a producirse muchos menos casos de infectados que en el resto de los países?
¿Podemos aprender algo de su estrategia de política sanitaria?
Por ejemplo, Corea del Sur ha implantado un programa de pruebas a gran escala.
En Japón, tienen unas normas sociales estrictas y los ciudadanos
obedecen en gran medida las indicaciones del Gobierno.
En Singapur y Hong Kong, la política de contención
(en concreto, el aislamiento y la cuarentena) se ha puesto en práctica de forma generalizada.
Otra forma de analizar las pruebas es, en lugar de observar
la curva empírica de contagio, es fijarnos en la curva empírica de mortalidad.
En el eje vertical de este gráfico, se puede ver el número de muertes
como una función del número de días desde que se declaró la muerte número 10.
De nuevo, se aprecia claramente que las curvas de los países se equiparan
con la de China y, de hecho, en el caso de Italia, en realidad la está superando.
De nuevo, Corea del Sur es un valor atípico.
Después del mismo número de días desde que se declaró la muerte número 10,
Corea del Sur tiene solo una fracción del número de muertes en comparación con Italia. ¿Por qué?
¿Qué podemos aprender de la experiencia del resto de los países?
Para empezar, analizaré el número de infectados.
En este gráfico se muestra, por cada grupo de edad de la población,
cuál es la proporción de infectados.
Corea del Sur se representa con la barra roja, mientras que Italia con la barra verde.
En esta comparación, se aprecia una clara diferencia.
Si analizamos los datos de Corea, parece que la mayoría de los infectados son jóvenes.
De hecho, un 30 % de los infectados tienen entre 20 y 30 años.
Pero solo hay un 6 % o 3 % de infectados entre 70 y 80 años.
En cambio, Italia tiene una proporción muy reducida de jóvenes infectados
y, entre la tercera edad, la proporción llega a ser de hasta del 20 %
entre personas de sesenta, setenta y ochenta años.
¿Por qué? ¿En qué datos tenemos que confiar?
Para recopilar información sobre estos datos, es muy útil
analizar las distintas estrategias de políticas sanitarias adoptadas por los dos países.
En Corea del Sur, prácticamente se han realizado pruebas a todos.
No literalmente, pero usando un procedimiento estadístico denominado «pruebas aleatorias»,
en el que se usa una muestra representativa de la población a quienes se les ha hecho la prueba.
Y, por lo tanto, podemos estar seguros de que hay muestras uniformes de distintos grupos de edades.
En cambio, Italia ha optado por realizar pruebas solo a personas sintomáticas,
que suelen ser los casos peores y más críticos que han ido al hospital.
Por tanto, la muestra de Italia está más bien sesgada hacia personas que desarrollaron los síntomas.
Pero los datos de Corea del Sur sugieren que hay muchas más personas sin síntomas que con ellos,
lo que sugiere que el número de infectados es probablemente mucho mayor del que conocemos.
También se podría pensar que Corea del Sur es un caso especial,
algo que los científicos denominan «validez externa».
Hay que tener en cuenta que podemos aprender de otros países,
de la experiencia de otros.
Esto es lo que los científicos denominan un experimento seminatural y que se ha realizado en la ciudad de Vo, en Véneto.
En esa ciudad, una gran parte de la población contrajo el virus.
Es cierto que Italia aplicó una política por la que solo se realizaron pruebas a los infectados.
Pero resulta que, en la ciudad de Vo, la mayoría de la población resultó infectada,
por lo que es una muestra representativa de la población de la ciudad de Vo,
simplemente porque la mayoría de sus habitantes se infectaron.
En la muestra de la ciudad de Vo, queda muy claro
que la mayoría de los infectados son jóvenes.
Por tanto, ahora podemos tener una mayor confianza y afirmar que el COVID-19 infecta mucho más a los jóvenes
que a las personas mayores, pero a su vez es mucho más probable que los jóvenes no presenten síntomas.
Sin embargo, el COVID-19 causa muchas más muertes entre la tercera edad.
En este gráfico por grupo de edad, se muestra el índice de mortalidad,
que es la proporción entre el número de muertes y el número de casos.
Es importante tener en cuenta que existe mucha incertidumbre sobre esta proporción.
Solo podemos estar seguros del número de muertes.
Pero el número de casos es desconocido porque, en la mayoría de los países del mundo,
con la excepción de Corea del Sur, solo se realizaron pruebas a las personas con síntomas.
Esto implica que el número de casos en el resto de los países
es mucho mayor de los números registrados por los gobiernos.
De hecho, Corea del Sur tiene un índice de mortalidad de aproximadamente el 1 %, mientras que en China es del 3 %.
Italia tiene un índice sorprendentemente alto, del 7 %, algo poco creíble y que probablemente
sea una distorsión, porque en Italia solo se han realizado pruebas a personas sintomáticas.
Es probable que el número real sea mucho más próximo
al de Corea del Sur y China, lo que sugiere que en Italia, lamentablemente,
hay muchos más casos de infectados de los que cree el gobierno italiano.
Sin embargo, lo que suele coincidir bastante en todos los países
es que la proporción de personas que mueren suele estar en el grupo de mayor edad.
Por lo tanto, se considera cierto que el COVID-19 suele causar más muertes en la tercera edad.
Aun así, existen diferencias drásticas entre la proporción de personas mayores entre
los italianos en relación con los chinos y la población de Corea del Sur.
Para apreciar si estas diferencias son reales o se trata de una distorsión estadística,
podemos analizar otra prueba: la pirámide demográfica.
Esto mide la proporción de población por cada grupo de edad
entre hombres y mujeres.
Por ejemplo, los hombres chinos de entre 30 y 34 años de edad
representan el 4,6 % del total de la población china.
Por otra parte, las mujeres chinas del mismo grupo de edad representan el 4,3 % de la población china.
Lo que queda claro al comparar la pirámide de China con la de Italia
es que China tiene una parte mucho más ancha aquí abajo.
Esto implica que su población tiene muchos más jóvenes que en Italia.
De hecho, prácticamente en todos estos grupos, después de sumar los hombres y mujeres,
se llega a un 2 % más de la proporción de la población del mismo grupo de edad en China que en Italia.
Está claro que, si la parte inferior es más ancha, la parte superior será más estrecha.
Por ejemplo, al sumar los hombres y mujeres de entre 70 y 80 años,
se obtiene una parte de la población
que es más de un 2 % superior a la misma proporción de población en China.
Es decir, que Italia tiene una proporción mucho mayor de población de edad avanzada que China.
En la diapositiva anterior, vimos que el COVID-19 causa más muertes entre la tercera edad que entre los jóvenes.
Pero, si Italia tiene una mayor proporción de población de edad avanzada,
quiere decir que el índice de mortalidad debe ser superior en Italia que en China,
y eso es exactamente lo que hemos observado.
¿Por qué se le da tanta importancia al número de casos?
Esta es la curva de contagio de la que habla todo el mundo y
seguro que ya conoce.
La curva roja representa el número de casos de infectados como una función
del tiempo desde que se desarrolló el primer caso.
Sin una intervención política, la curva sería plana.
Pero, entonces, la primera persona infectada tiende a infectar a otra persona.
Y ahora tenemos dos personas que pueden infectar a otras dos personas.
Ahora, esas cuatro personas pueden infectar a otras cuatro personas.
Y eso se multiplica de forma que hace que la curva crezca exponencialmente.
Pero la curva crece exponencialmente y
llega hasta un punto en que hay mucha gente infectada.
Y, si todos se recuperan, serán inmunes, lo que quiere decir
que los nuevos infectados no pueden infectar a todos los demás,
ya que hay personas que ya son inmunes y, por lo tanto,
se reduce la curva de contagio.
El problema con el sistema sanitario es la capacidad,
que se representa aquí como la línea gris horizontal.
Cada vez que se supera la capacidad del sistema sanitario,
hay un número de pacientes críticos superior al número de camas de cuidados intensivos disponibles.
Una gran parte de esas personas pueden morir a causa de la falta de unidades de cuidados intensivos.
Como economistas, estamos acostumbrados a pensar en esto en términos de oferta y demanda.
La curva de contagio roja es la demanda de servicios sanitarios.
Y la línea gris horizontal es la oferta de servicios sanitarios.
El problema con la curva roja es que los casos de infectados están tan concentrados
en un breve período de tiempo, que supera en gran medida la capacidad del sistema sanitario.
Por lo tanto, los gobiernos intentan ralentizar el contagio de la enfermedad
de forma que el número de casos se reparta.
El área debajo de la curva azul no tiene por qué ser necesariamente más pequeña,
y ni siquiera es deseable que sea más pequeña que la curva roja.
Sin embargo, los casos están repartidos en el tiempo de forma que
el sistema sanitario pueda contenerlos y se cumplan los niveles de oferta y demanda.
Sin embargo, sin una intervención, se produce un exceso de demanda
y los gobiernos necesitan encontrar una forma de solucionarlo.
La pregunta es cómo conseguir esto de la forma más eficaz.
Existe un claro consenso sobre el deseo de aplanar la curva.
Pero hay menos consenso en cómo conseguirlo.
El primer paso para comprender lo que puede hacer el gobierno
es analizar cuánto puede ampliarse la capacidad de los cuidados intensivos.
En el próximo vídeo, la segunda parte denominada «Epidemiología para principiantes»,
hablaremos sobre cómo ralentizar la velocidad del contagio.
Empezaremos por cómo ampliar la capacidad.
En primer lugar, veremos cómo se puede medir
la capacidad del sistema sanitario de cada país.
En este gráfico, se muestra el número de camas
de pacientes críticos por cada 100 000 personas en distintos países.
Alemania tiene 29 camas por cada 100 000 ciudadanos. Portugal solo tiene 4.
Italia está por encima de la media, con un número próximo a 12,5.
La capacidad del sistema sanitario no se refiere simplemente al número de camas,
sino también al número de equipos necesarios para atender a enfermos de COVID-19, mayoritariamente el número de respiradores,
ya que es una enfermedad que causa complicaciones respiratorias.
Así que no resulta sorprendente que, para ampliar la capacidad de respiradores,
Italia haya pedido a su único fabricante que cuadruplique el suministro de respiradores.
Alemania ha pedido 10 000 más.
Y Matt Hancock, el ministro de Salud de Reino Unido, afirmó lo siguiente:
«Si produces un respirador, lo compraremos. Ningún número es demasiado alto».
También hay una heterogeneidad geográfica en la capacidad del sistema sanitario.
En este gráfico, se muestra la proporción de unidades de cuidados intensivos usadas para pacientes con COVID-19.
Solo para que se pueda comprender cómo funciona una unidad de cuidados intensivos, normalmente,
en cada período durante el año, el 70 % de esas camas están ocupadas por personas
con otros problemas, como accidentes de coche, derrames cerebrales o cuidados intensivos por la gripe estacional normal.
De media, solo un 30 % de las camas están libres,
que en realidad se reservan para otras emergencias.
Esto se muestra en este gráfico como la línea verde horizontal.
Como puede verse, si solo se tienen en cuenta los pacientes con COVID-19, Lombardía está muy por encima de su capacidad.
Las personas tienen que sentarse en salas o pasillos, o bien simplemente no se les admite en el hospital.
Y la situación no parece mucho mejor en Marcas, Piamonte, Valle de Aosta y Liguria.
Solo parece haber capacidad libre en el sur.
En general, como país, parece que Italia ya ha hecho un uso bastante exhaustivo de sus recursos.
Sin embargo, hay buenas noticias. A corto plazo, se puede ampliar la oferta de servicios sanitarios.
Este es el caso de Lombardía entre el 25 de febrero y el 16 de marzo.
El número de casos de coronavirus se incrementó,
pero la proporción de pacientes atendidos por coronavirus también se incrementó.
En concreto, la región de Lombardía, que tenía un número
tan bajo como 700 al principio de la muestra,
en cuestión de solo diez días,
del 5 al 16 de marzo, consiguió ampliar de 700
a 1200 plazas: un incremento de 500 unidades de cuidados intensivos.
Lo que pueden hacer los gobiernos es empezar a usar camas de la sanidad privada
y pagar a la sanidad privada para ampliar esta capacidad.
Pueden empezar a usar hoteles, barracones
e incluso centros educativos y aulas como unidades de cuidados intensivos.
Pero no solo se necesitan camas, también hacen falta respiradores.
Por lo tanto, es necesario pedir a la industria que produzca
más respiradores y a las fábricas que pasen
a producir componentes que, en conjunto, permitan montar un nuevo respirador.
Sin embargo, no se trata únicamente de capital físico.
Para ampliar la capacidad, también es necesario ampliar el capital humano.
No habrá suficientes enfermeras ni médicos.
Por lo tanto, una opción es que el gobierno reincorpore a todos los enfermeros y médicos jubilados.
Puede ir más allá y empezar a formar, para tareas muy básicas
relacionadas con respiradores, a agentes de policía y profesores de secundaria.
Y pedir al ejército que se encargue de las tareas policiales.
Además, si los casos están concentrados en una región, como es el caso de Lombardía,
una buena idea es llevar a pacientes críticos no relacionados con la enfermedad a otras regiones
que aún tengan capacidad de reserva para aliviar un poco la presión en la región con más dificultades.
Por lo tanto, lo que hemos aprendido en esta primera parte es que el COVID-19 es la peor crisis sanitaria de nuestros tiempos.
Los jóvenes tienen muchas más probabilidades de resultar infectados.
Son portadores y no suelen presentar síntomas.
Pero las personas mayores tienen más probabilidades de morir.
Muchos países se enfrentan a una intensa demanda de servicios sanitarios:
hay demasiados pacientes críticos, no solo de COVID-19,
pero hay muy pocos respiradores y camas en las unidades de cuidados intensivos.
Esto implica una dificultad y una amenaza, no solo para los pacientes infectados,
sino también para pacientes críticos normales por cualquier otra afección que ahora tienen muchas más probabilidades
de morir al tener que esperar más tiempo la atención crítica que necesitan.
Para ampliar la oferta de servicios sanitarios, no solo es necesario convertir hoteles,
barracones y puede que hasta centros educativos en unidades de cuidados intensivos, sino también pedir
a las industrias que se conviertan en fabricantes de componentes de respiradores.
Aún así, no es suficiente ampliar la capacidad de capital físico,
sino que también es necesario ampliar el capital humano.
Reincorporar a personal jubilado de enfermería y formar a agentes de policía y voluntarios,
mientras el ejército se encarga de las funciones policiales.
Con esto, damos por concluida la primera parte, la recopilación de datos.
La siguiente parte se llama «Epidemiología para principiantes». ¡Muchas gracias!

---

### The Epidemiology of a Contagion
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZcE8fVR_dE

Idioma: es

Bienvenidos a la Guía del usuario de COVID-19, Parte 2, "Epidemiología para Dummies".
Soy Andrea Galeotti, profesor de economía en la London Business School.
Y este vídeo es parte de una serie desarrollada
por mí mismo y mi amigo y colega Paolo Surico.
Hoy, hablaremos de epidemiología.
En este breve vídeo explicaré un modelo epidemiológico típico de contagio,
al que llamamos SIR, de "Susceptibilidad, Infección y Recuperación".
Así podrán comprender mejor qué ofrecen y de qué carecen las políticas sanitarias actuales.
A continuación, presentaré el informe del equipo de respuesta al Covid-19 del Imperial College.
El informe se publicó el 16 de marzo y ha tenido repercusión
en las políticas sanitarias que el Reino Unido ha aplicado para el COVID-19.
El objetivo de esta sección es que puedan formarse su opinión
sobre hasta qué punto las distintas políticas alcanzan sus objetivos previstos.
Finalizaré resaltando las áreas en las que se necesitan más datos y análisis.
En concreto, enfatizaré la importancia de hacer pruebas
entre muestras representativas de la población en diferentes países.
El objetivo de esta última parte del vídeo es presentarles los recursos
para evaluar y mejorar las políticas vigentes.
Empezaré por hablarles de un modelo epidemiológico típico llamado "Susceptibilidad, Infección y Recuperación".
Este modelo resulta indicado para considerar la propagación de los virus,
en particular, de virus como el COVID-19.
Con este modelo, las personas se clasifican en tres categorías principales.
Hay personas sanas que no son inmunes al virus,
y personas con riesgos de contraer el virus.
Aunque entren en contacto con el virus, lo contraen si se relacionan con personas que están contagiadas.
Cuando una persona susceptible se relaciona con una persona contagiada, con cierta probabilidad,
va a pasar de la fase de susceptibilidad a la de infección.
Esta es la segunda categoría de las personas que encontramos en este modelo.
Las personas que han contraído el virus y que no se han recuperado son las que están contagiadas.
Y el estado de infección va a durar un tiempo,
que dependerá en gran medida del tipo de virus.
Pero durante este periodo de infección de las personas,
pueden transmitir el virus a los demás, son contagiosas.
Tras un tiempo, las personas contagiadas se recuperan.
Este modelo parte de que con la recuperación, las personas se inmunizan.
Carecemos de información precisa sobre la eficacia de la inmunización al COVID-19,
es decir, algunos indicativos apuntan de que recuperarse de la enfermedad significa inmunidad.
Este es el modelo SIR. En resumen, en este modelo tenemos personas susceptibles,
que con las relaciones se contagian.
Y cuando ya están contagiadas, hay un período en el que pueden propagar la infección al resto.
Pero tras un tiempo, se van a recuperar.
Y daremos por hecho de que con la recuperación van a adquirir inmunidad absoluta.
Lo que queremos dilucidar ahora es cuál va a ser la curva de
la demanda de atención sanitaria predecible con este modelo.
Queremos conocer el porcentaje o la demanda de ingresos críticos,
para prestar los cuidados intensivos derivados del COVID-19.
Cómo irá progresando la curva si el COVID-19 se propaga conforme a este modelo.
Y lo que vamos a señalar ahora es que existe un concepto importante, una cifra importante,
una estadística de este problema, el llamado "número de reproducción".
El número de reproducción es la media de personas que resultan contagiadas por alguien contagioso.
De modo que si el número de reproducción del COVID-19 es 2, existe un cálculo aproximado
que indica que, por cada persona contagiada, el virus se propaga de media entre dos personas susceptibles.
Lo que queremos averiguar es por qué el número de reproducción es tan importante para conocer
la demanda sanitaria para tratar al número de personas que se irán infectando.
Imaginemos una situación en la que el número de reproducción es inferior a 1.
Y hagamos un experimento muy sencillo.
Todo empieza en un mundo donde la población está sana pero de pronto, por algún motivo,
dos personas, Paolo y Andrea, se infectan.
La infección dura 1 día. Pasado ese día, Paolo y Andrea se recuperan.
Ahora, imaginemos que el número de reproducción es 0,5.
Esto supone que de media, Paolo y Andrea, durante el período en el que están contagiados,
infectarán en total a otra persona más.
Esto supone que empezamos con 2 personas contagiadas, Paolo y Andrea.
Tras el primer período Paolo y Andrea se recuperan, por lo que no hay nadie más contagiado,
pero Paolo y Andrea han contagiado a una persona.
Por lo que pasamos de 2 personas contagiadas a 1.
Ahora, esta persona contagiada va a salir y relacionarse con otras.
Y ya que el número de reproducción es 0,5, esto supone que cuando esta persona se recupere,
habrá, como máximo, otra persona contagiada.
Por lo que podemos observar que este virus no se propaga entre la población.
De hecho, acabará por desaparecer de forma natural.
Los virus con un número de reproducción inferior a 1 son virus que en realidad no vemos.
Incluso si aparecen, ni siquiera los detectaremos.
El otro supuesto es si el número de reproducción es superior a 1.
Repitamos el experimento, pero partiendo de un número de reproducción de 2.
Repitamos la misma situación, una población sana, salvo Paolo y Andrea.
Paolo y Andrea están contagiados, y la infección les durará un tiempo.
Después, se recuperarán.
Pero durante ese período, no presentan síntomas, están asintomáticos.
No se han aplicado políticas ni restricciones, porque es algo nuevo que nadie conoce.
Así que Andrea y Paolo salen, se relacionan con sus familiares,
y con sus amigos, van al bar y siguen con su actividad.
Al final, cuando se recuperan, cada uno ha transmitido el virus a otras dos personas.
Si el número de reproducción es 2, Andrea habrá contagiado a 2 personas,
y Paolo habrá contagiado a 2 personas.
Así que la situación será la siguiente, empezamos con 2 personas
contagiadas, Andrea y Paolo, que acaban por recuperarse.
Pero ahora en la población hay 4 personas contagiadas,
porque Andrea y Paolo han contagiado a otras 2 personas cada uno.
De nuevo, estas 4 personas no son conscientes de lo que sucede,
están asintomáticas, así que continúan con su vida normal.
Pero ahora, cada una va a infectar a otras 2 personas.
Finalmente, estas 4 personas se recuperan,
pero cada una de ellas ha contagiado a otras 2, y 2 multiplicado por 4 es 8.
Por lo que ahora hay 8 personas contagiadas.
Lo que hacemos es simular el proceso en el que cada período,
la infección, y por tanto, la demanda sanitaria van a incrementarse cada vez más.
Estamos en la fase exponencial.
¿Este proceso durará para siempre?
No, no durará para siempre, porque conforme hay quienes se contagian, están también las personas que se recuperan.
Cuando alguien se recupera, conforme a este modelo, se inmuniza.
Con la inmunización, todas las personas que están contagiadas
también se van a relacionar con las que ya son inmunes, no solo con las personas susceptibles.
Estas personas inmunes se relacionarán con las contagiadas,
de forma inevitable, porque en algún momento las cifras de contagiados serán altas entre la población,
por lo que disminuirán el número de reproducción.
Empezamos con un número de reproducción de 2, la tasa de contagio en la población es alta,
pero, tras lograr inmunizarse con la recuperación,
el número de reproducción desciende, por lo que la infección empieza a desaparecer.
Este es el modelo básico de "Susceptibilidad, Infección y Recuperación".
Lo único que hemos hecho es explicar la situación cuando el número de reproducción
es superior a 1, cómo obtenemos la curva de contagio teórica, que es lo que lamentablemente vemos
ahora tan a menudo en diferentes periódicos, artículos y los medios.
Esta es la fase en la que las personas empiezan a contagiarse de forma continuada,
y una bajada representa la fase en la que el número de reproducción desciende con la inmunización.
Pueden ver que de lo que oímos a diario en la prensa y los medios,
lo que nos interesa es llegar al punto en el que esta curva se aplane.
Paolo, en su primer minivídeo de esta serie,
también habló sobre la capacidad del sistema sanitario.
Y nos consta que la capacidad del sistema es muy inferior al pico de la demanda
que se generará por un número de reproducción de 2 para el COVID-19.
Por tanto, es necesario que esta curva descienda.
Tenemos un ejemplo sencillo para entender qué significa hacer descender esta curva.
Con el descenso de esta curva, se logra reducir el número de reproducción.
Esta es la conclusión que sacamos de la primera parte de este vídeo.
¿Cuáles son los factores del número de reproducción?
El número de reproducción puede cambiar si conocemos mejor las características del virus.
Y se puede cambiar si creamos la vacuna, la vacuna farmacéutica.
El punto 1 y el punto 2 son de máxima importancia.
Los recursos médicos de todo el mundo están totalmente centrados en ambos
para conocer el comportamiento del virus y poder desarrollar una vacuna.
Pero por el momento, no hay mucho que podamos hacer.
En este momento concreto, si queremos aplanar la curva, tenemos que actuar desde otro frente
que afecte al número de reproducción, y se trata de la interacción social.
El COVID-19 se propaga con las relaciones, por lo que si dejamos de relacionarnos, si la interacción
social se corta, el número de reproducción descenderá.
Y de hecho, las políticas que han surgido durante este período se centran en disminuir
el número de reproducción promulgando medidas que frenen la interacción social.
Es más, si vemos las medidas que se están aplicando,
para aclararnos, se pueden dividir en dos tipos de políticas.
Las que aplican medidas de contención y las políticas de erradicación.
Las políticas de contención intentan disminuir el número de reproducción para evitar que sea superior a 1.
Lo interesante es aplanar la curva, pero no demasiado.
Vamos a ver por qué esto es importante.
Básicamente, estas políticas lo que hacen es intentar limitar la interacción social,
pero en cierta forma no restringen demasiado las relaciones.
Si se continúan aumentando las medidas
para frenar la interacción social, se llegan a las políticas de erradicación.
Con estas políticas se trata de que el número de reproducción llegue a ser inferior a 1.
Por ejemplo, el distanciamiento social entre la población.
Voy a contextualizar estas ideas en un importante estudio
contenido en el informe del equipo de respuesta al Covid-19 del Imperial College.
Este informe básicamente intenta arrojar cifras sobre cómo las distintas medidas
de distanciamiento social disminuyen el número de reproducción y, por tanto, aplanan la curva.
Si repasamos la tabla de arriba a abajo, observamos una medida,
una política que disminuye cada vez más la interacción social,
con lo que se consigue una disminución constante del número de reproducción.
Estas son solo suposiciones.
Por ejemplo, vamos a fijarnos en la política de mantener los casos aislados en casa.
Es decir, cuando alguien presenta síntomas, tiene que permanecer en casa durante 7 días.
Si todos cumplen esta medida, o si gran parte de la población la cumple,
se reducirá el contacto fuera del entorno del hogar,
en este caso, se calcula la reducción será del 75%.
Al reducir los contactos fuera del entorno del hogar, también habrá
menos interacción, y por extensión, el número de reproducción disminuirá.
El objetivo de este estudio es estimar o dar un número aproximado del efecto,
de hasta qué punto la curva se verá afectada por esta política u otro conjunto de políticas.
Solo quiero dejar claro y garantizar que este informe no solo se elabora
a partir del análisis sencillo que he presentado. En absoluto.
Se trata de un trabajo exhaustivo basado en varios recursos epidemiológicos,
estudios que se han publicado en numerosos centros de investigación científica internacionales.
Y estos modelos se desarrollan a partir de este modelo SIR, pero consideran gran cantidad de información
que tenemos sobre el COVID-19, sobre otros estudios y las características demográficas del Reino Unido.
Voy a intentar ofrecer estas cifras en orden para que se hagan una idea sobre el efecto
de estas distintas políticas para disminuir el número de reproducción y aplanar la curva.
Estos gráficos ofrecen mucha información, intentaré ser lo más preciso posible.
Voy a empezar por la izquierda.
En el eje X tenemos el tiempo.
En el eje Y tenemos la demanda de atención sanitaria,
medidas como las camas por ingresos críticos acumuladas por 100.000 afectados.
Por supuesto, esta cifra será muy similar a la
de personas que se van a contagiar en la población.
La primera curva que quiero describir es la roja.
Es la capacidad del Servicio Nacional de Salud (NHS) para prestar atención a los ingresos críticos.
Y en el Reino Unido, como contó Paolo en el primer vídeo,
hay unas 5.000 camas por cada 100.000 habitantes.
Por tanto, cualquier demanda por encima de esta línea roja, supondrá dificultades para el NHS.
Por supuesto, partimos de cierto grado de suposición para todas las cifras que voy a presentar,
pero no hay posibilidad de cambiar esta capacidad, no hay posibilidad de aumentar esta capacidad.
En realidad, hay algo de margen para esta dimensión, pero no demasiado,
al menos como Paolo dijo antes, no a corto plazo.
Entre todas estas curvas, me quiero centrar en dos.
Una es la negra y la otra es la azul.
La curva negra es la demanda de ingresos críticos pronosticados sin ninguna intervención.
Vamos a usarla como medida de referencia. Y como pueden observar,
hay una gran diferencia entre la demanda generada
sin intervención y la atención que el NHS puede garantizar y prestar a los ingresos críticos.
Esta carencia de atención es grande, con un gran coste.
Lo primero que sucederá es que el NHS se colapsará, y en el informe se estima
que esta carencia en la atención va a suponer 510.000 muertes en Gran Bretaña.
La pregunta es hasta qué punto podemos aplanar la curva y cuántas vidas podemos salvar.
Esta es la medida entre las políticas de contención del virus,
que no aplanan mucho la curva, pero sí lo suficiente.
La mejor política es combinar el aislamiento de los casos, la cuarentena en casa
y el distanciamiento social para personas mayores de 70 años.
En la diapositiva anterior hay una definición precisa.
Puede observarse una gran caída de la curva.
Las curvas se aplanan mucho más.
Sin embargo, la demanda que se genera con esta política es superior a la capacidad del NHS.
Y de hecho, si estimamos el número de personas que morirán,
si aplicamos esta política, el informe arroja 250.000 muertes.
Para concluir el análisis de esta situación, hay otro aspecto
de esta dimensión que es el área sombreada en azul.
Se trata del período en el que se producirá la intervención.
Como se observa, esta intervención tendrá lugar desde abril hasta julio de 2020.
Después, las restricciones se irán levantando.
Y cuando las restricciones sean menos duras, el virus continuará propagándose,
o la demanda de atención sanitaria seguirá reduciéndose.
Esto sucede porque al no haber erradicado el virus,
mucha gente enfermará, pero también mucha gente se recuperará.
Por eso, en el período en el que no aplicamos esta política, hemos logrado bastante inmunidad,
y, por tanto, la sociedad es resistente al virus.
Por supuesto, partimos de que con la recuperación, la población afectada se inmuniza.
Esto demuestra los pros y los contras de este tipo de política:
un precio alto a corto plazo, pero la sociedad se vuelve resistente.
¿Qué ocurre si la medida de distanciamiento social es cada vez más estricta
para erradicar el virus?
Pasamos ahora al lado derecho.
Si nos fijamos en el lado derecho, la curva negra es el resultado de "no hacer nada".
Y las curvas naranja y verde son el resultado de una estricta política de distanciamiento
social. En concreto, en relación a estas políticas,
el aspecto más importante es que las políticas de erradicación aplican el distanciamiento social para todos.
Cuando se dictamina el distanciamiento social para todos, se ve cómo no es posible
distinguir entre capacidad y demanda.
De hecho, para ver la distinción hay que enfocar.
Esta es la representación de esta imagen en esta parte del gráfico.
Y como ven, si se sigue el aislamiento de los casos,
la cuarentena en casa y el distanciamiento social general,
se supera la capacidad del NHS, pero la curva se aplana considerablemente.
Y si incluso se añade el cierre de colegios y universidades, se logra
cierto margen para que la capacidad del NHS responda a la demanda.
Y estas políticas de erradicación pueden ser muy eficaces,
porque disminuyen bastante el número de reproducción.
De hecho, en este escenario, el número de muertes es mucho
menor, alrededor de 20.000 personas.
El problema con estas políticas es que se tienen que aplicar
desde abril hasta septiembre de 2020, un período muy largo.
Y, si en septiembre de 2020, se levantan todas estas medidas,
y no se hace nada, hay muchas conclusiones para creer que, al no hacer nada,
la sociedad seguirá siendo vulnerable al virus.
Vamos a sufrir otro ciclo. ¿Por qué?
Porque es justo el factor que nos falta con el modelo tan sencillo de SIR.
Hemos combatido el virus muy rápido,
no hay muchas personas que se hayan contagiado y recuperado, por lo que la sociedad es muy vulnerable.
Por tanto, se demuestran la importancia, pero también las desventajas, de las políticas de erradicación.
Es obvio que ahora las medidas de erradicación son las que más se aplican, pero también hay que aclarar
que un aspecto importante de estas medidas es que nos dan tiempo.
Tenemos que usar este tiempo de forma efectiva para controlar la vulnerabilidad
de la sociedad ante una nueva propagación del COVID-19.
No es viable seguir aplicando estas políticas hasta que tengamos una vacuna.
Ahora, la opción que tenemos es reflexionar
sobre las mejores medidas que tendremos que adoptar llegado este período para
relajar las medidas de distanciamiento social a la vez que se evita la nueva aparición del virus.
Y lo único que podemos hacer es intentar averiguar cómo podemos mejorar
estas políticas que ya se están aplicando.
Lo mejor es localizar los puntos débiles de los análisis actuales.
Y cuando digo "los puntos débiles de los análisis actuales",
no se trata de criticarlos.
La gente está actuando, trabajando en un entorno de verdadero estrés a contrarreloj.
El informe del Imperial College es fantástico.
Sin embargo, tenemos que anticiparnos.
Y debemos pensar en si hay algo más que podamos hacer.
Y de lo último que voy a hablar en este vídeo
es de algunos temas que hemos descubierto repasando algunas de las investigaciones
que se han realizado, y de algunos informes que han salido en los medios.
Y una investigación concreta es este informe publicado el 16 de marzo en Science.
En este informe se analizan los contagios registrados en China,
además de los datos de movilidad, para poder deducir el porcentaje de contagios no documentados,
y el nivel de contagio de las personas que han contraído el virus, pero,
quizá por ser asintomáticas, no se han registrado, por lo que no se han incluido en las cifras.
Y definir que la mayoría de los contagios están sin documentar.
"Estimamos que el 86% de los contagios estaban sin documentar antes del 23 de enero de 2020".
El otro aspecto es la tasa de transmisión, o la capacidad que tiene una persona para contagiar
cuando no presenta síntomas, y por tanto, la mayoría de contagios de estas personas
sin documentar era mucho menor que los contagios documentados, aproximadamente la mitad.
Sin embargo, ya que hay tantas personas contagiadas pero sin documentar,
hay quienes propagan más el virus.
Esta información es importante porque, por supuesto, se basa en datos limitados,
pero sugiere que, por ejemplo, los cálculos actuales de índices de mortalidad
es probable que estén sobrestimados. Sugiere que se adquiere determinada inmunidad,
que muchas personas se han contagiado, y ya que no lo sabemos,
la gran parte de ellas se han recuperado.
Por tanto, si es correcto que estas personas se inmunizan con la recuperación,
hay cierta inmunidad en el sistema.
La mala noticia es que al estimar estas cifras, por ejemplo, en el informe del Imperial College,
quizá estamos partiendo de una tasa de contagios que no es real, sino inferior.
Por lo que, estas curvas se van a interpretar con demasiado optimismo a corto plazo.
Pero la conclusión de los informes y estudios es que por el momento
estamos elaborando medidas a partir de información bastante incompleta.
Y si queremos anticiparnos, no podemos elaborar políticas efectivas sin información útil.
Por tanto, urge una propuesta de medidas sencillas
que deberíamos adoptar durante este período de políticas de erradicación, para poder obtener mejores datos.
Esta es una propuesta sencilla, pero en absoluto original.
Es algo obvio en mucho aspectos, pero a veces es importante resaltar la obviedad de las cosas.
La propuesta es realizar pruebas entre una muestra representativa de la población, sin importar los síntomas,
y registrar las características sociales, económicas, demográficas y de ubicación a nivel doméstico.
Cuando dispongamos de esta información, podremos usar métodos estadísticos para deducir
las características domésticas más probables para predecir si alguien está contagiado en toda la población.
Y así podremos desarrollar estrategias de control, para que cuando
hayamos frenado la propagación del virus y estemos levantando
las políticas de erradicación, podamos actuar de modo que cuando el virus empiece
a surgir en algunas partes de la población, podamos actuar rápidamente para aislarlo a nivel local.
Es el llamado "rastreo de los contactos a nivel nacional" para el distanciamiento social segmentado.
Pero para ello, tenemos que recopilar los datos correctos.
Y recopilar estos datos y usar análisis estadísticos extensivos puede salvar muchas vidas.
Permítanme concluir con algunas pruebas interesantes
sobre la eficacia de esta estrategia.
Aquí comparo cómo no se lograron resultados efectivos
para contener el virus en Italia, y aquí la situación en Corea del Sur,
que logró frenar la propagación del virus.
Pueden ver la diferencia en el número de casos y muertes entre Corea del Sur e Italia.
Ambos países usaron medidas similares, recurrieron al distanciamiento social.
La medida adicional en Corea del Sur fue la realización rápida de pruebas.
Realizaron muchas más pruebas.
Para que se hagan una idea, en Corea del Sur, hicieron 5.500 pruebas por cada millón de personas.
En el Reino Unido, 750, Italia está a la mitad de estas dos cifras.
En Corea del Sur, los tests estuvieron disponibles muy rápidamente.
Los médicos pudieron prescribirlos gratis, y los tests también estaban disponibles por la vía privada,
pero el gobierno reembolsaba el dinero si daban positivo.
Toda esa información sirvió para elaborar una fuerte política
de rastreo de los contactos, tests supervisados y control de los contagiados.
En definitiva, espero haber aclarado algunos puntos con este breve vídeo.
En concreto, en lo relativo a las políticas sanitarias relacionadas con el COVID-19,
una forma de reflexionar sobre ellas y de cómo las evaluamos
es cuál va a ser el efecto de estas políticas en el número de reproducción.
Con la capacidad actual de los sistemas de atención sanitaria, las políticas de erradicación
son las únicas que nos pueden ayudar a corto plazo.
Por tanto, es muy importante ser todos responsables y cumplir con las medidas de los gobiernos.
No basta con tener una política para reducir el número de reproducción, lo necesario es acatarla.
Compraremos tiempo, y durante el tiempo que ganemos, tenemos que ser inteligentes y efectivos.
Y una propuesta muy básica es realizar tests en una muestra representativa de la población
para obtener información fiable y objetiva sobre la prevalencia del COVID-19.
Y esto tiene que hacerse no solo en uno, sino en muchos países,
porque al usar las distintas fases en las que se encuentran estos países
para el estudio representativo de la población, obtendremos mucha información.
Un análisis estadístico extensivo entre distintos países
y desarrollar estrategias de control a partir de esta información fiable.
Este es el final de la parte 2 de esta Guía del usuario para el COVID-19.
Pueden encontrar todas las diapositivas en esta página web.
El siguiente vídeo será la parte 3: "Economía para Dummies".
Espero que les haya resultado interesante y cuídense.

---

### The Economics of an Outbreak
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv5JD0Invjc

Idioma: es

¡Bienvenidos/as a todos/as!
Mi nombre es Paolo Surico y junto con mi colega Andrea Galeotti
hemos elaborado una serie de miniconferencias a modo de «Guía del usuario para el COVID-19».
Hoy presentaré la parte 3: «Economía para Dummies».
¿Qué haremos en esta miniconferencia?
Presentaremos evidencias del coste inicial de la crisis.
Queremos ilustrar cómo funciona la economía
usando un marco sencillo del estallido de la demanda y de la oferta.
Queremos presentar evidencias sobre cómo la inversión de las empresas
y el gasto del hogar dependen de la liquidez.
¿Qué aprenderán al final de esta conferencia?
Aprenderán a usar la evidencia inicial para calcular el tamaño de los costes económicos totales;
comprenderán el papel de la incertidumbre y el pánico en la determinación dinámica de los costes económicos;
y entenderán el papel fundamental de la escasez de liquidez
en la transformación de la crisis sanitaria en una crisis económica.
Permítanme comenzar dándoles una idea de la magnitud de esta crisis.
Esta gráfica ofrece una previsión en tiempo real de cuál podría ser el crecimiento de la producción
en el 2.º trimestre de 2020 para China y para la zona del euro.
Es una representación diaria porque todos los días reunimos información en Google
procedente de grandes conjuntos de datos, aprendizaje automático y publicaciones de datos para los principales productores.
Y cada día
hay un algoritmo producido por métodos de previsión a corto plazo que puede predecir esos números.
Hasta finales de febrero, la previsión del PIB para China superaba el 6 %,
era muy similar al número que hemos visto en los últimos trimestres para China.
Pero a medida que aparecía una cifra concreta
y tan pronto como la dimensión de la crisis comenzó a hacerse evidente, en cuestión de días,
el pronóstico para el 2.º trimestre de 2020 para China disminuyó del 6 % a -3 %, una diferencia de 9 % del PIB.
Actualmente, parece que China entrará en una leve recesión en el 2.º trimestre de 2020.
Esto es muy importante, porque este es el país
que hace unas semanas se esperaba que creciera por encima del 6 % y ahora -1 %, una diferencia del 7 %.
La zona del euro no está en una situación mucho mejor.
La caída es menor, pero solo porque el crecimiento promedio es menor.
Desde principios de enero hasta finales de febrero, la previsión era de entre un 0,2 % y un 0,4 %.
Pero a medida que se difundían las noticias, primero en Italia y luego en el resto de Europa,
se hizo evidente que el último pronóstico predijo una recesión
o un crecimiento negativo en el 2.º trimestre de 2020 del -0,3 %,
un diferencia de más de 0,5 % del PIB
en cuestión de unas semanas en la previsión para el 2.º trimestre de 2020.
¿En qué se basan estas previsiones?
Algunas evidencias provienen de la bolsa de valores.
Hablamos del precio de las acciones, el valor de las empresas.
Normalmente, son variables prospectivas que tienden a predecir los precios y el crecimiento económico.
No importa en qué parte del mundo se fijen,
la caída del valor en la bolsa es entre el 10 % y el 40 %.
Esos números, esas caídas fueron grandes y es muy probable que ocurran muchas más.
Después de una leve caída viene un rebote, algunas personas se dan cuenta de que pueden obtener un beneficio de la breve caída,
pero luego ocurre otra gran caída y un rebote breve,
y otra caída más grande de manera que el resultado general puede provocar un cambio muy importante en la bolsa de valores.
Veamos la economía real.
Sin duda alguna existe un efecto directo compuesto por una combinación de pánico, incertidumbre y política de confinamiento.
Los primeros dos sectores en sufrirlo son la industria de viajes y los restaurantes.
Lo que vemos aquí es una fuerte contracción en el número de personas que viajan.
-80 % en Asia y el Pacífico, -30 % en Europa.
Y esos son los límites inferiores.
Sin duda alguna, el número solo puede aumentar.
La caída solo puede ser más grande a medida que más países decreten el confinamiento.
Esto implica mucha presión sobre aerolíneas que ya empezaron a sentir las consecuencias.
Lamentablemente, la misma imagen se presenta también para restaurantes.
En cuestión de una semana, entre el 9 y el 16 de marzo, en fuentes de Internet como OpenTable,
hemos visto un desplome en las reservas de hasta el 80 % en el Reino Unido, en los EE. UU. y en todo el mundo.
Vemos una imagen similar en lo que los economistas llaman «datos brutos».
Este es el número de cambio porcentual en el sector automovilístico.
¿Por qué me fijo en este número?
Porque en mi investigación anterior del sector estadounidense, italiano y británico
siempre descubría que, cuando las personas tienen dificultades,
reciben un impacto negativo en sus ingresos o cuando hay incertidumbre,
la forma más fácil para ellos de lidiar con ella es posponer la compra de grandes productos duraderos,
como coches.
Es algo muy fácil de posponer:
quería comprar un coche nuevo, pero esperaré un poco más
porque ahora no tengo dinero, porque no estoy seguro de si conservaré el trabajo
o porque no estoy seguro de qué sucederá en el futuro.
Lo que descubrí en mi investigación anterior es que
cuando se aprecia un gran cambio en la compra de vehículos, se acerca una gran recesión.
Miren los datos actuales de China.
Los números oscilaban entre positivos y negativos,
hubo más negativos, pero luego, en las dos primeras semanas de febrero,
China registró una caída del 92 % en la compra de vehículos.
Esto no es únicamente un efecto del confinamiento que solo afectó una parte del país.
Es el resultado de una serie de precauciones creadas por el pánico y la incertidumbre
en toda una nación, que provocó un desplome de hasta un 92 %.
Otro factor importante que considerar es que
a raíz del confinamiento, se fomentará —si no se obligará— que
muchos profesionales en muchos sectores trabajen desde casa.
Pero trabajar desde casa no funciona para todos ni para todos los sectores.
Supongamos que ustedes desean obtener una idea de lo costoso que será para una economía
que la gente comience a trabajar desde casa.
Una manera simple de entenderlo es viendo esta gráfica.
Son datos procedentes de los EE. UU., de la Oficina de Estadísticas Laborales.
Los triángulos verdes representan el número de trabajadores en cada sector.
Todos estos trabajadores representan el 100 % del PIB de los EE. UU.
Los puntos azules son una estimación del número de trabajadores en cada sector
que podrían potencialmente trabajar desde casa.
Me gustaría que se fijasen aquí en una serie de puntos.
Primero, ningún punto azul está cerca del triángulo verde.
De hecho, ni siquiera en un punto intermedio. Están mucho más cerca del cero
que del triángulo verde.
Esto significa que un número pequeño de trabajadores en cada sector puede realmente trabajar desde casa.
Por supuesto, podemos ampliar la capacidad y en unos pocos meses, si no semanas,
veremos un gran cambio y muchas más personas trabajando desde casa.
Pero esas brechas son muy grandes.
En el sector educativo y sanitario, tenemos 35 millones de trabajadores
de los cuales solo 10 millones pueden potencialmente trabajar desde casa.
Pero, seguramente, el número creció recientemente.
Además, quiero que sepan que existe una gran heterogeneidad en todos los sectores,
con algunos sectores que tienden mucho más a trabajar desde casa que otros.
Los sectores del ocio y de la hospitalidad, construcción, limpieza, restaurantes, cine, teatro
son todos los sectores, toda una parte de la economía, que simplemente no pueden trabajar desde casa.
Si cierran el país, simplemente le quitan todo el valor.
Si ustedes suman todos los puntos azules —el número de los trabajadores—,
ni siquiera se acercarán al 50 % de toda la fuerza laboral,
lo que nuevamente sugiere que el confinamiento tendrá un impacto heterogéneo en los sectores
y también, en gran medida, en toda la economía.
¿Qué implicación tiene esto para la oferta o la demanda?
Aquí me pongo el sombrero de economista y describo un marco muy sencillo
de la demanda agregada, la oferta agregada, el precio y la cantidad.
La pendiente de la demanda está decreciendo, los precios más bajos tienden a originar una demanda más alta,
y un precio más alto tiende a reducir la demanda.
En cuanto a la oferta, los precios son más altos, las empresas quieren producir más,
y sucede lo contrario cuando los precios son más bajos.
Al principio, pueden pensar en COVID-19 como en un shock de oferta.
Las personas en China no pueden ir a trabajar, las empresas no pueden producir ese insumo intermedio
que se usa mucho, por ejemplo, en coches,
en electrónica, en otros muchos lugares del mundo.
Es la interrupción de la cadena de suministro global.
Esto implica que para la misma cantidad, la oferta agregada aumenta
de una manera que reduce la cantidad y incrementa los precios.
Se produce menos y por poco que se produce
ahora se tiene que pagar más, porque hay más competencia para conseguir el producto.
¿Es este el final de la historia?
No, en realidad no.
¿Por qué?
Porque ahora que ha habido un shock de oferta global que es el efecto directo,
entra en juego una serie de efectos indirectos.
Existe una incertidumbre acerca de hasta cuándo se prolongará todo esto.
Existe una incertidumbre acerca de si todos estamos contagiados.
Vamos a ahorrar más dinero, preferimos no hacer una nueva inversión,
porque no sabemos cuándo terminará el confinamiento.
No sabemos si vamos a perder el trabajo debido a la caída de la economía.
No sabemos si vamos a infectarnos o si, tal vez, ya estamos infectados,
y, por lo tanto, ya no podremos trabajar o vamos a perder nuestro empleo.
Entonces, lo que sucede es que disminuimos la demanda.
Empezamos a gastar un poco menos anticipando que
tal vez necesitaremos ese dinero más adelante.
La demanda agregada se contrae más que la oferta agregada
de una manera que implica una mayor disminución de la cantidad y una bajada de los precios.
Pero, por supuesto, si hay incertidumbre en el sector del hogar,
también la habrá en el sector empresarial.
Ellos ven que hay una gran interrupción,
que los hogares reducen la demanda de los productos de las empresas.
Entonces este no es un buen momento para invertir.
Pero si las empresas no invierten, empiezan a contraer la demanda agregada.
Pero, ¿qué significa que la demanda agregada se contrae?
¿Qué significa que las personas empiezan a consumir menos?
Significa que las personas comienzan a comprar menos.
Y si compran menos, significa que las ventas de las empresas caen.
Si las ventas de las empresas caen, significa que las empresas ya no tienen liquidez.
Como veremos en algunas diapositivas, para muchas empresas, especialmente pequeñas y jóvenes,
la liquidez es un componente muy importante en su modelo de negocio.
Sin liquidez, simplemente no pueden operar y, por lo tanto, deben declararse en quiebra.
Tienen que cerrar.
Y aquí es donde la demanda y la oferta siguen su rumbo sin encontrarse nunca.
¿Por qué? Porque el cierre de una empresa significa que muchos trabajadores serán despedidos.
Si muchos trabajadores son despedidos, pierden sus trabajos, pierden su propia liquidez,
pierden sus ingresos y, por lo tanto, no pueden consumir más.
Si no pueden consumir, la demanda se reduce
dando como resultado una recesión cada vez mayor y, finalmente, una depresión.
Esta gran caída en la demanda genera aún más incertidumbre
y ejerce una presión aún mayor sobre la liquidez de las empresas
que estas ya no ven porque el consumo se contrajo.
Si la liquidez de las empresas disminuye, algunas de ellas se declararán en quiebra,
lo que implica que van a despedir a más trabajadores,
quienes generarán una mayor reducción del consumo y una mayor caída de la demanda.
Y así sucesivamente.
Permítanme darles más evidencias sobre la importancia que tiene la liquidez,
porque creo que lo que veremos será escasez de liquidez.
En esta gráfica, aporto evidencias
que he reunido con colegas del Banco de Inglaterra
en mi investigación sobre el universo de las empresas privadas.
Las empresas privadas son empresas que no cotizan en la bolsa de valores.
Puede ser la tienda que está al final de su calle,
puede ser cualquier empresa pequeña de construcción
o una empresa pequeña de servicios que no cotiza en la bolsa de valores.
Lo que ven en el eje vertical es la relación de liquidez/activos.
Las empresas que más dependen de su liquidez tendrán una relación bastante grande.
¿Por qué? O bien porque los activos son muy pequeños, o bien porque no tienen muchos activos.
La mayor parte de lo que ganan no proviene de los ingresos que obtienen del activo,
sino de los ingresos que obtienen de las ventas, que es una medida de liquidez.
Lo que ven en el eje horizontal es la medida del tamaño de una empresa.
El tamaño se determina mediante el valor del activo de la empresa.
El valor del activo de una empresa pequeña es menos de 100 000 £ o 250 000 £.
Lo que vemos es una curva muy pronunciada.
Una empresa pequeña tiene una relación de liquidez/activos mucho mayor.
En otras palabras, las pequeñas empresas tienden a depender mucho más de la liquidez para administrar sus negocios.
Su relación de liquidez/activos es tan grande porque no tienen muchos activos.
Si dejan de obtener liquidez porque ya no venden a los consumidores,
porque estos ya no quieren comprar por motivos de precaución o por pánico, o por incertidumbre,
la empresa ya no podrá funcionar.
Ya no podrá pagar a sus proveedores ni a sus trabajadores.
Para darles una idea de la importancia que podría tener este efecto, he dibujado un eje horizontal en 0,5.
Esta es una relación de liquidez/activos, de modo que su liquidez equivale al 50 % del valor del activo.
Es una medida arbitraria pero útil para darles una idea de la dependencia de una empresa de su liquidez.
Las empresas que están por encima de este umbral son empresas
que dependen fuertemente de su liquidez para administrar sus negocios.
Solo para darles una idea, en el Reino Unido, las empresas con una relación de
liquidez/activos superior a 0,5 representan aproximadamente el 10 % de la parte del empleo entre las empresas privadas.
Dado que las empresas privadas representan alrededor del 50 % del empleo total en la economía,
con el 50 % restante representado por las empresas que cotizan en la bolsa,
las empresas que dependen más de su liquidez
son las que tienen más probabilidades de sufrir con la bajada de la demanda,
generada por el pánico y la incertidumbre de la crisis del coronavirus,
y registrar una caída del 5 % en el empleo.
Un número extremadamente importante.
Lamentablemente, el problema de la liquidez no solo afecta a las empresas.
Como documenté en otra investigación sobre los hogares,
estos también experimentan una importante escasez de liquidez.
Lo que ven en la gráfica derecha es la parte de inquilinos,
propietarios con hipoteca y propietarios sin hipoteca en el Reino Unido.
El 40 % de la población tiene una hipoteca, el 30 % son inquilinos.
Si miran la hoja de panel, si miran sus carteras,
si miran sus patrimonios y lo dividen en patrimonio líquido y patrimonio líquido como,
por ejemplo, inmuebles, pueden ver que existe un marcado contraste entre estos tres grupos.
Fíjense en los propietarios absolutos.
Tienen una gran riqueza de activos, porque tienen una casa y no tienen ninguna hipoteca sobre esa casa.
Al mismo tiempo, también tienen mucho patrimonio líquido.
¿Qué es el patrimonio líquido?
Son ahorros, dinero en efectivo, acciones.
Y si miran el rango intercuartil,
verán que las personas a la izquierda y derecha de la distribución siguen teniendo liquidez.
Parecen libres.
Parecen tener suficiente liquidez para responder a un impacto negativo de ingresos.
Al otro lado del espectro están los inquilinos.
Por definición, no poseen vivienda.
Y, como ustedes pueden imaginar, suelen tener muy poco patrimonio líquido.
Aquí, 0 se refiere al valor medio.
¿Qué es el valor medio?
Es el punto de distribución que deja al 50 % de la población en un lado de la distribución
y al otro 50 %, en el otro lado.
Pero solo si los miran en el rango intercuartil,
verán que hay muchas personas en el territorio negativo.
¿Qué significa eso? Significa que tienen una deuda no garantizada.
Por otro lado, hay algunos que tienen poca liquidez.
Está claro que los inquilinos viven con límites.
Los inquilinos tienen muy poca liquidez.
Ahorran muy poco dinero ante una adversidad.
Si pierden su trabajo, no pueden pagar el alquiler.
Si pierden su trabajo, no pueden consumir.
Pero esto no afecta solo a los inquilinos.
Hay una parte importante de la población que también se enfrenta a la escasez de liquidez.
Es un poco más sorprendente.
¿Por qué? Porque son personas con dinero.
Son hogares con una hipoteca.
Poseen riqueza —patrimonio inmobiliario—, sin embargo, la mayor parte de su patrimonio no es líquida.
¿Qué significa eso?
Que no pueden moverlo fácilmente.
Tienen una parte importante de patrimonio inmobiliario porque tienen una casa,
pero también tienen una deuda con esa casa.
Siguen teniendo una hipoteca, por eso su parte es menor que la de los propietarios absolutos.
Sin embargo, se han esforzado mucho para pagar un depósito y poder comprar la casa.
No obstante, si se fijan en su liquidez,
si se fijan en sus ahorros, si se fijan en su participación accionaria,
verán que su valor medio es 0.
Fue muy sorprendente descubrir en mi investigación
que alrededor del 50 % de los hogares con hipoteca viven con un nivel de liquidez
que es apenas la mitad de sus ingresos mensuales.
Esas son personas que, si dejan o pierden su trabajo,
no podrán pagar la hipoteca.
Esas son personas que, si pierden su trabajo, no podrán consumir.
Esas son personas que, si pierden su trabajo, se verán obligadas a vender su casa.
Claro, si todos venden su casa, provocarán una caída del precio,
que ocasionará una crisis financiera del tipo que hemos visto en 2007-2009 con una gran recesión.
La conclusión es que hay una parte importante de la población
que vive con lo justo, que vive y consume la mayor parte de lo que gana.
Son el 50 % de los deudores hipotecarios que por sí solos representan el 20%, el 50 % o el 40 % de la población.
Hay otro 20 % de inquilinos, que probablemente sean el 20 % de la población total,
y hay otro 20 % que es muy probable que sean cobradores en negro.
Juntos representan el 40 % de la población
que depende de la liquidez para pagar el alquiler y la hipoteca, y para sostener el consumo.
Si pierden sus empleos, toda esta demanda caerá bruscamente.
Bien, ¿qué hemos aprendido en esta conferencia?
La recesión global parece ser inevitable.
Posiblemente, también ocurrirá en los mercados emergentes.
En general, a pesar de la enfermedad y el shock de oferta
que provocó, los efectos de la demanda probablemente serán mucho más importantes que el shock de oferta inicial.
La incertidumbre, el pánico y las políticas de confinamiento parecen ser la clave que fomenta la enorme caída de la demanda.
Otro dato importantísimo es que la inversión de muchas empresas
(especialmente pequeñas y jóvenes) y el gasto de muchos hogares, hemos identificado alrededor del 40 %,
especialmente el de los inquilinos y deudores hipotecarios, dependen en gran medida de la liquidez.
Si la fuerte caída de la demanda obliga a las empresas a cerrar y, por lo tanto, a despedir a esas personas,
estas no tendrán ingresos para pagar su consumo
y la economía entrará en un ciclo de depresión que será muy perjudicial.
Eso es todo en lo que respecta a la parte 3.
En la siguiente parte veremos cuáles son las opciones en materia de políticas para hacer frente a esa gran depresión económica.
¡Gracias!

---

### How to communicate through a virtual working world | LBS
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oY6vVUnKIk

Idioma: en

welcome to the London Business School
webinar series leading through a
pandemic
I'm Julian birkinshaw a professor here
in London Business School and I'll be
your host for the entire series we
thought we would start with a very
practical topic one which everybody I
mean literally everybody is now wholly
engaged with which is the challenge of
working virtually and who better to lead
this session than professor Linda
Gratton a leading authority on many
aspects of managing people careers the
future of work more generally
Linda's been at lbs for more than twenty
years longer in fact than I have and as
a permanent fixture on the thinker's 50
list of the top management thinkers in
the world I believe she is ranked number
13 at the moment then there's also
fortunately done some work specifically
on this topic of virtual working and
she's done that over a number of years
so she really is perfectly placed to
help us with this topic so without
further ado I am going to hand over to
Linda Linda welcome again and we're
gonna let you steer us through this
topic give us a bit of context a bit of
history and a little bit of practical
advice and then we're going to get a bit
of the discussion thank you thank you
very much Julian and welcome everybody
thousands I can see online right now to
this webinar on virtual working I've
been studying it actually since the
1980s and that was remember for those of
you around in the 1980s and as Julian
has suggested I certainly was that was
when you first brought your personal
computer home I don't know if you
remember those days and we've been
looking at it ever since and what I'd
like to do in this webinar is to say
something about what we've learnt but
then also to say what does that mean for
us I'm going to come up with six actions
I think you should be taking right now
to ensure that you can and your
colleagues of people that you lead can
really make the most of the time that we
have ahead of us in terms of home
working now when I said it started in
the 1980s of course most of us didn't
work from home in fact even now most of
us don't work from home
well we didn't and
till a few days ago so let me ask the
first poll so may we have the first poll
please and the first poll is simply to
find out just where you are right now
so first poll is coming up now now we
remember - that's poll number two let's
get poll number one up
can we get poll number one up please
okay pull number one where are you now
are you in your work office like we are
are you at home
are you in a working hub you know those
places that you can go to nearby maybe
even or are you somewhere else the Isle
of Skye coffee house sitting in your
beach hut most of us are working at home
isn't that extraordinary and actually
one thing I'm going to say during my
conversation today is this is an
enormous opportunity for us to
experiment with something that many of
us have always wanted to do which is to
spend more time working from home
eighty-eight percent of the thousands of
people who have come in right now are
working from home now how are you
finding it well let me let's move on and
say a little bit more about what we know
around virtual working so so let's let's
move on to the second slide thank you
okay so really when you think about
virtual working working from home I'd
like you to think about it really as a
story of social and technological
ingenuity and it has in my view three
elements and those elements that I'm
going to return to as we talk about what
it is to work virtually the first of
course is technological you know you
started working at home in the 1980s
because you had a personal computer that
you could bring home and start using at
home and that's why the social pie
years of home working were freelancers
who brought their laptops home that big
parcel computers you might remember them
to actually Julian's nodding here that
actually work worked from home so and of
course that technologies evolved in the
very fact that we can now have thousands
of people collect connected shows that
that technology is is is moving very
fast and that by the way is going to be
a very important part of the story I
want to tell today but it isn't just
about technology because what those
early pioneers found is although working
from home had lots of advantages the
disadvantage was that they were lonely
some of them isolated and also companies
fretted that maybe they weren't as
innovative as they might have been
because they weren't collaborating it
wasn't face to face so the second
element I want to talk about today as
social you're probably not thinking
about this yet because you're all
scrambling to get your technology right
and find a chair that you can sit in and
a desk and so on and try and help your
employees to do that but my prediction
is very quickly we're going to think
about the social aspects of it because
humans are very very social animals and
when we are put in our home like this as
many of us are isolated then that's
going to have implications on our
relationships with our self in terms of
our own mental health but also our
relationships with others so I want to
the second element is social the third
is work itself because the sort of work
that you do in an office when you've got
lots of people around you and the tasks
that you perform are not going to be the
same as the ones that you do at home so
when we think about virtual working we
need to think about those three elements
we need to think about the technological
aspects of it the social aspects and
also the work the design of work aspects
but let's and that by the way then
becomes virtual working so let me tell
you a little bit about the story of
virtual working which by
the way in the past has also been
influenced by external events this isn't
the first time it has been so let's just
also think a bit about how that's done
and what we can learn from what I would
call the waves of virtual working that
started by the way in the 1980s and it
started with those virtual freelancers
the people who are working from home
often using their own personal home
computers here's one if you don't
remember what it looked like it took up
a lot of space and by 1990 Elance the
platform company had had launched which
allowed people to to share work between
each other and remember by 1995 eBay was
on the I was on the platform and that
meant that people could also sell goods
so in the 1980s was really a time when
we were experimenting with moving out to
an office because we were selling stuff
or working on stuff and we were using
the computers that had just emerged now
what did those social pioneers find
because we were researching them at that
time well we found that they were some
of them were independent consultants
some of them were freelancers and what
they loved was autonomy and flexibility
and maybe you're feeling that right now
even though you're probably worried
about the technology there's a little
bit of you that's perhaps thinking and
your employees are thinking you know I
now have more autonomy and I have more
flexibility but what we also found
during that period when we were
researching these at-home freelancers is
that they worried about being part of a
community and they also worried about
what we as a spy's of psychologists were
called tacit knowledge you know the sort
of knowledge that isn't easily shared by
reading something the sort of knowledge
you get when you're hanging around
watching somebody you know both of us
have children who are doctors and we
were just speaking a moment ago that
that that means that you know they
learnt a lot through watching other
other doctors okay so that was what I
would call wave one now wave
- which really started in the early
two-thousands was when it moved from
social pioneers who were freelancers at
home into the corporation and you in
corporations in large corporations
suddenly had virtual corporate
colleagues by the way and we wrote this
in a Harvard Business Review in 2013
myself and Tammy Jones
19:11 made a big difference and so did
the SARS epidemic into 2002 so this
isn't the first time that actually a
pandemic has made an impact on the way
that we work one of the things that we
thought actually after the SARS pandemic
was that we never went back exactly to
how we were before and that's one of the
things I want us to think about today is
will we ever return to how we work
before I don't think we will and I just
want us to think that what we're
experiencing now isn't it isn't just a
blip it would fundamentally change the
way that we work so where was where were
we in in 2000 well I'd say like anywhere
anytime do you remember though some of
you might have been working companies
that said you work anytime anywhere and
that's because we now had the
collaborative communications and the
collaborative tools to allow people to
work from home so your employees were
now working from home and you are in
often okay about that but from a social
perspective you did begin to wonder
whether they were less engaged there
wasn't any data to show that by the way
and also you fretted a bit about
productivity as managers you know if
people were out of sight where they act
they might have been anywhere anytime
but they were also out of sight and and
companies began to sort of worried
worried about that in terms of work they
began to struggle with how do you manage
people working from home and how do you
measure their performance and a very
interesting research project which I
actually wrote up in one of my books are
called the shift some years back was the
experiment that British Telecom did
where they sent half of their
group to work from home and then half of
them to stay in the office and they
measured they it was a proper experiment
so they had baseline measures and then
they measured a whole series of measures
across a time period so they measured
engagement retention productivity they
had good measures of those three things
what they found was this that if from
the start if you use the baseline
measures of the at-home workers and the
the work that the in employment workers
the people working from the office
office workers what you found is very
quickly the productivity of the at home
workers deteriorated and the reason it
deteriorated and we looked at this very
closely was because they didn't know how
to use the technology and they didn't
know how to work together over time as
they learnt how to use that technology
and how as they learned how to work
together collaboratively their
productivity engagement and performance
increased so it was the same level as
the office workers and for some teams it
actually was higher so there is a
possibility that working from home might
not be a stall to productivity and might
be an actual bonus to productivity but
as I'm going to show later to get that
right you have to be like BT learn very
quickly how to actually work from home
and that then led to what I would call
the third wave and this is when we wrote
the Harvard Business Review about this
into 2013 which we called virtual
co-workers because what was beginning to
happen is that we now had low cost
collaborative tools you know companies
were beginning now to join up all their
employees and video costs were falling
you remember even a decade ago this
would not have been possible this would
have been a very expensive piece of kit
and it would have been breaking all the
time it looks as if this is
to work perfectly fingers crossed but
what happened is that people who are now
working from home began to feel lonely
and isolated and so there was then
co-working hubs often based in smaller
towns or or or areas where employees
could congregate not in their office
their main office but actually in hubs
where they could work together and by
the way freelancers did the same and
this is why you've seen the huge growth
of these co-working spaces because
actually all of the people who work in
we work now could work at home but they
choose not to because humans like being
there other people and this is I think
something we've really got to take into
consideration as we think about this new
phase that were entering people working
work also realized how to divide and
distribute tasks but also worried about
natural communication where are we now
I'm going to call it the mass experiment
so when I go back and write about this
as I'm sure we will like I've already
written something which you'll see in a
few days time when we talk about the
mass experiment this is nobody this has
never happened before
we've had a synchronous home working
where some of us work from home some of
the time you may be because you are a
young a parent of young kids or because
you are caring for up for somebody or
because you wanted to choose to work
from home that day but remember this is
these were these were just few are some
people some of the time so that was
asynchronous the reason it's so sort of
fascinating now is it's everybody or
many people all of the time that means
it's synchronous and that actually is
going to really change the way that we
think about this now we have got
extraordinary corporate platforms and
also the capacity to have many to many
conversations in my own advisory
research work for example we are
currently joining up up to a hundred
thousand people in an
conversation of virtual conversation
about values and many companies are now
doing that so the technology is
extraordinarily developing developing
extraordinarily quickly and gives us
real opportunities I think to move on
from the work from the waves that we saw
earlier but of course what's different
this time in terms of the mass
experiment is in the past home workers
always had the chance of getting out of
the home going into the office going
into a local hub we now are home working
we have social distance and we are
isolating ourselves and that in my view
is a completely different issue because
we know that social isolation has real
challenges in terms of mental health and
also in terms of collaboration and
purpose so let's just take a look at the
second poll now please and in the second
poll the question that I'd like to ask
you is about your experiences right now
by the way I'm keeping a diary yeah I'm
keeping a diary because I think I think
we're gonna forget really quickly what
it was like at the beginning so I'm
going to ask you right now to describe
your experiences this is what day three
for some of you it's today it's day two
for me and here's your choices I love
the autonomy and flexibility
I find that technology frustrating
interestingly a few people saying that
gives me time to think and concentrate
as an academic
I've always enjoyed home working because
that's where I write I write from home I
I don't write from a busy office it
works okay but I miss the social
interaction that's coming out the
strongest right now and I keep getting
distracted my by my family that reminds
us all of that Martha's business that he
kind of it's getting the BBC and then
suddenly his children appeared I think
we're going to see a lot of children
appearing on the sides particularly from
but isn't that interesting so it works
okay but I missed the social interaction
I sort of would have predicted that
because I think we've got the technology
right I think even five years ago that
would have been frustrating for lots of
us but actually most of us have sort of
got the technology right whereas
beginning also to
of the autonomy and the time flexibility
but it's really the social interaction
that's an issue and I think that's a
really important problem and challenge
that we have to face so let's move
straight into really what we might do
about that and I'm going to suggest we
take six actions and we take them right
now
so remember Petey's experience which is
everything performance productivity
engagement goes down and it goes down
until you get it right so the faster you
can get it right the more you reduce
that productivity a dip which you're
going to feel right now so these are the
six actions you should take right now
number one technology invest in
intuitive technology you know we know
all about what that is the fact that so
many of you said it's not an issue for
you means that that's an action you're
already taken but let's just a couple of
points there one is make sure it's part
of the regular flow of what people at
home find it really difficult for you to
use technology that they've never seen
before make it sure sure it's the first
port of call and match the technology to
the task and what I mean by that is if
it's a simple project then use project
based technology but use video as much
as you can and I want to I want to say a
bit more about this later an experiment
with a big conversations this is a great
time for you to experiment with with
platforms that allow thousands of people
to work together to talk together to
have conversations about values about
how they're feeling and so on so I would
recommend that the ones that we run we
run for three days so we run we have a
platform open for three days I would
recommend we all excuse this opportunity
as a time for experimentation number two
social now many of you have already said
that you're feeling isolated and it's
only day three
imagine how we're going to feel in three
months time and yesterday I'm a member
of the World Economic Forum on work and
the economy and we had a conversation
amongst ourselves yes
today about about social isolation
isolation and have heard quite a lot
from our Chinese colleagues who of
course are already into month two so I
want to also say something about that
because I think that gives us some ideas
the first thing and again just do it now
reimagine the home the home workspace
when people went in to look at the homes
of freelancers and people were working
from home they found that those that
worked well tended to have a couple of
things in common one is they had a hope
they they found a place to work where
they were protected from outside
distractions and and that also helped
them to avoid feeling too rootless so
they had easy access to the tools of
their trade
they used a space that was dedicated to
work which they left when work was
complete and they were also
idiosyncratic in terms of what each
person had I would recommend if you
haven't done it already that you ask
everybody who are your your leading
about their working environment and if
that means helping them out with a
budget to get the right chair the right
the right table I would do it right now
because we're in in this in the long
haul and as much as possible you need to
help people find a find a place to work
at home so we need to do that really by
this the end of this week that's sort of
how I'm seeing it with my own team the
second and this is really I think the
most important aspect of what we're
going to talk about today in terms of
social interaction the area that you
were most concerned about is make it
human now what do we mean by that well I
would make a couple of suggestions one
is use high fidelity communications as
much as possible humans really really
like face-to-face communication and
video allows us to do that you can watch
me now I can't see you but of course on
some of the platforms that you use you
could see 10 or 20 people simultaneously
I would recommend as fast as possible
you start using video as a way of
bringing people
together and I would also suggest that
you build in right now what I would call
water cooler conversations so for
example in my own team who are separate
we're going to four o'clock have a
coffee break where we all sit in front
of our video and drink coffee together
and don't actually talk about work it's
just going to be how how do you how do
you how are you finding things and we're
going to on Friday have a cocktail hour
where we all sit and drink cocktails
together you need to put those in place
as fast as possible because human
interaction isn't just about work
conversations it's about the watercooler
conversations and those happen
face-to-face and you need to build
face-to-face opportunities for people to
do that so make it human my third set of
recommendations is about work itself and
here are some ideas the first is that
when you think about working in the
office there's a natural rhythm to that
you know you come in you chat around to
people you know you need to create some
of those natural working rhythms when
you're working virtually so for example
in my group we meet actually at nine
o'clock not 10 o'clock we had a group
meeting at 9 o'clock this morning and
we're going to meet again at 4:00 where
everybody can sit and talk to each other
and I think those team meetings are
going to be really crucial you need to
put them in the diary so people have
some structure because one of the
concerns about work when it's from home
is it becomes unstructured so you need
as much as possible to build natural
structure into the way that people work
and also in terms of your projects what
we know from what working from virtual
projects is that they also need a
structure so if you're launching a
project this week as many of you will be
then remember that that needs a kickoff
structure an onboarding structure and a
milestone structure what we learnt by
the way from virtual projects is that
people really need to know who each
other is as early as possible to learn
something about what each other likes
and what sort of path
that's where the coffee that coffee is
going to come in useful
but also understand what the milestones
are which takes me to my final set of
recommendations which is about really
building in task structures and here's
some ideas from that which actually I've
taken from Tata consulting services
that's been working virtually as IBM
have been doing for many years now this
is what they do in terms of setting up
projects and setting up work number one
absolute clarity about goals and key
roles number two definitions of people's
boundaries and their control remember
when people in the office they work
through boundaries and control on a
moment-by-moment basis by going in to
see somebody and say you know would you
stop doing this or could I could I take
that from you with that because we don't
have that we need more clarity about
boundaries and control clarification of
tasks and processes and measuring roles
and commitments and one of the things I
think it's also very very much about the
culture that you set up and remember one
of the issues about home working is that
because people are out of sight you
don't trust them and my recommendation
here is to take the view that TCS takes
which is to say trust someone until they
have proven to be untrustworthy so my
final point here is to make sure that
you trust people who are working from
home they're not skiving they're not
doing lots of other things so they're
going to try as much as possible to make
this work for you and to make it work
for themselves
so in summary these are the six actions
I think we should be taking there around
making sure the technology's intuitive
and you learn to experiment they're
about social in terms of reimagining the
home workplace and making it human and
finally they're about work itself in
terms of creating a natural work rhythm
and focusing on collaboration and Trust
and let me just finish by making a sort
of a slightly philosophical point which
I think Julie and I are going to come to
later let me just say a couple of
things by way of finishing number one I
don't think that will ever get back to
the place we were before this pandemic
I'm going to use the word pre-pandemic
work and post pandemic work I think that
because it's all of us it's synchronous
it's not a synchronous is synchronous
and this will go on for months I believe
that it will fundamentally change the
way all of us work I was talking on the
web conference yesterday to a Chinese
businessman and he said you know I used
to fly between Beijing and Shanghai
every week and do two meetings he said
now I used video conferencing and I do
five meetings in a day and I said do you
think you're ever going to fly to fly
that again and he said no why would I
and you know it seems to me and those of
you who read my books know that I felt
for some time it's time we changed the
way that we work we've got into far too
many bad habits in terms of too many
meetings having long commutes and we've
not spent enough time with our kids and
our carbon footprint and our mental
health and the wear and tear have all
warned us that this was wrong but for
all sorts of reasons we haven't been
able to stop it this gives us an
opportunity to shift that it gives us an
opportunity to reset the way that we
work and I think that you know if we can
keep this innovative spirit and I for
one over this period will be blogging
and writing columns and doing webinars I
think that we can come out of this in a
better place and more resilient than we
can went into it thanks very much Thank
You Linda
terrific so think that was a wonderful
kind of summary of both where we've been
and what we're doing now and indeed
where we might go I'd been following all
the questions and I've been attempting
to structure my goodness thoughts on
them so we're gonna have a little chat
here first of all let me acknowledge
some of the questions were about things
which we're going to talk about in other
webinars so someone was asking about
scenario planning well
we're absolutely going to talk about
that next week a couple of you are
asking questions about how do we stop
panic buying shops how do we make social
distancing work effectively well our
colleague Nero seven áthen is going to
be speaking about some of those
behavioral things I think in two weeks
time so I'm going to deliberately Park
the questions which are not directly
related to this session what I'm going
to do is we're going to start with some
of their a practical questions and we're
going to kind of work out from the
practical and the and the immediate to
some of them or philosophic or kind of
end up in there in the big questions so
where should we start
someone said building on your point
about the watercooler
yeah and what it what is this sort of
the minimum physical engagement that we
need you mentioned that the BT workers
were dropping off in productivity we all
get this notion that you can't
completely isolate yourself can you give
us any sort of guidelines alert you know
yes once we get through the pandemic
period and we can still have some sort
of getting together any thoughts on the
rhythms of how often we should be making
face to face versus how often we should
be just working from home well I think
you know thanks for that question it's
it's a really sort of fascinating
question and I that is intriguing fast
rule to that it depends on the task and
it depends on the person so let's take
the task first I mean for the moment
people we're going to move into social
isolation and so I think that's going to
be the case it's not yet the case in the
UK but I think it will be very rapidly
and so people aren't going to have any
physical engagement and I said earlier I
think that's going to be problematic and
we need very quickly to bring in a sort
of systems to bring that back and video
of course is absolutely the best way to
do that I think in terms of post the
post pandemic world there are some tasks
where you know you can do most of it
completely on your own writing a book
for example when I write a book I don't
really talk to people I just sit in my
room write six years and years on end
but but there's other tasks where
physical being face to face is really
important and one of the things we've
learnt a psychologist
is that knowledge is both explicit and
tacit explicit knowledge you can sort of
get by reading a manual or watching a
YouTube but tacit knowledge as I
mentioned earlier is the sort of
knowledge that you really need to be
with people and listening to them and
being coached by them so I I think the
reason in that second and third wave
that people moved from working from
their home all the time to working in
hubs is that they craved that physical
connectivity so I don't think anybody
will want to work from home all the time
I think what we'll be getting to is a
sort of an ebb and a flow and what might
that look like in terms of just time I
would say that we will definitely at the
end of this have more flexible working
because I think we all have learnt how
to use the technology
we'll have learnt how to use videos and
we might also sort of enjoyed spending a
bit of time at home so I what we might
also do which I've talked about a few
times in my own work is moved to a
four-day week which which I personally
have said for some time is a good thing
primarily because those of you who know
my work know my last book was called the
hundred year life we're going to work
into our 70s you can't do that it's
really hard to do that if you're simply
working all the time you don't have time
to learn and regenerate so I think in
terms of regeneration I would like to
see this as an opportunity for some
companies to experiment post pandemic to
move to a four-day week so I want to
yeah I'm build on that a couple of
questions that are linked to it um one
was around its decision making more
shall we say rational or less political
online and and I think what they're
getting at is you know as a means for
sharing information online working is
fine we join a call I was on one this
morning
ten people we're sharing what we're
doing it's easy but then sometimes we
have to make decisions right and
sometimes a decision in a face-to-face
situation is you know I'm looking at the
body language I'm trying to figure out
how hard to push you I mean you just
can't do
those things in the same way yeah in
online situations so so are we how are
we going to manage the sort of the more
difficult aspects of group dynamics
around decision making how and someone
made it a question about this as well
how are we going to be able to kind of
measure the success and effectiveness of
our of our decision-making processes hmm
I think I think again that's a great
question and thank you so much I know
that we have an opportunity with some of
the other professors down the line to
talk more about that we've encountered
that actually very much in our own work
looking at virtual working and for
example when we do virtual working we do
it right across the world and what we
found is the some cultures and we work a
great deal in Japan where face-to-face
contact contact contact is absolutely
crucial for that for working out what
the person is thinking so what we found
are our Japanese colleagues do is to use
an emoji Oh to show how they're feeling
at any point in time that's cute
so they actually so I think one of the
things we have to learn if as we move to
virtual is actually to express to say
how we're feeling so for example this
morning when I did my teamwork team we
asked each person how are you feeling
today and so I think that talking more
about emotions is going to be so
important because humans get so much of
their signaling from body movement and
again as I said earlier I think videos
are going to be really really important
because at least you can see people but
if you're in a very large group where
you can't see them and you're just on a
telephone link I think we have to find
ways like emojis that actually say this
is how I'm feeling right now that's
right so for your repressed British
stereotypical manager that's hard to do
we have to be a bit more expressive
about what we're feeling because that
feeling doesn't come out in a you know
in our online setting right I mean no
certainly not with suits oh yeah I think
that might be one of the things that we
learn is to express our emotions and
maybe use use technology as a way of
just showing this is how I'm feeling
right now and that links to um to a
question which was around productivity
or effectiveness gap between different
age groups between different national
cultures and you touched on the Japanese
story I mean it's a stereotype isn't it
to say that you know the younger
Millennials naturally use this
technology is that is that actually true
I mean is it the case that we're gonna
have to work harder to get people shall
I say our generation using this
technology he knows this is gonna get me
really started so okay technology and
generations there's no real evidence
that there's massive differences between
age groups in terms of technology if you
just look at dating apps apparently some
of the major users of dating that's now
with the over 50s / sixties in the over
70 so please drop the stereotype about
older people not being not wanting to
use technology there's no evidence of it
and it's stereotypical and it makes
other people feel to feel bad about that
so just assume that all your employees
are keen to use technology and you just
simply have to help them to do that so I
don't think you'll see any productivity
difference in terms of age and not
necessarily in terms of culture in
country but as I said earlier there are
cultures like as I gave the Japanese
example where face-to-face is very very
important and so you have to bring in
other ways of replicating some of those
aspects remember with the bTW example
that whilst I said productivity dipped
until they used Note knew how to use it
in the end productivity was higher than
the group who were working from an
office and the reason it was higher is
they actually had more productive hours
in the day so they were less likely to
spend ages chatting to people around the
water cooler okay so a couple of crisis
is difficult but I'm going to ask you
any questions about advice for
businesses supporting those with those
who were at home with young kids as you
know a lot of kids are school now and
sometimes you
that's required in other countries it's
becoming the norm question are mental
health I mean yeah is this actually
exacerbating the challenges that people
who have mental health issues facing I
mean any thoughts or advice on those
challenging questions okay firstly the
question of kids I just sent a fabulous
photograph tip to my family who have
children this morning which showed you
know new home working and it was a
picture of a mum drinking a glass of
wine with a cage next door to her with
the children in the cage
maybe not advised I'm not advice for the
kids in the cage but I think what we
would say is that we have to acknowledge
that people who are working from home
with children have a particular set of
challenges facing them both in terms of
you know just that the physicality of
where they're working because remember
in most of the world both parents work
so now you've got homes where two
parents are working and they've got
children who are no longer at school so
what can we do about this I would say I
would say two things number one talk
about it
and I'm suggesting that you have daily
conversations with everybody who's
working from home if not twice a day and
one of the questions you ask is how are
you getting on because this is a time of
experimentation and we'll have to learn
how you work when there's two of you
working and you've got kids around the
second thing I would suggest straight
away is to think about scheduling so to
appreciate that everybody is not going
to be able to work all the time and
rather than people hiding that I think
it's perfectly reasonable for you to say
if you've got kids at home there will be
periods when you're not going to be able
to work and I acknowledge that and make
it clear that that's part of the
schedule of work so I would say two
things number one be open about people's
experience you know we've all we've been
talking for years as indeed have you
Julian the agile corporation and the
agile corporation learns and and and
becomes agile so we all have to move
into a learning
time when we actually are learning about
these issues that we face and then we
can adapt so I think being adaptive and
thinking about scheduling is going to be
really crucial good neat question here
about about attention so you know for
the last week basically my diary has
been emptied of all my previous book
because I'm sure yours has as well so in
theory I've got you know huge amounts of
time in practice I'm hugely distracted
right I mean I'm watching literally kind
of watching the news by the hour to
figure out how things how things are
moving on and so there is this there's
this fascinating question about how we
filter out all the distractions when
this applies to working at home but it
also applies in daily life so that we
can actually focus on the right stuff in
an effective way any any any practical
tips on that well I think you know two
tips on that one is to do with the
individual one is to do with their
manager I think from the individuals
perspective do you remember I mentioned
that the freelancers learnt that they
needed a place where they weren't being
distracted so we learnt years decades
ago that people who were most productive
at home had a space where they weren't
distracted where they went to and when
they finished they moved from their
working space as it were to their home
space and if there's a door or something
in between that's even better so I think
what we've all got to do as individuals
and certainly I have done is to find a
space that you can sit in
I actually am getting dressed and
putting makeup on every morning and
that's not just because I'm on the video
so that we just actually as much as
possible replicate so that's the first
thing the second thing I would suggest
and it comes back to my earlier
suggestion of having meetings every
morning and every evening what I what I
did with my team today and yesterday is
we went around and they all destruct
described what they were doing that day
so by doing that you're also making
verbal commitments to the rest of the
team you're saying today so for example
I said today I'm doing this webinar and
then I'm going to
and what I do do as well is I actually
kept a diary of the things I did
yesterday because I have a feeling that
if after a week or two you're going to
think my god what did I do
but actually I can show you from my
diary yesterday that I did two web
sessions I spoke to a journalist from
the FT obviously I wrote this marvelous
Sloan MIT article you'll see so I
actually wrote that down so I could see
and then I also realized by the way that
when I looked at my you know running
thing I hadn't done any exercise at all
I hadn't closed any of my circles so
today I have to moderate my behavior so
you know I think it's what we know about
learning is that people learn by getting
feedback and by changing their behavior
so the more that you can ask people to
verbally tell you what they're doing
that day not because you're checking up
on them but because they can also
verbally commit to themselves this is
what I am going to do today there's a
good point because of course most people
on the other video will be familiar with
agile work which yes you know the
essence of agile working of course is a
self-organizing team accountability and
responsibility for schedule they have
daily stand-up meet yes and those are
physical stones yes and what you're
saying is almost replicating that yes
but in a virtual world and as soon as
you do that daily commitment it actually
does force a greater piece of work so
yeah a nice clean Karen you know your
work on agile teams is really important
here because we've been pushing you know
we've all pushed towards agile teams
there's been quite a few barriers the
barriers are now down so use the same
same protocols are using with agile
teams now with you up with your home
workers but it does link very nicely to
a question on your last point on focus
on collaboration and Trust you know one
of the biggest barriers to agile work is
not the agile team it's the boss of the
agile in other words that boss has to
get the head around the fact that the
agile team is making its own agenda and
making its own priorities and so I guess
the point is for those of us in
positions have
ship we've got to find ways of cutting
some slack if you liked exactly as you
say giving more trust to homes working
remotely in agile agile virtual teams I
think that's a really important point
that you're making Julian I mean you
know one of the reasons why home working
never really took off
is that bosses didn't work from home and
so they had no sort of real
understanding of what that was and they
often thought that people working from
home was skiving yeah
now all the bosses are working from home
and so I would say it's really important
that you show empathy yeah both to
yourself and the people that you're
leading be empathic to their situation
listen on a daily basis to the stories
that they're telling you about their
experiences and change your protocols as
fast as possible in order to reformat
work to reformat the home so that people
can actually use this period as an
opportunity to become more resilient to
have more resilient working practices as
I said at the beginning I've been
concerned about the way we work for some
years now and I've written extensively
about that and I don't think it's
resilient enough for people now to work
into their 70s we have to change the way
we work this is our opportunity to do
that but to do that you need as leaders
to be empathic about about the issues of
people face and to be trusting that
they're doing the very best they can so
let's move in the final piece we'll
probably do another five minutes or so
to some of these bigger questions and
I've been recording quite a lot of them
you know can we expect the death of the
office job I mean that links to
something you said earlier that an awful
lot of people have been sitting in
offices or going to business meetings
which they've finally figured out they
didn't need to but but let me they mean
that we should tie this to a much much
more kind of interesting linked question
which is you know we have this sort of
belief that somehow big agglomerations
big
million 20 million person cities is the
way that the world is moving you know as
soon as we've freed ourselves up and I'm
really talk about the developed world
rather than the developing world here
tokyo's and London's and New York's but
as soon as we got ourselves away from
this huge notion of collaboration you
know there are high quality of life
places we can Wayne mentioned the Isle
of Skye
you know I particularly like the Lake
District I know you're from the Lake
District I mean why shouldn't a bunch of
us actually you know start living in
some of these places and you know coming
to London anymore occasionally yeah and
and I and I have a lot of sympathy with
that view as I said at the very
beginning I don't think that when this
is over we'll go back to the place we
started you know that's the is the
metaphor of the flowing river actor you
know when you jump back in it's not the
same and it won't be the same and we
have to acknowledge that and if it goes
on I've been thinking about this is from
a psychological perspective mean what we
know is that habits form over a period
of time and if it goes on for three
months and I have every belief that it
will then three months is enough time
for new habits to form so what might
those habits be well part of those
habits will be that we we use video more
than we used to you know so we everybody
feels fine about having a video
conference part of those habit mean
means that we don't go into the office
as much as we do you know all of us are
worried about our carbon footprint and
we know that for many large companies
the major a major aspect of the carbon
footprint is people commuting from their
home into work we know that that has
mental health issues we know that many
of you have a two-hour commute how does
it feel not to have that commute now you
know in terms of your mental health so I
think that we will start asking
ourselves why do we work like that I've
been saying for ages wouldn't it be
marvelous if we didn't work in cities
and or move to cities right now humans
have moved to cities faster than is it
imaginable you know humans live now more
are more likely to live in cities than
there are in rural places but wouldn't
this be a great opportunity
to actually move back to other parts of
the country in all you know we're
speaking here in London but I spend
quite a bit of time in Tokyo the
Japanese would Japanese government would
love people to stop living in Tokyo and
to work to live in in the cities around
Japan so why not give this as an
opportunity to think differently about
where we locate ourselves no I think
that's right and and if you start
thinking through the ramifications of
that in terms of you know infrastructure
in terms of all those huge buildings
which is going to be you know up for up
for let's how much we rely on the trains
and and the planes it does link very
nicely to the whole sustainability
agenda that has been of course part of
the conversation for many years but but
it is fascinating isn't it that's all
the talk about changing our behaviors
because of the risk of global warming
have kind of come to nothing
whereas suddenly you know this crisis
dramatically changes how we pay there's
a fascinating psychological point about
what it takes us to change so it'll be
kind of neat won't it in some ways that
this this jot to the system which has
been imposed in an unfortunate way could
actually help us to then change our
behaviour in a positive way for that for
the payment it could and I think the
reason I would feel positive about
change is for two reasons one is this is
going to go on for months so it's so
habits new habits can form and secondly
it's everyone and what we know about new
ways of working is the major blockage
new ways of working it was also always
leaders themselves and now that they're
having to find new ways of working they
themselves are changing their behavior
so I would recommend that you know as I
say I'm keeping a diary but do recommend
that there are much bigger issues in
play here issues about where the post
pandemic world actually wants to be Wow
good Thank You Linda that was you know a
terrific point to end let me just give
you two or three minutes worth of of
housekeeping before before we close
first of all the video will be available
on capture but obviously the slides are
part of that video so if you want to
remind yourself of anything that Linda
said it will all be available I'm
guessing
tomorrow the final slide which if we
could just move to it that final slide
tells you two things first of all right
at the bottom it has got the landing
page for our entire webinar series it's
quite a long URL but I'm sure you can
write it down that gives you access to
the entire series there are currently
seven that are up on that list obviously
including this one we are about probably
next week to announce a further seven so
there will be two per week for the
entire period of you know end of March
April and even into early May and then
I'd like to just make a particular plug
for our next one which is on Friday Sir
Andrew Lichtman is our speaker I will be
there to introduce him into asking
questions so andrew is the former dean
of London Business School and he's a
professor of management practice in
accounting he's been doing a lot of
research on judgment making difficult
judgments and of course those are very
live issues to all of us all the time
particularly in times of crisis where
there is so much uncertainty so if you
would like to register for that talk
many of you will have already done so
but if you'd like to register go to the
landing page that's mentioned there and
you can apply to join that one at that
point so with that I'm going to suggest
that we finish thank you once again
Linda for a terrific set of ideas thank
you all for joining us and hopefully
we'll see many of you virtually on
Friday thank you and goodbye
you

---

### Leading through a pandemic: Making difficult judgments in coronavirus times | London Business School
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBTmc35QuGY

Idioma: en

welcome to the London Business School
webinar series leading through a
pandemic
I'm Julian Burkinshaw I'm a professor of
strategy and entrepreneurship here at
London Business School and I will be
your host throughout the series our
purpose with these webinars is to give
you some bigger picture perspectives on
the challenges you face as business
leaders we've got a lineup of faculty
experts to every week who are sharing
their insights from their research as it
applies to various aspects of reading
through a pandemic we want to enrich
your understanding of what's happening
and to give you a some practical advice
for how to run your business in these
difficult times it is a great pleasure
to have Sir Andrew Lichtman with us our
former dean welcome Andrew and now a
professor of management practice before
I introduce him properly I would like to
provide just one piece of framing
relevant not just today's webinar but -
in fact the entire series so if we could
put the slide up many of you will
remember Donald Rumsfeld does that name
ring a bell he was the former US
Secretary of Defense during the Iraq war
and he will be remembered probably
mostly of all for one distinction he
made between known unknowns and unknown
unknowns and he was ridiculed at the
time for it but of course he actually
had a very important point to make which
is the following that there's a bunch of
risks that we face in our lives in our
business lives in our professional lives
in our personal lives which are
measurable they are quantifiable we can
run analyses to predict the likelihood
of certain things happening we can buy
insurance against all those things and
the sum I put up there where the risks
currency risks you know some default of
suppliers we can literally buy things
called credit default swaps if we're
worried about companies going out of
business all of these are things that
you can put a value on and they are in
the category of known unknowns
unfortunately UN have is our category of
things called on
known unknowns and of course we are
living through one of those now The Cove
in nineteen and emic is what we are
living through if you've got decent
length memories you will all remember of
course the global financial crisis
you will remember 9/11 some of you may
go all the way back further to the
collapse of the Berlin Wall all of these
were once in a generation or even once
in a lifetime events they could not be
predicted I'm not saying they couldn't
have been imagined but they couldn't
have been predicted in any sort of way
which would allow us to create sensible
models around them some people have
called these Black Swan events the key
point here is simply that we do not have
a sort of a set of methods for analyzing
them sensibly where do these things
arise from we live in a complex world a
world where there are second and third
and fourth order consequences of small
changes in initial conditions which lead
to things happening in ways that cannot
possibly be foreseen it's called the
butterfly effect some of you heard that
phrase before clearly we've got the
situation where you know a something
something that happened in wuhan is now
a global pandemic that is the butterfly
effect in action so these things can't
be planned that they can to some degree
be managed in the circumstances so how
do we handle such things we're going to
be talking over the next few weeks about
some of the methods that we can use but
to focus today's session because all of
these different Black Swan or unknown
unknown events are unpredictable they
all have their own particular qualities
there's no way that you can have thought
through all of the contingencies around
them those are the circumstances where
judgment comes into play
judgment is an anvil we'll talk about
this in a bit more detail in a second
but judgment is literally when we are
being asked to form views on things that
we do not have complete data on so today
we are going to talk about judgment who
better
than to do this answer and really Kerman
it was big research project since he
stepped down as dean of London Business
School two and a half years ago is
really on this question what does
judgment look like so without further
ado Andrew I'm going to hand the clicker
to you it's a great pleasure to have you
with us please the floor is yours give
us some thoughts about the challenge of
judgment children thank you very much
indeed and hello everybody
especially to alumni who I haven't seen
in a while I I'm sorry these are the
circumstances in which we are
reestablishing contact we've got a
couple of polls and I'd like to start
off if I may with the first one could we
have the first poll please
so the first poll really identifies what
is it at the moment that is your biggest
concern I realize that all these in a
sense are concerns but it would be
helpful especially for the QA just to
give a bit of a sense of that so the
answer is pretty convincingly so far is
about the uncertainty about how long
this will last and I might have imagined
that by per se thank you very much
that's fine
that I think gives us a help and say in
terms of saying where do we go in the in
the Q&A session all right
so let me go into the subject itself
there are the big issues Julian's refer
to these these are the kinds of things
in our professional lives
that we're looking at inevitably there
are many more issues of this kind these
are the big corporate issues if you like
and then there are the personal issues
that we've got in our own lives these
are things that many of us have had no
opportunity to practice or have had
before in our lives and so we're faced
very much with a set of uncertainties
with which we've got to grapple ok
before we start can I just say a couple
of things in terms of this particular
subject that I'm talking about and the
approach to it first of all I'll be
talking about judgment and one of
I mean good judgment it's just it's a
shorthand I'm talking about it as an
important quality but I well realize
this is not of course the only thing you
need in a crisis integrity resilience
these are kinds of things that we're
gonna need in in full measure during
this crisis but so I'm talking about
judgment not as an exclusive quality as
it were but at a very very important one
what I'm saying is not intended to be
something which is up something which is
a blueprint this is the way you do
things it's very much a guide and
approach to the way which you might do
things I also know that from the people
listening today you have very very
different circumstances some of you come
from for-profit organizations some
not-for-profit organizations large and
small organizations some of you are
affected directly by this crisis others
by others being affected by the crisis
there's a secondary effects so I know
that therefore there are many different
sets of circumstances here at home as
well as at work I also know and this is
something which I've learned from
talking to alumni around the world that
cultures matter a great deal in the way
these things are approached so I'm well
aware of that the generalizations they I
make do not necessarily apply in the
same measure to every culture but I hope
a lot will be common above all though
this session is not about it's it's
about how not about what and that's
because the crisis is changing every day
for example we know we've had two days
with no deaths in wuhan now is that a
blip or is this the end of the crisis we
don't yet know in a week's time we'll
have a much better sense of that Italy
has clearly had a very as I had a torrid
time in this crisis we don't know yet
why Italy is so different that's the
kind of thing again which will get more
information about overtime and then
later today the Chancellor will make
announcements about the kind of support
he's going to make to UK businesses
again that will change the
for a number of UK businesses so you can
see why therefore I'm talking about an
approach to this crisis rather than what
you do today because what you do today
may not be the same as what you need to
do in the light of further information
tomorrow all right this is about
judgment so what is judgment there's the
definition for you it's the ability to
combine personal qualities with the
relevant knowledge and experience to
form opinions and take decisions and I'm
gonna focus mainly on decisions although
clearly we've all got to form opinions
as well and also thinking about the
question of people we're gonna have to
think quite a lot about people do we
trust people in these circumstances I'll
be saying more about that in a moment
[Applause]
what is judgement what it what comprises
judgment it combines a collection of
qualities it's not it's a composite of
all these things so it's not a single
element it's many a couple of things to
say about it this is not about being
cautious judgment is about taking
decisions in the right way at the right
time not taking no decision it's not
about being judgemental being
judgemental is making a judgment on
somebody which is the opposite of
judgment and also it's worth saying that
the values one has are within this
process and I'll be explaining how that
occurs I mentioned already I know that
there are different cultures applying
this in a different way okay if you look
at the bottom bar at the moment an awful
lot of what we're doing and have to do
is about judgment and that's because we
haven't got the relevant facts and data
because we haven't been in this position
before in one month
we'll be a lot better off we have much
more information in a month's time and
even more in three months time in two
years time hopefully we'd be looking
back on this learning the lessons and so
on but judgment is a very
proportion of what we need to exercise
now booze we simply haven't got the
precedents and the underlying facts and
data to go on you may say all right so
can we measure judgment in terms of
success I'm afraid we can't if we could
life might be a lot easier but just a
bit clearer a lot of what judgment is
about is also dependent on luck I mean
the fact is success we know depends on
luck and on factors outside our control
today especially we have so many factors
outside our control we may also be
taking a managed risk which may involve
failure because we took that manage risk
and in terms of data we know that some
data is partial for example the question
of how many people have got the virus is
unclear because the statistics are not
being systematically collected in many
countries and some countries have not
been very good in collecting that data
also in terms of linking judgment at
success we'll never know what the
alternative might have been now i point
this out because we're talking here
about a process not about an outcome
right I'm going to finish on the general
aspects now sorry that just to say it's
about stacking the cards in your favor
I'm gonna finish about the general
aspects before I move specifically on to
coronavirus and what we can do about
about this in terms of a process this is
the framework that I've been working on
and it involves six elements which are
the process of judgment number one is
about what I take in Julian mentioned
that the chat facility which was ice
orbs I saw Linda's I saw Linda's web
webcast a couple of days ago and I was
quite distracted by those coming up on
the bottom of the screen you know it
made it difficult to take in what's
going on we vary in our ability to take
take in things I mean and we need to
make sure we are taking in both what we
hear and also what we read
the second element is who and what we
trust if one thinks about many people
having to make statements in the light
of very little information at this time
it is quite difficult to know who to
trust because although somebody may look
great they themselves may not know what
the answers are and if I just take one
example of somebody who certainly for me
exerted a great sense of trust last year
it was Jessica Arden the New Zealand
prime minister in responding to the
atrocity in in in Christchurch the
shooting Christchurch so Trust is a
second important element the third one
is what we know about this not just
about life in general but about this and
as we know at the moment we know quite
little about this we have you know for
example people have their kids are
coming home they're gonna have kids at
home for the first time how do we treat
that that's a completely new situation
for many people about how one's gonna
cope with that in terms of feeling and
belief number four what one judges is
filtered through that's why I put the
dotted line there one's beliefs and
feelings and if I just take an example
here one attitude to this crisis is
bound to be affected by once asses to
health more generally some people are
more relaxed about it and some people
are more anxious number 5 is about
choices now for example one may decide
you know should I work at home well
that's a choice maybe I decide I should
work work at home on the other hand a
delivery means but can I work at home is
it going to be possible with you know
with the kids at home doing for example
they're there lessons there that's gonna
be a tough thing to do that is the
framework into which I'm going to put
the coronavirus judgments that I'm going
to be talking about I should take two
things first of all if we talk about
feeling and belief this also involves an
attitude to risk some people today are
more prepared to take risks and some
less now our attitude to risk is a
central part of what we feel and believe
the second one is about timing choices
are also about timing and we know at a
fast evolving situation like this that
timing is a very important element
anyway that's the framework just to be
clear about some of the basses this is
the feelings and beliefs area we know
that all of us are subject to bias and
I've just picked out a few there in red
of which we've got to be I think
particularly aware this time the first
one is about analogy can we make an
analogy between this and the other
crises the answer is no it's not like
anything else we've seen before we know
that systemic optimism or pessimism we
approach things with a different frame
of mind and again we've got to be
careful about that in terms of our
underlying feelings about this crisis
confirmation bias are we looking for
things simply to confirm what we already
feel we've got to be a bit cautious
about that availability means taking in
the latest bit of evidence we've got and
giving that undue significance and again
we I think we've got it have a sense of
the timescale under which we're looking
at things small numbers we don't have a
big sample here you know China is
already being taken is this the model
for the rest of us well it may or may
not be by the time we're a month along
we'll have a lot more experience with a
lot more countries to go on and group
think it's quite tempting for us to sit
around together and say we know what we
think well we need to be a bit careful
about that I mentioned those because I
think we need to be aware of the bus's
we've got coming into this okay so let's
have a second poll if we may taking my
six elements of judgment I don't like to
ask you for May which of the following
are you finding most difficult in these
conditions those are the six elements
taking in knowing what to do a trust
having enough information feelings
dominating choices knowing if you've got
the right options now if I can carry
through what I decide the indications so
far is that no single one of these
dominates and that I think is really
very
interesting because you know it's not as
if to say everybody's preoccupied by the
same thing there's a general thing
throughout these that these are many
different things that we're where profit
bye-bye I can tell you that the winner
here is knowing whether I have the right
options in other words making the
choices and I can understand that that's
of course inevitable that one feels what
exactly the choice I'm going to make
good thank you very much again that'll
be useful in looking at the Q&A let me
go on now to the question of applying
all this to coronavirus territory all
right so first of all I'm taking things
in I think there's a danger that we may
filter what we take in in other words we
look at the information and we're quite
selective about what we take in perhaps
going to the things where we feel more
comfortable or more anxious whatever it
is I think we have to be careful about
the way in which we take in the
information which we're getting a be
aware of our mechanism that we might be
filtering secondly in terms of trusting
we know that people don't know and it
does seem to me there is a premium here
if people tell you well actually I don't
know what the answer is of this stage I
can't give an answer to that question
that is honest people who plan all their
way through I think I've got more of a
problem and in terms of saying you know
the way in which for example one talks
to people one works with I think it's
worth being honest because that seems to
me is the way in which one comes across
then as someone who is credible we know
about the dangers of fake news and
social media and so on we have to be
careful about that in terms of what we
know about this the key element here is
and that comes back to the chart I had
earlier that the longer this crisis goes
on the more we will know about it it is
going to be much easier to take
decisions as time goes on that it is now
indeed it's easier now to take decisions
that was a week ago if you think back
one two weeks it feels like a different
world and that's because time actually
gives us the benefit of of having more
information
on the feeling and belief I think we
have to be aware as I mentioned about
where our biases are it doesn't mean to
say we're gonna get rid of these biases
but it's helpful in making a judgement
in saying well actually I know I tend to
do X or Y I tend to listen to the last
person who was talking to me or whatever
it is just to be aware of that in in
deciding then how you're gonna make your
choices and also one does have to have a
sense of where is my risk tolerance in
this five we've got the question of
choices and as mentioned already this
will move as more is known the choices
will change because we will have more
information to go on lastly we've got
the delivery element and this is
affected not just by what affects us but
also about all those secondary elements
what is happening to our customers
what's happening to our suppliers what's
happening to our colleagues you know all
these things are going to affect our
ability to deliver we may make the best
choice but actually be unable to do
something simply because other things
come in the way this framework it seems
to me is applicable to many different
areas if we think about the question
they're very difficult issue do you lay
people off do you wait these kinds of
things and for example if we think about
incentives conventional incentives in
many cases are out of the window the
issue now is survival in many cases not
you know can we make a TSR target or
whatever it is so we have to be very
aware of in terms of dealing with our
people about this judgment framework the
priorities are something that we all
have to get to grips with how do we
prioritize in these very new
circumstances you know we have to
rethink an awful lot of things which we
took for granted before in terms of
plans and strategy I'm going to talk
from in a moment about plans and
julien's dino is going to talk about
strategy in a in a later part of this
series but we have to think about those
pretty carefully I'll come on to that as
one of my examples
project we most of us have got projects
are those all on hold do we have to have
them on how to save money again we need
to rethink each of our projects in terms
of thinking about the unknowns we've got
to face performance measures I'll come
on to that too frankly as I said
survival may be the issue here no longer
the targets we set out at the beginning
of the year and last year the question
of what happens in a post coronavirus
world no of course we can see that home
working is going to change an awful lot
of attitudes in terms of what's possible
but we don't yet know how that will
change more fundamentally but if we just
take education our own field here at the
London Business School it's bound to
change some aspects of that in terms of
understanding what we can do so those
are the kinds of areas one can apply
this framework in I'd like to take three
specifics if I may first of all about
what do I know my suggestion here is
push yourself along the timeline in
other words if there are relevant facts
and data available try to make sure you
know where they are and find them if you
can if I just give one example there's
an issue about face masks all right
should one waist wear a face mask or not
well actually if you look on the WHI
website gifts it seems to me some very
clear advice about what web what - face
masks good for and what they're not in
terms of the issues which you face you
are not the only person facing the
problem you face now there are many
people in this country all over the
world facing exactly the same problem so
my suggestion here is find others who
are facing your problem even discussing
it I suggest here is going to help in
terms of sorting out your own feelings
and understanding about what you might
do and I think you can think creatively
about what that means in practice
there's a thing called creative
benchmarking which is not saying let's
benchmark exactly but
it's benchmark the ideas or benchmark
the processes perhaps some very
different kind of activities so if I
think for example about the emergency
measures you take and how eventually for
goodness sake how to go back to normal
everybody will be grappling with the
same kinds of issues if you can talk to
other people connect to other people you
don't have to face these things alone so
that's one example the second one is
about how I plan and obviously with
maximum uncertainty this is not the same
as conventional terms the first thing I
think what has to do is to revisit one's
appetite or tolerance for risk terms of
saying what am I prepared to do okay
here's a radical suggestion you could
argue that by now you should have
scrapped the existing budgets even if
you're in an area which is relatively
unaffected because if you're unaffected
other people are still going to be
affected by it and arguably you should
be planning with new objectives and
graded timescales in other words certain
for a week not very certain for two
weeks rather uncertain for three months
these are the kind of graded timescales
I mean and in a sense one could do
something I've mentioned here rolling
forecasts you can roll those forward all
the time I think being realistic about
how far you can plan ahead is a good
thing you you know you cannot plan the
future in these circumstances anything
like the way you could a week ago a
month ago and I think one should be
explicit about the trade-offs you know
what are the trade-offs here between
risk and the cost of doing something the
speed of doing something zero based
budgeting for those in the in the field
will know is something where you scrap
everything and start again from zero
that is pretty disruptive but in some
cases you're going to have to do that
because things are going to change
fundamentally and there's no use saying
whether it's just an extension of where
we were before
hopefully in not too many cases in terms
of planning ahead I suggest you should
look at uncertainty and how that's built
into your projections I
clear about where the uncertainties are
for example it may be unrealistic to say
let's have one point for the future you
might need a range rather than a
midpoint you need to check the
assumptions you're making other people
are making look for evidence that's
missing and don't start planning grand
scenarios for the next six months too
early that could be a bit of a waste of
time in the case of numerical models
frankly the assumptions currently
involved in your wonderful artificial
intelligence equations may no longer be
correct so you may be operating with a
set of assumptions on models which no
longer apply please do check out to make
sure that the kinds of assumptions
you're making on the base of these
models actually are still relevant and
in terms of the planning I think a
question reasonably to ask yourself is
would I be prepared to defend what I'm
doing now when this is all over I think
that's quite a good question to ask just
as a check third area which of specific
is people I know are feeling well you
know do I rely on my gut this is a very
common common question when I've been
talking about judgment more generally
and I meant I've got these four books
there Malcolm Gladwell saying yes yes
gut feeling is everything and then the
water water right people say no it's not
at all
all right so do you rely on your gut
feeling here are the questions I think
you ought to answer before responding do
you tend to act and then regret it have
you got insufficient relevant data for
this have you got relevant insufficient
relevant experience for this and are the
stakes high these are four questions I
think in any circumstances one should be
asking oneself and here my assumption is
we don't have relevant experience and we
probably don't have the relevant data
now now I'm not suggesting you should do
you do never rely on your gut but I am
suggesting you should think hard before
relying on it okay those are three three
practical examples of how to use this
frame
but I hope the framework will be useful
in many different occasions here's the
summary and the kinds of things to bear
in mind I've mentioned filtering and and
in terms of listening and reading trust
clarity on assumptions and on parallels
and you know this is not the credit
crisis and no country is exactly like
China just to be quite clear in terms of
feelings and beliefs and risk be aware
of those make sure your options aren't
artificially limited and make sure you
know in what time scale you can be
operating and look at the feasibility
just be realistic about that here are
six questions to ask yourself this is
this sort of summary of the Mavi of the
framework that I've put up these are the
questions I believe one ought to ask
oneself whatever one comes in for
difficult judgment territory for those
who want to know more I wrote this up in
a Harvard Business Review article which
came out in the January February edition
there's the reference and it'll be
available to when this is made available
after the event you can look at the
reasoning behind the way I've chosen
these things and examples I give if
you'd like to know more finally can I
just say please do follow up with me
there's my email I would very much like
to share developments I want to see how
things are going and perhaps to look at
this during the course of the crisis to
see what more we at the London Business
School can do thank you very much you
know thank you Andrew and if we could
take the slides away we'll move back
through sort of our full full on picture
of both of us I think that will be very
useful for the next I guess 20 minutes
or so for the discussion so I've been
receiving a lot of questions and I'm not
going to of course get to all of them a
couple of you asks first of all how many
people are on this and the answer is
more than 2,000 so a pretty big audience
today a couple of you also asking about
can we get copies of the slides can you
tell us more about the books and of
course Andrews very kindly giving us
email address so feel free to get in
touch with them be careful what you wish
for them and we will of course be
sharing the video on the website in a
couple of days first question was
actually directed at my intro so let's
just close that off a couple of people
said look surely pandemics are
predictable so they're in the category
of known unknowns and and I think Andrea
I mean you may want to comment to this
my answer to that is at some level
pandemics are predictable in fact every
sort of scenario plan I've ever seen
includes a number of these very low
probability but a high impact issues
such as pandemics global nuclear war the
trouble is that putting that on a list
of something which someone is imagined
is very very different to actually
planning for it so the fact that we're
in a pandemic doesn't mean that somehow
we got it wrong because we didn't plan
for it because all of these different
things have taken so many different
forms over the years we've got to cope
with the fact that this one is unique
any any thoughts on that no that is very
very well given ok let us move on to
I've got at least six categories of
questions here
the biggest single category links of
course to your framework the sort of six
different ways that one one builds
judgment and the biggest single part of
it is this issue around around feelings
versus shall we say objective data
people have said look you know many
actions seem to be being based on gut
you know judgments are subjective you
know it doesn't seem right that we
should be making decisions in this way I
guess - specifically homed in on the
point that you that you ended with is
you said that this is not a good time to
be relying on gut because these
circumstances are unusual because we
don't have enough information I guess I
would just ask you to just say a little
bit more about under what when can we
rely on our gut in other words to what
extent should we be allowing our
intuition whatever exactly that is to
help us yes we take the point that we've
got to use science and data as
as possible but that's not gonna get us
all of the way yeah when should we be
fearful sort of courageous enough to
allow the gut to take us to the last
step okay so I make my mistake
I'm not saying gut feeling isn't isn't a
great thing because I think it is and in
a lot of occasions especially those in
which we are we are familiar with the
circumstances gut feel generally seems
to me to service really very well in
other words we bring to mind very
quickly as human beings all our
accumulated knowledge and experience and
that is what our gut feel is it isn't
from the gut actually it's from here it
is all that accumulated knowledge and
experience that comes out amazingly
quickly I mean we are astonishing
animals in that way so I'm a strong
believer in gut feel no question at all
about that but this it really is not a
good moment to rely on gut feel because
we don't have we don't have that
experience and we don't have the
knowledge and so it seems to me the
essential elements of gut feel are not
there so should we be when we have this
a gut reaction should we be forcing
ourselves to shall we say expose why we
feel that we tried to almost like yes
you know go back and make sense of what
is this prior experience that is causing
me to think in that ways that exactly
and that's why under any circumstances I
think it's a good idea not to say I
don't have any feelings about this we
all have feelings we go into any any
decision taking in terms of any opinion
which we form you know ah our feelings
are there of course they are they're
part of us what main thing to do as I
suggest is to acknowledge them and to
understand where one's coming from
because that it seems to me is going to
give one the best chance of making a
good judgement okay so second set of
questions linked to the second poll and
if I remember rightly 28% of the
audience said we don't feel we've got
the right options to decide 24 percent
we don't know who to trust
22% Wieters we haven't got enough
information I mean it's a cry for help
right in other words it's like we don't
know what to do this
an unprecedented situation there's a
risk isn't there of analysis paralysis
right in other words we want to just
wait until we've got more information
before we know what to do and you know
setting aside the particularity z' of
this case as a general rule analysis
paralysis is not helpful you know what's
your advice are the general specific on
overcoming analysis paralysis well I
mentioned when I when I gave my
framework that this is not about caution
it is not saying judgment is about not
doing something because we know in many
cases not doing something is doing
something I know the fact is if you
delay too long it's too late and so
there's no question in my mind that this
is something that you know we have to
bear it in mind it's interesting that
all six of my elements came up in the
poll because I came come back to it you
remember I said right now it's a lot of
it is about judgment and it is all the
elements of judgment there we are
uncertain about so many elements of this
which is why it seems to me the judgment
framework is so potentially so important
in terms of helping us to make those
difficult choices
so I announced this browses I'm no way
saying that you know this list ought to
be looked at I mean frankly if you've
got to make a decision in five seconds
you've got to make it in five seconds
that's the that that's all you've got
but in those five seconds I'm suggesting
just think very quickly do I know do I
trust do I believe what I like and so on
yeah and I'm just going to throw in my
own observation on this because you know
I'm part of the team who London Business
School is is planning and managing
through this and we've got huge
questions about that the future that we
cannot answer now but what we can
absolutely do is focus on the thing that
we have to do laid out which is to make
sure that all of our degree students are
able to graduate by August and all of
those planning meetings are all saying
what are the minimum steps we have to
take to ensure that that happens we've
got huge bigger issue
to worry about later but we simply
cannot resolve them right now let's
focus on the sound hopefully you think
that's a good way of dinkles good how
could you say anything else appreciated
so umm question number three how have
decision makers remained so ignorant of
Vital best practices to fight covert 19
that have been experienced actually done
in some other countries Korea Taiwan and
so forth why aren't we building on those
experiences I mean feel free to
challenge the premise of the question
but it's a very fair question that there
is genuine experience in the
here-and-now from other countries you
know take the UK are we doing the right
things in that context well I think we
are as it were we are not part of the
decision taking process and don't know
we do not know what evidence has been
taken into account now I think the
question is a bit unfair because my
understanding from what I like you is
look at the announcements I look at the
newspapers I look at the of the way in
which politicians announce these things
and it seems to me they are as far as I
can see taking took out what's going on
somewhere else I mean they be you know
very silly not to do so so I think the
question I say is a bit unfair because
we don't know all the things that that
decision takers are taking into account
the fact that that somebody is
unconvinced means that you know arguably
there's a communication issue here I
mean obviously we would all prefer to
trust the politicians that they're
making the right decisions and making
the difficult choices in the light of
the best information available but I
mean I come back to my suggestion which
is in terms of the things that we do in
our public lives and our private lives
we need to make sure where we have the
best possible information and there's a
lot out there I mean all I can say is
you know I've been looking in the last
few days there's a lot of information
available if you look for it perfect
good so I want to go back to the very
first poll that you did and the the
bottom line there was 62% of of people
worried about how long it will last the
biggest single worry and and and that's
a fascinating issue to think about is
um I'd like your comments on that I mean
it seems to me that you know on the one
hand we want to be optimistic about
surely this this crazy time will come to
an end soon we've also got to be
realistic about the possibility it
carries on for a long time and I guess
as social animals we like to you know we
like to plan for our futures and and and
and figure out what we're going to do
next
all of that is on hold how should we how
should we think about that how should we
try to plan when we can't can well if
you remember my suggestion was that what
we should do is have a time scale for
planning which is appropriate to the
information which we've got so we don't
plan very far into the future if there's
no basis for doing that I mean what we
can do is to make sure than the
short-term we're doing the right things
if necessary to have the options
available for us to take good decisions
later on so as we don't close off
options for us for later on so I think
we can respond we can respond
appropriately to the information which
is available to us so you know I I don't
have anything more to say than that
other than to say that I think if we
don't know something let us say we don't
know right and we're waiting for further
information to enable us to make a more
informed decision that no that's that's
right and and and you and I were
discussing before we got started and of
course it is tempting to try to have a
ready answer to every question there are
times and this is one of them where we
actually should just simply say and you
know we do not know we need we need more
information um you know so that is um
those of you live in the UK Boris
Johnson our prime minister said
yesterday in 12 weeks there will be we
will be through this or I forget his
exact words he didn't say exactly what
he meant by 12 weeks but it was
fascinating to me that he that he gave
us a planning horizon because 12 weeks
is somehow close enough that we can get
our heads around it any any thoughts on
that well it's interesting because at
the press conference which the Prime
Minister held yesterday the journalists
got onto this pretty quickly and said
well what
exactly is gonna happen in 12 weeks
which of course if you're right and I
have you know heard a comment saying
well it isn't you know the beginning of
the end it's still the end of the
beginning maybe in three months time so
I think we can all feel more cheerful
that there's a three month time horizon
potentially for this which is great but
actually we don't know what's going to
be happening in three months slam and I
suspect I though of course I may be
wrong neither does the Prime Minister in
today there have been a few questions
about him in particular but I want to
keep this international so we're going
to keep comments about Boris Johnson or
other world leaders off the conversation
right no no if that's okay so question
number five
do you believe social media has exploded
this monster out of proportions does
Facebook reinforce our biases well I
think it depends how much you look at
social media I'm not a great social
media fan in terms of where I get my
information but like I've already been I
mean it's very interesting somebody
yesterday a doctor actually sent me a
little knee up an email explaining about
this virus and he passed on saying
here's some very good information he
then sent me something an hour later
saying this is fake news this was sent
to me as fake news oh my gosh so you can
see I mean these are times when one has
to be really pretty careful well beep
some people rely more on on social media
and some less and you've got great
social media I think that's fine I would
I'm cautious I mean a nice again if
people say they know it's quite unlikely
it seems to me that they do in these
circumstances indeed yes indeed and from
what for that's worth I mean we've all
seen that social media allows our biases
to being very enforced because it of
course gives us a feed that's based on
the stuff that we have we have we have
clicked on before it is fascinating to
me that I am getting a lot of scientific
stuff coming through my facebook feed
but what I do not know of course is
whether others are getting that
scientific stuff
perhaps that's because of the stuff I
click on I'd like to think that in these
times of crisis people are trying to be
a little bit more rational and
scientific about about the situation
you're facing here's a nice question
this is a very generic question but you
can apply it to the specifics if you
like how canted should one be when
making a judgment call that you're
uncertain about in other words as a
leader you're standing up you have made
a judgement there's some rationality
there but the some intuition to what
extent do you have to present this as
somehow this is the right answer or can
you bring some of your uncertainty out
in terms of what you communicate I think
this is a great question I think this is
one of the things surely that marks a
very good leader which is someone who
can communicate the fact that they
understand the situation but there
aren't certainties attached to it and
having that very delicate balance does
seem to me an element of good judgment
in leadership now every situation is
different it's you can't simply say you
know what should one do in general
because it's going to depend on the
circumstances on what you know and what
you don't know in each case but can I
just make suggestion look up the way in
which people make announcements now and
say to yourself do I trust this person
what is it
seems to me they actually know and don't
know and if you want guidance about what
to do and not to do just watch other
people and think to yourself do I
believe this
because if you don't believe it you
don't mean well that's a pretty good guy
they've got something wrong so I would
take example as I kind know and indeed
it is sudden ease in these these
uncertainties crisis times when it's
often said hasn't yet mean a leader
comes to a fallen leader shows their
true soul at the time of a crisis and we
start to see who comes across as
authentic and who comes across as false
or forced and we can see this Eman we've
got many examples that are coming
through our our Twitter feeds as we
speak good so thank you a couple more
questions and we're going to close in
about three or four minutes and these
may be in the category of things that
you can't answer so
what's that what's your advice on a
career change at this time of crisis and
I'm gonna link that to another question
which is equally challenging other
investment opportunities that should we
be thinking about right now I've lived
too long to answer a question like that
as saying are there's a great investment
opportunity just listen to me this is
what it is or this is definitely how you
should change your career I mean in both
cases this is something which is very
much question of the individual and
indeed you know the issue of how much
risk you're prepared to take in these
circumstances I'm sure there will be
opportunities ironically even in these
times for a number of people and things
will emerge that would not have emerged
in any other way just as investment
opportunities will will emerge but I'm
afraid I'm not so clever or so rash as
to advise people about whether they
should put their money now thank you for
a fantastic talk sir how do we conserve
the role of government in
decision-making I want to just pick up
on one specific part of that because you
worked in government you had a very
significant role in the UK government
just give us a on the difference if you
like between private sector and public
sector decision making processes
particularly in crisis times well the
key element for those in the public
sector is about risk I mean the fact is
that in in the public sector it's not
it's not symmetric there is a big - in
taking a risk and getting it wrong and
there's not necessarily a big plus in
taking a risk and getting it right and
that's one thing I would point to
straightaway but the center's are very
very different here and you know in
terms of saying what's different in
public and private sector I'd be you
know this is a huge subject dodol I'm
slightly cautious about taking it here
all I can say is that I mean having
served in the UK public sector I know
that the people there will be doing
everything they can to try and help the
country through the crisis so you know
I've I've got a huge respect for the
people who work in the public sector you
know to me and I'm sure they we're doing
their best for the rest of us good so
let's move to that final slide if we
could we are going to close and I am I'm
not going to attempt to summarize our
conversation but I will actually be
doing exactly that in a posting that I
will do I put it out on LinkedIn but
will also link it to the to the website
so please take a look at the slide in
front of you you will see that lengthy
website name at the bottom London dai
edu campaigns executive education
pandemic webinars on that website you
will find at the top a list of the
upcoming webinars and the very next one
is on Tuesday next week near o7a --then
is a colleague who works in our
organizational behavior group he's going
to be talking about negotiating losses
in times of crisis and if you go to the
bottom of that web page what you'll find
is videos and resources and links to all
the websites other webinars rather that
have happened already so feel free to go
on to that website feel free to share
that with your friends we're going to be
using it essentially as a as a place
where all of London business schools
thinking on these issues is going to be
collected so with that I'm going to
suggest that we close thank you so much
Andrew for your very thoughtful analysis
of decision-making in coronavirus times
thank you all for attending and we will
see you all next time on Tuesday
you
you

---

### Reshaping 2021: Charting a course from disruption to growth | Think Big
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5r1jEzw920

Idioma: en

welcome
to the uh london business school webinar
series called
think big this is a new series of
webinars that we are hosting
over the next year or so uh and i am
julian birkenshaw i am the
host of this first webinar uh and the
series that will come
in the next few months will feature some
of my colleagues
and what the theme of these these
webinars is is we're going to be looking
at
big global issues and we're going to be
bringing in experts to talk about those
issues
and today we're going to start with a
pretty important topic for pretty much
any business out there right now trying
to chart a course
from disruption to growth to try to look
beyond
the pandemic to figure out what the next
few years
will bring for us all and to discuss
this topic
we're delighted to have with us two
highly successful
london business school alumni uh first
of all
nisereen shoker who's the chief
executive of the middle east region for
online fashion retailer yukes netapote
and secondly claire woodman who's the
chief executive of the emea region
and chief executive for morgan stanley
international so let me just get a
couple of words from each of you to
introduce yourselves and your companies
and israel why don't you go first sounds
good thank you and thank you for
inviting me
to be part of this session my name is
nasreen
i'm currently the ceo for middle east
for ux nation
which is the leading online luxury
retailer
and essentially we're distribute we're
part of two different companies
one that focuses on luxury and one that
focuses on off season
so really taking advantage of the full
cycle of fashion
before that i also worked in retail for
the virgin
virgin group and then before that in
media so
it's as media and fashion have come
together it's been really good to see
them
you know both experiences coming
together in such a seamless way
perfect so you're no stranger to
disruption
um claire why don't you say a few words
about yourself as well
thank you and uh julian thank you for
inviting us today
um so i'm claire woodman i am at the
head of emir from morgan stanley
um in europe we're a u.s um a financial
services firm and in europe we have
9 000 people and we operate in
19 different countries um i didn't start
out
in banking i actually started out in the
city as a lawyer at clifford chance
and decided i wanted to work my way up
the food chain
and joined um one of clifford chance's
clients morgan stanley
so i've been with morgan stanley for 20
years
and i've done a number of roles across
the bank predominantly around our
capital markets business
and we have one of the largest
equity businesses um in the globe on the
globe
so that's my background i graduated from
london business school somewhat late
five years ago but thoroughly enjoyed my
time
and i can absolutely say that it's
really helped um
inform the way that i manage and lead
our organization in this region
perfect thanks and nizarin of course is
also an obs grant from i think 2004.
so let's let's get going and we will
start with
uh with disruption and and that's
probably you know the hottest
you know business buzzword of the last
decade i'm going to say i mean there's a
number of others out there but
everybody worries about disruption and
clearly not just the covert pandemic but
that whole
digitization of of the world before that
disruption is something we've been
living with for a while listen i'm going
to go to you first just because
um you've got a fascinating background
um
particularly i think in the the original
um period when bertelsmann i think it
was who you worked for at the time
uh got into the uh the sharing of music
online uh and the whole napster episode
which many of the
the people listening will remember let's
help
remind us a little bit about what
happened there because of course napster
were the original kind of disruptors
and it didn't end completely nicely for
them
uh tell me tell me what your your role
in that was and what lessons you might
have picked up
from that period yeah so speaking of
disruption
i'm one of those people who really
thrives on disruption
because i'm normally hired to disrupt or
to turn around a business that's
through disruption or an industry that's
going through disruption so it works
very well for me
um when i joined burlesman we
essentially made most of our money
printing cds
and we probably made more money on the
physical product than actually
the the rights of the music and so on
and as
things started to change napster came on
board 60 million
people were actually sharing music and
listening to music for free
and we had this idea that well that's
the future
and therefore let's go ahead and buy the
business and let's digitize books
we had random house that's digitized
music
completely not realizing that before you
do something like that
as smart as that seemed at the time if
you don't have all the stakeholders
in play then it's going to be explosive
and disastrous
and it's self-combusted basically
because we were trying to charge for it
when in fact the price was free so
and uh the difference here is this and
it taught me very quickly the difference
between the bleeding edge and the
leading edge
and we were definitely the bleeding edge
the leading edge became
apple music and spotify who benefited
from that disruption
as labels began to realize that this is
here to stay and people aren't going to
go back to buying cds again
but we were sued by every single label
including one of ours which was ironic
and it cost the business a lot of money
and it cost naxter as well it's its
future which is very very unfortunate
because they should have been the
winners of this in the end it was
spotify and apple music
and so many others so i do have a
follow-up question on that and i've
often wondered about this right which is
you know back 20 years ago the the music
labels there were three or four i mean
birdless moon sony
warner emi whatever um i mean they owned
all of the
all the content right and yet somehow
none of them succeeded in transitioning
onto selling this stuff online and as
you say it was of course
napster then of course it was apple and
then it was spotify
why did none of the incumbent companies
manage to actually
manage that transitional process
themselves the business model was
definitely flawed
because they were the publishers as well
as the producers
so what meant most of the times is that
the artists themselves did not end up
making a lot of money
unless they were touring because that
was the income they made
or whether it was merchandising which
obviously now you see
a lot of artists have become designers
because that's where they realized the
money was
but probably it was more than anything
uh poor management
it was so difficult to convince people
who've been doing one thing for 25
30 years living a very very lush
the music industry was a very very lush
industry you know parties and limousines
outside
and by the way i worked for all the
labels you mentioned
and it was all the same so they just
could not
imagine that their lifestyle was going
to change ever
and so they fought it right rather than
joining it
and after that came obviously video
and film didn't learn from it either so
again
other than netflix it went through
exactly the same thing
and the way they structured the deals i
mean we've got
a lawyer as well to tell you that also
the royalty rights were
so divided they were so ridiculous
you know every country had its own
different um
schemes and so even trying to put all of
that together was so messy
that they preferred the status quo until
there was no status quo and there was no
more business
and then people like jay-z and others
decided
heck you know i'm just gonna tour i'm
just gonna print t-shirts i'm gonna make
um i don't know very famous expensive
sneakers
and i'll make a better living i don't
need you no the
as you say the the value in that
industry has migrated
away from the the selling of of the
music as you say to the
the touring rights and the and the and
the other selling of their brand
yeah yeah yeah yeah i'm sorry claire i
will get you in a second but i i've just
got one
more question just to follow this line
because i'm fascinated by it
you know history doesn't repeat itself
exactly does it because what we're
seeing in the movie world right now
is yes of course we've got netflix but
we've also absolutely got disney for
example
fighting back quite effectively and
warner and others
who are now vertically integrating
forward
in order to ensure that they don't
actually lose out in that same way
right but it's the closed garden concept
and the customer doesn't want a closed
garden they want to be able to choose
anything they want from anywhere and
this idea
and by the way music labels try to do it
universal did their own platform
bmg did their own platform bmg and sony
then ventured together to do their own
platform
and then the ones that won were the ones
who were apple music
i.e they let everybody choose what they
want or spotify
who actually encouraged independent
artists and that
became even a bigger success now
disney's saying i'm just going to let
my customers watch disney on my channel
and you know somebody else says no just
my movies on my channel
that watch it happen it will go the same
way music went
and for me to watch it happen over and
over
again just goes to show you that
management does not actually learn from
history
interesting so if anyone's watching
wants to chip in on that debate i'd i'd
love to hear from
you but look claire we're going to speak
now about a completely different
industry
i mean banking is of course ripe for
destruction
by by virtue of the fact that banking is
almost by definitionally
a digital industry i mean money is the
ultimate digital
product and yet you know compared to the
story we've just heard
the the big investment banks the big
retail banks it's the same guys
out there running the show as were 20
odd years ago so
so do tell us a little bit about how i
mean morgan stanley you know
probably as much as well as anybody has
navigated
this period of huge disruption the
financial crisis the digital
transformation of the industry what have
you done how have you
managed to stay ahead in some ways why
are the forces perhaps a little bit
different than we heard within israel
i i guess we faced you know crises and
situations which um
has forced bank management teams
actually to have to
listen and learn and um and i think it's
interesting actually
julian if you go back and think you know
what did the
global financial crisis what positive
things came out of that
it came what came out of that was a
banking industry that was
much better capitalized had much better
financial resources
to deal with you know future situations
and so for us banks and
um and some of them roll forward to i
would say 2012
and this is relevant to um the pandemic
hurricane sandy had a pretty big impact
on some u.s banks including my own
operations in a particular part of
manhattan
and it caused us and a number of peers
to
dramatically invest in our technology
resources
our desktops our data centers
and also our just sheer technology
capacity to run our plants
which we increased way beyond actually
our operating levels
that was absolutely crucial no one ever
predicted
the pandemic roll forward to that
and then having to get 95 of your
workforce
to work from home and not in their
offices and actually
having good financial resources to be
able to support clients and their
refinancing needs so to be able to
support clients
um also to support our employees who
we absolutely took their health and
well-being as the number one priority
into the crisis
to get them bid to be able to be up and
running and be able to connect through
to their systems in the office and
basically operate
at home as if they were in their offices
was you know a huge lift
but i do i do wonder whether we would
have been
as well placed to do that had we not
made
all of the investments and the um
and dealt with hurricane sandy in the
way that we did so
um certainly we have had to take you
know each crisis to focus on
our financial resources our people
resources and then
our operational resilience you know
completely front to back
and as i look forward now what i do see
as we um confront this hugely complex
and challenging question
of what does return to the workplace
in terms of offices as opposed to
working from home look like
and the hybrid discussion and i think it
puts us in a really good place to
try and get the best out of of both and
i would say that from the pandemic what
i have seen
in our organization is some really
interesting changes over such an
accelerated time frame in terms of
behavioral change in terms of decision
making i'm going to can i come back to
those points i i really do want to get
into the micro
part of the story but i don't want to
lose the kind of the macro bit so so
hold that thought
um disruption i mean you've done a
fascinating story there about how you
kind of you know found yourself
much more resilient perhaps than you
would otherwise have been but
when i look at the the macro forces
around disruption in banking and i look
at blockchain of course as
is a huge uh force for change and of
course the whole internet banking thing
before
i guess my question is why has banking
as a whole not succumbed to the same
you know forces that that we've seen
happening
in in music where for example outsider
companies
come in i mean is it is it as simple as
regulation for example i mean banking is
a heavily
regulated industry that must have helped
you and others to to survive this period
what are the what are the forces for
inertia
in banking i guess is the question i'm
trying to get at
look i think um i actually think that
it's um it's in
it's an interesting question but i think
if you look at the asset management
industry
and the the whole retail and wealth
industry
actually that's going through a dramatic
change as
consumers want to be able to do much
more in on a digital
and a digital way you know very is a
very
significant generational change in terms
of their consumer behaviors
you know you know generations don't want
to go into see an advisor
and go into a branch in fact you know
for the last 14 months
it wasn't always easy to actually go
into a bank and do a brush
and so actually being able to provide
you know
digital services to be able to do all of
the things that
traditionally you would have done by
meeting with an advisor
or by going into a branch et cetera you
know consumers want to be able to do
on their iphones you know at their
desktop etc
and so i do think there is change i
don't think the regulators have actually
perpetuated an oligopoly at all in fact
they've gone out of their way
to create sandboxes and
places of you know safe and um you know
prudentially safe
innovation and actually if you look at
the retail banking space
you know there's lots of new entrants
and um you know
and disruptors you know a number of
small banks that are really challenging
and pressing
you know retail banking etc so i do i do
think we're
we're definitely seeing you know
channels it is it is fascinating and
we will move on in a second but i
i am conscious that banking is a is an
incredibly resilient
industry you're not wrong i mean i i
know the industry a little bit and as
you say
the regulators are at pains to have you
know for example open banking in the uk
is a is a big thing and yet you know the
big guys are still
sort of more or less keeping the little
guys at base so it is uh
it will be interesting to see if that if
that trend continues
i want to shift pace slightly um
a lot of people are worried about how do
i do transformation so
you know i'll i'll talk to companies all
the time about they need to
engineer a digital transformation in
their company
and here i'm not so much talking about
the technology i mean claire you've
talked a lot about that which was
terrific but
almost like the human side of a digital
transformation and indeed the very first
question we received was was exactly on
this
issue of what's the human side of
digital transformation
nissan do you want to give us some top
tips there in other words
based on your experiences what you've
learned how would you
advise companies to take this whole
process of
of digital transformation seriously from
a human perspective
we came a long way initially digital
transformation
meant you have a cto and the cto builds
an
empire and they buy all kinds of
softwares and
they start guiding the company in terms
of
how the tech transformation is going to
happen and then you have the non-tech
people
running the business and then the tech
people running another part of the
business
now that's proven not to work and the
idea of a cto
should should not exist or a digital
chief digital officer let's say should
not exist
essentially every person should become a
digital officer
of their own division department at all
levels
that's easier said than done especially
if it's a traditional business
trying to become a digital business so
i've experienced that a few times so
again at birdsmen when i worked there we
had
book clubs and music clubs which were
very traditional
and we're trying to make them more
digital you choose
everything online you do everything
through the app and so on
and the first thing is the people who've
been working in the legacy business are
not ready
they're just not they believe that that
business is never going to move over
so you have a change that's needed
either people change
or they have to leave the company i know
it's harsh but
it's the fastest way forward and then
upskilling the ones that stay
to become as digitally savvy as possible
and mixing them
with digitally native employees
otherwise it becomes
very very difficult so at uk centreporte
we are a tech business and we generally
there aren't that many
tech luxury people you can hire so you
end up hiring people
from the fashion industry who worked in
stores
worked in physical retail it's not
always
easy to move them from physical retail
thinking
to digital it's not but what they need
is the tools to do so that's our job as
a
as a company to be able to do that what
i would say is the worst thing we can
possibly do
is have two camps one that's legacy and
one that's digital
i did this once in my company where one
day
i looked at their job descriptions and i
added
e-commerce to everyone's job description
a third of them resigned you know i'm
out of here
i wasn't hired to do this i thought i
was doing something good
because i'm adding to their capability
i'm making them more marketable
in the business but they weren't ready
for it but the reality is that
even if you're running an e-commerce
business and you're a buyer i can't have
a buyer who's running e-commerce
and a buyer who's running a store it has
to be the same kind of thinking
and that affects your whole supply chain
because you know it's all about
assortment it's all about the number of
products that you have
they're the ones who are going to win
and pricing and so on
if you have two different teams then
your site is priced different to your
your store
um it's a different experience all
together
your supply chain you're not taking
advantage of
all your stock that you're buying so
you're left with a lot of over stocks
that you're unable to sell at the end of
the season so we've come full
circle i think from having it being
completely separate
and costing businesses millions and
billions
to getting to the point now where we
understand efficiency in it is in it
becoming integrated
thanks claire what what's your thoughts
on this i mean this notion that
you know you've got to embed digital
sort of everywhere and you've got to
build everybody's capability is that the
philosophy you've taken
in morgan stanley as well well look
across our institutional and
our wealth businesses in the us um you
know technology
is um is vital and we have to we've
constantly
always have to you know invest in our
technology because
our systems and our capabilities and we
operate at such fast you know
execution times you know in our trading
businesses
that it has to be kind of embedded
in in everybody's job descriptions as
nasreen said
but in terms of getting you know change
affected
um i am i actually think that you really
have to
figure out you know what your clients
want and then
you have to understand the culture of
your organization
so in some organizations and julian
you've you've referred to this because
you've done work on this about digital
transformation
in banks and you know lots of um there's
been lots of focus on some firms use you
know agile teams and
and as a way of getting stuff done and
um and i would say that you know over
the years we tried lots of those
different type types of techniques to
get you know changed through the
organization
and um perhaps it hadn't always been
well embedded up from
when it was um started but um last year
when we went into the pandemic
we actually sort of did the the uber
agile team in terms of our crisis
response team
was your your best in class you know
isolated with complete autonomy to make
decisions for the organization
and i would say using that agile
framework to
effect change and transit transition us
to
work from home um really was an enabler
and and i think that model can be
replicated if it's you know
digital transformation that an
organization needs to make but
there there has to be complete sort of
understanding and agreement about
you know what that's going to do and
what how empowered those people are in
the organization to do that
so that those decisions that they make
don't then get you know
second guessed in different parts of the
organization
and of course the pandemic no one could
negotiate about the pandemic
everybody had you know one clear
priority which was uh the health and
well-being of our people
in their minds no i mean it is
fascinating i mean we've all lived
through this in our own organizations
but
you know the speed with which
organizations responded
back you know roughly a year ago in
terms of
of prioritizing just as you say health
and well-being of employees uh
getting customers needs short-term needs
met absolutely
the problems of inertia and blockages
just disappeared melted away
and we were able to to do amazing things
and of course that has
i guess both of you i mean quick
comments on this before we move on but
in terms of are you finding ways of
somehow
taking the the essence of that new way
of working and building it into your way
of working
going forward i mean claire i'll go to
you first on that one oh no
you know absolutely i mean um we've had
you know at points in time over the last
14 months we've had um
you know 95 percent of our people in
this region
doing their their jobs very well and in
a very productive fashion
at home and so of course there have been
you know
a a ton of learnings in terms of what we
can do to
enable our people and our employees to
maintain
productivity but also to try and work on
how do we maintain the social cohesion
of the organization because
morgan stanley is a social organization
where
you know predominantly the work that we
do is done
you know in offices and so we are now
grappling with
the uh the the step change of
gradually returning to office and
enabling
you know areas where there's flexibility
that has actually helped
our teams do you know a better job by
having a mix of
in office and work from home so there
are lots of lessons and
lots of of of of things that we've taken
away from it and one of the things is i
have to say
is using this sort of technology to
use to communicate and to to serve a
purpose that you may have you know
historically had
you know 800 people convened together in
a large
you know location you you may not need
to do those sorts of
things again so absolutely the pandemic
has changed
learning and networking you know
interacting
um and i'm sure nisri can give us lots
of uh you know tips around
you know how to do this because i think
actually certainly for
services industries um you know the
internet
and the accessibility and the benefits
that the tools can use
have really not been um leveraged enough
good
so listen let me go to you on that i
mean we're moving into this question of
of what is the future of work almost you
know and i've clearly
an awful lot of people are now saying
well we're not going back to normal
normal is now a combination of the old
and and the new
hybrid is as good a word as any nizzling
what's
as has as you can support he got a sort
of formal position on this in terms of
are people being allowed to to stay at
home are they expected to
go to a mixture of work and home office
what's what's the plan and
and how are you making the most of the
opportunity affordable i think
the the transition was a lot easier for
us because we are a global organization
where we operate in many countries we're
we're a matrix organization so anyway we
live and talk to people on the screen to
begin with that's how we
that's how we operated before the
pandemic
and we've always had a work from home
two days a week which has been
always i would say ahead of the curve
incredibly civilized
for for the company and very very
helpful
for for the work life balance so when it
became
five days a week it wasn't such a big
transition because the technology was
already in play
we had state-of-the-art you know vpns
and everybody knew how to connect with
one another
we knew how to speak and react to one
another
by screen which is to me the hardest
part
however business aside and yes we're all
efficient and we're working
10 hours a day and so on what i do see
is a a breakdown in team culture
that begins to happen and that's
critical for the ones who draw
the recent joiners especially they don't
get to understand
who we are they don't know the team
dynamics they're getting to know us via
screen
no one-to-one interactions this is
going to be setting the stage for them
for the many many years to come in terms
of how they interact with us
so coming back to work is essential for
them
plus not everybody has a country home
that they can go to
a lot of our employees probably live in
a one bedroom
they share apartments with a lot of
people so the office was actually
a a space to rest and relax or if it's a
mom
she she loved being home but she loved
also having that time away
to focus so we found that a lot of young
employees were really struggling
mentally putting in place like a buddy
system
uh what we call like walkie-talkies and
things like that were really important
to keep them
close to us from a human perspective
now what happens now we have to come
back to the office
without a doubt and what i what what i
caution is that it's harder than we
might think
so the idea of you just send an email
out and say
oh yeah okay in two weeks we're all
coming back to work
there are a lot of people who have now
found out that this is their best way of
working
and they're a lot more efficient this
way and it's the new norm for them
and going back to the office seems very
abnormal so we're gonna have to
just like we held hands with them being
at home
now we have to do it on the other side
getting them back
into office mode working you know
getting dressed in the morning
you know yeah wearing your high-heeled
shoes again
you know i mean we're in the luxury
fashion business it's part of who we are
yeah okay so i mean i've heard i mean
i've thought about this a lot i've done
some research in this area i mean
it's often said that that you know the
things that the office are good
for uh are the three c's and those three
c's
are uh culture um collaboration
or creativity is sort of part of
collaboration and
clients is the third now um i don't know
if you
by that i mean by all means comment but
claire let me ask you first of all
what are you doing what are you trying
to do to
to overcome this culture gap i mean
israeli touched on it already i mean
you know it is true that you know the
the young bright young things who are
joining morgan stanley
have never been to a morgan stanley
office i mean it's hard to see how they
will get
acculturated until they're given some
sort of
you know face-to-face exposure how are
you dealing with that
well firstly i don't think culture is
just
something that is transmitted physically
i think that actually and we've worked
very hard with um you know
our analyst classes who joined last year
to make sure that we did
plenty of you know online discussions as
nasreen said
you know the equivalence of buddy
systems and networking events
and plenty of virtual events to in fact
we went
overboard with you know doing hosting
virtual sessions etc
to really try and make up for that and
um and obviously
as certainly in in the uk and
in continental europe as the economies
start to
come out of lockdown and we can get more
people back into the office we will use
that time as you said
to really focus on those three c's
particularly
the collaboration and really focusing on
you know ensuring that people understand
what our
core values and what our culture is in
terms of how they do their business but
we're very conscious of that and we are
always when we talk about
the business we talk about clients we
talk about the strategy julian
we're talking about our culture at the
same time and
and um james gorman our ceo has been
always from day one but being ceo
really focused on you know strategy
leadership and culture
and really embedding those from day one
when you join the firm as you know a
junior analyst
um i think um i think as firms and
organizations start to
think about um the transition to more
time back in the office and look
our organization we've had to have quite
a few people
do performing essential services none of
our offices actually closed during the
pandemic we had to
have continuity of our services but we
are actually thinking about
you know the activities and the roles
that you know people and teams
at different layers of the organizer and
levels of the organization perform
to really think about how do you use as
nazarene said that time when you're in
the office and as you said julian
to really maximize you know your
collaboration
cooperation interactions and basically
replenishing some of that um as one of
my colleagues said relationship capital
that is getting a bit depleted having
been
you know in this very distributed model
for so long
and actually one of the um i think the
the um
linda gratton's recent piece in um the
um
sorry that other business schools yes
and how to do hybrid right actually has
a really good framework for
organizations thinking through if
if they haven't started to think through
this this um
this challenging because as nasreen says
it's going to be really complex
to um to to to return to the
the office um and it will take time and
i think it will
you know it won't be a linear um you
know path
it will be you know fairly um cyclical
because
this thing will change and we're not you
know quite out of the pandemic
and of course every country is nezrene
works for a global organization
too we've all got you know we're all
operating at different phases the us is
opening up much faster than europe
um and you know our colleagues in apac
have um have had a much higher office
presence um
than we have here in um in europe yeah i
mean some of them almost never closed in
fact which feels strange to us that's
right
that's right that is what happened so um
so look i
i've got loads of questions and we won't
get to anything like all of them
but i'm going to ask a bunch of them in
a second but we've got one final
question i want to to
ask both of you about before we before
we move to audience questions
um looking to the future um i mean this
is a session about you know from
disruption
to growth um i mean by all means answer
how you see fit but
but certainly one huge uh
trend one huge opportunity slash threat
is the whole sustainability agenda in
other words the
extent to which our our own
organizations
are able to play a sensible part in
in that collective global effort that's
needed uh can i get each of you to to
share some
some of the things that you're doing in
terms of of sustainability um i guess
i'll go to niserene first and then i'll
go back to square
so sustainability has actually been part
of our dna for a very very long time
it's why ux got started in the first
place
and then that support has had sustained
for
probably almost eight years now and it's
one of our most popular
franchises and continues to grow what i
find
fascinating is how the middle east has
become
much more interested in sustainability
than any other factor
so when the youth and their 70 percent
of the population were asked
why would you shop with an e-tailer
retailer
there are many reasons assortment price
etc
and the number one reason was
sustainability
and they can because they're you know
they're young they're smart
they can read right through fake
you know messages that are just done for
csr
purposes or when you're authentically
building a sustainable brand um also
working
very very closely with designers who are
using
reusable materials like gabriella hearst
who
now is the creative director of chloe
who uses recycled cashmere
um you know on the very very high end
but also on the entry level
we're finding many many opportunities to
do that
we have councils we have a program
called infinity
it's a personal commitment that every
member of wine up
has to has to commit to in terms of
their everyday job
and nothing brings me more happiness
than to see this in the mainstream
retail business than
than anything else you know this is it's
something i've been advocating
forever when i was with virgin i was
invited
to join richard on stage to talk about
disruption in
retail and i was talking about
unconsumption
someone said i'm never ever going to get
a job in retail again
that you know how could you advocate on
consumption and what i was saying
was we have globally we have enough
of what we need and we should invest in
pieces
rather than doing the dollar stores
because
essentially somebody's paying if you
only pay a dollar for something
somebody else is paying more than a
dollar it could be with their
losing a an arm or a finger it could be
losing an education if you're young
it could be losing your eyesight if
you're doing you know
small network somebody's paying for it
one way or the other if it's not dollars
it's in health so
we all have a role to play and it's nice
to be working for an organization that
takes it very very seriously
thanks claire what's um what's because
obviously banking's a very very
different
sector in regard to this but i think
you've still you still got quite a
a story to tell here right oh
totally i mean look esg investing is um
is mainstream finance
now and um actually i was just looking
down because i wanted to make sure i got
the figure right
the global flows into esg funds
in december reached a record highs last
year
of 62 billion i mean over the past five
years you know
esg investing has really you know
accelerated in growth but
for us you know um like marine
nezreen's organization we recognize the
risks posed by
global sustainability you know including
climate change and
um you know inequality and the impact on
communities
um you know over a decade you know a
long time long time ago
and we set ourselves you know throughout
the last decade
various targets and commitments that we
would stand by
and in 2018 we made a significant
commitment
to finance over 250 billion dollars of
you know low-carbon solutions for uh
clients
in terms of you know clean technology
and financing you know
renewable energy alternative sources of
energy
sustainable bonds um you know and uh
and transactions that would facilitate
you know the transition to a low-carbon
economy
last month we announced that we would
triple that commitment to
750 billion dollars and that's made
in part of a you know a much larger
commitment to really
um you know mobilize and uh drive
sustainability
but in terms of coming back to you know
strategy and culture
how did we get our organization behind
that you know we're a traditional us
investment bank it was all about you
know really actually
not having a silo and nezreen talked
earlier about you know
it doesn't work if you have a chief
technology officer
that just sits in one silo you know
these changes in organizations have to
be
across each and have to be very
horizontal not vertical
and certainly what we did was embed you
know esg and sustainability
across not just our own operations and
remove single-use plastics from all our
buildings
but also really ensure that we were
providing
best-in-class advice research research
analytics
and really work on the um the
transparency
and the comparability of companies data
and these rooms are you know alluding to
you know green washing well
we're really working to help the
industry you know come up with
good metrics and good data that enables
you to
compare the journey that you know
companies are making as they you know
transition their organizations to uh
lower carbon
environments is it the case in banking i
actually have no idea what the answer to
this is
you're getting um the banks who have
made a
you know a credible commitment to
sustainable
investing sustainable finance etc are
actually getting a premium on their
share price or
or or not and because if i look for
example the energy industry
i can see clear evidence that the the
companies
who have put you know full commitment to
renewables are actually getting a return
on that eberta lower and
nl and so forth compared to to exxon
let's say
what's happening in the banking sector
do you do you monitor that so we so look
um our research absolutely we look at
different um
data sets of corporates and what we have
seen is certainly
in the world of funds sustainable funds
have achieved over 2020
better returns than their traditional
peers now you might say that 2020 was
kind of the year of you know
sustainability and
a wake-up call to esg but actually when
we look at you know a longer-term time
horizon
we see that actually there's lower risk
there's
reduced costs and there's you know the
opportunity set
for companies to drive higher returns
and uh you will you are seeing that you
know coming through and translating to
you know better pricing in terms of you
know the financing that's available so
this this the change is happening and
we're absolutely seeing that
for sure so lots
lots of questions as i say and i'm going
to bounce around a bit i'm just going to
try to
pick up on some of the the ones which i
think are kind of interesting
um somebody asked and this is from
nazarene
asks about consumer behavior and i guess
an interest in in trying to tap into the
differences in consumer behavior across
the different parts of the
of the middle eastern market that you're
you're selling into
um and of course looking across the
whole range of the different
fashion items i don't know quite what's
underneath underneath this question but
can you
can you give us a flavor because this is
an industry i have no
personal knowledge of how people buy
fashion online
can you just well i mean we we never
could have expected what people were
gonna do
online in a pandemic when they weren't
going out
but what was really strange is they were
buying a lot of bags and shoes
so and we heard that from all retailers
and they were buying
jewelry and they were buying beauty is
an obvious one
there was a lot of focus on skin care
and you know
masks and things that they were doing at
home but what was very surprising for me
is shoes you know
we had nowhere to go yet people were
buying shoes
and very very flashy shoes so to me
what was very very obvious is optimism
you know it's uh it's a classic case of
being very very excited and feeling like
you know it's uh we're coming out of
this lockdown soon
the other thing i would say is um
and actually it's it's a full it's it's
an either or spectrum
so it's either very high spending or
what you would call revenge
spending and this is just the industry
in general
or you're seeing people who are very
very promotionally driven
uh smart smart promotionally driven you
know they want good brands
at the right price and they're willing
to wait um so those trends we're
definitely seeing and they're global
trends it's not just
us you heard a lot of people say tops
were selling more because of zoom and so
on
we've seen really strange you know
behaviors like
why would you buy a bag you want to buy
a pair of shoes when you're not going
anywhere
you know but to me those were all good
signs
you know we were selling really
expensive evening gowns and
so people were definitely preparing for
when
will open again those are good signs
very very good signs the middle eastern
customer is
really unfazed she's a beautiful amazing
customer
well i must admit i do not recognize any
of what you just said
julian everyone's preparing for the
roaring twenties you
[Music]
i'm going to take a completely different
line now unless claire wants to speak to
her what nursing just said but
claire there was a question about
digital currencies from central banks i
mean that might be a little bit techy
but
but you know we we do see a lot of
central banks now talking about
launching their own digital currencies
we central banks of course looking very
closely at the potential of blockchain
technology do you want to just give us a
quick a quick sense of what the what the
issue there is
yeah look um look um most central banks
have um
are looking at um digital currencies and
some form of
of currency um i think they i would
differentiate those from um
you know bitcoin and um and other
currencies in that i think there's
the the an intention that they will be
backed by
you know um you know fiat currency etc
but um absolutely i mean i think most
central banks are really
looking at the the benefits and the
tools of and you referred to
blockchain technology and distributed
ledgers
and you know can these be informative
are they helpful
so yes absolutely the ecb the bank um
and
um and more recently the federal reserve
have all said that they are
looking at uh digital currencies so
let's see um what happens indeed in that
space well this is it because obviously
if you're a central banker you are
extremely nervous about this
concept of a of a sort of a completely
deregulated banking system so
and look i can absolutely see why why
we'll see some sort of um
some sort of hybrid thing where the
central banks are are maintaining some
sort of control but making use of the
of the technology um here's a difficult
question
um and that's what i call don and he
says you know
the metrics that you monitor in order to
ensure that you don't get disrupted in
other words as you look at the
disruptive forces out there
um the big challenge you always face is
when or when should we move in other
words
take blockchain is a great example but
it's not the only one you know at what
point do you jump into blockchain it's
quite possible to get in too late
it's also possible to get in way too
early so this doesn't have to be about
blockchain it could be about any of
those
forces for change but how do you monitor
the new things that are bubbling along
in order to make sure that you catch the
right wave at the right time
maybe i can talk maybe i can talk about
that a little bit
i mean studying a lot of and we did that
a lot
you know london business school where
you study a lot of businesses that
you know had their heyday and then
collapsed and
why did that happen and across the board
it's always because
when a company is doing very well it
starts
pulling dividends stock prices go up
you know your shareholders want um a
better
a better price and so on and the
investment in what's next
is less and less unless you have a
visionary leader
who's always assuming that disruption is
is there and it's bubbling and i'd
rather create it before someone else
does
i mean the walmart amazon example is the
best one possible
where you know walmart is a
you know fortune one company no one
could go near them
they had a store a mega store in every
little town in america
they owned america they owned factories
they owned everything
and one day jeff bezos came up with
books and then
here we go and now when they try to go
back in
and invest as doug mcmillan started
doing
in the last three years it's too late
you know it's it's too late they should
have done that
10 15 years ago but they couldn't
because the leadership was
old school and and probably thought oh
who's this
jeff bezos guy he'll you know he'll
never make it
but any business we're in when we're
doing our best
is when we expect that someone's going
to be looking at us
thinking i can do this better or i can
do just the same
so that's when you you need to invest
what do you think i mean in terms of
monitoring current
potentially disruptive trends
yeah i know look um i think um last year
was quite a
um sort of an execution year and a
conclusion
of of some of our transformation and um
julian um as we have talked before the
um
we made two acquisitions last year in
the us one was we bought
a very large online brokerage firm
e-trade
um which we are integrating and
fund manager eaton vance and both of
those acquisitions were
as a consequence of recognizing that we
wanted to
diversify and complement some of our
existing businesses particularly
in the wealth and asset management space
in the us where
we knew that we had we had particular
gaps and so
i think part of your the answer to your
question is
you know as you're constantly
re-evaluating where you are on your
strategic journey
you're evaluating can you grow um
organically in places where you know
you've got
gaps or where actually it makes much
better sense to
um you know to acquire and inorganically
grow that
more quickly and gain true scale and um
you know that's had
you know a significant you know impact
on the size of our
business in our footprint in the us and
so that really has
complemented all of the the services and
the um that we can provide certainly on
the
the wealth and asset management space
and then we when we turn to our
institutional businesses
we're constantly thinking about where
potentially
are there disruptive forces where are
there areas where
we have to keep investing in terms of
remaining you know best in class in
terms of the
the technology and the services and the
capabilities that we can provide
and so some of it is about metrics but
also i think
it's um it's about um you know stress
testing and you know basically it's that
um well you taught us this at business
school and
you know horizon scanning and looking
around corners
and that's quite hard to do but um it's
absolutely
necessary in terms of understanding the
landscape and
i guess for nazarene this whole growth
in
sort of recycling re reselling
and you know sort of this upcycling in
terms of you know in the retail sector
has been you know her company's been you
know front and foremost at that
thanksgiving one thing i was going to
add as well with with richard branson
one thing he taught us is this idea of
always saying
yes because when airbnb first started
they probably went to
a hotel chain and when uber first
started they probably went to a big car
manufacturer
you know a lot of those disruptive
businesses at one point
pitched to the large organizations who
said
terrible idea you know look at what they
were wearing
probably walked in with jeans you know a
little bit unprepared and
the answer was no and a lot of those
businesses came our way and we said no
so learning from those experiences
at virgin and other companies is always
say yes you never know those two kids
are going to walk through the door and
give you this crazy
idea might in fact become your biggest
disrupter
just a couple of years later well it's
an established fact isn't it that
netflix tried to sell themselves to
blockbuster i think it was 2
000. yeah said no
okay we're running out of time i've got
two more questions one
very i mean if you can answer quickly
that would be great um what should we do
with the older generation
somebody says that quite what the older
generation is but perhaps it's
it's always somebody's older than you
isn't it so so maybe it's
certainly it's not the people who grew
up with technology i guess it's the old
baby boomers
of which i'm kind of the last year um do
we do can we train these people up to
make them digitally savvy
should we just give them uh traditional
jobs in the back office or to servicing
equally old clients sorry i'm being
liberally politically incorrect here but
but yeah no i'm gonna take that because
i'm definitely against age
discrimination
um i believe it's attitude not age
and i've seen it um i've seen
very young people who are very very
resistant to change
and i've seen people at you know it's
hard to even say
older but very very open to different
ideas willing to learn
uh willing to adopt new technologies and
they train themselves so they don't even
need like special programs or
internships or anything like that what's
probably more important
is establishing what i would call return
ships
because more than ever as the
retirement age is getting older and
older especially in the uk
there is this period of time where
people are feeling
poorer and poorer as they get older so
actually i think companies have a
responsibility
to bring them back and do returnships
into the into the business
so that's probably very effective to
keep them feeling valuable
claire any quick thoughts on that before
my final question yeah
learn and learn from them um and um
agree with them nazarene we had a return
to work programme um years ago that
started out to um
help women who'd actually taken you know
a period of time out of the organization
um and financial services actually it's
um
not just for um you know women who are
and mothers who are returning to the
workplace
it's broader than that so um they are
very they can be really successful
programs for organizations thanks and
i've had several of these questions so
i'm going to ask one of them you have
two incredible women leaders
on the panel today what advice would you
give to other women
sailing through disruption and you can
take this in whatever direction you want
but you're going to have to be pretty
quick because we're going to
finish this thing off in two minutes any
any quick thoughts on on
on being a female leader in today's i'm
gonna give it to claire
because she's a woman in a financial
institution so
claire go ahead um
keep up your network um um
stick with it and um develop your own
um board of directors to give you
support
and reciprocate so it's incumbent on all
of us to
bring others through um the
organizations that
we run so um that's that would be my
tips
didn't you add anything i'd say
definitely if you feel like you you
don't have a skill get it
in my case i felt that i was missing
some financial skills
i went got an mba and i focused my
courses on finance that was really
important
and then i knew that that i was good at
turn around
you know i loved messy things i loved to
clean up messy things
and i was good with people so the best
advice i would say is know yourself
and apply yourself in industries where
you feel you can be
the most successful and forget about
glass ceilings and
all that equal pay just focus on what
you do best
perfect and indeed london business
school does have a very successful women
in leadership
executive education program which if any
of you are interested uh i'd be very
happy to provide more
information about it so a nice uh
opportunity for a plug for one of our
programs there we are gonna
wrap up there thank you so much nezreen
thank you claire
fascinating conversation obviously we
covered a huge number of issues and we
only really scratch the services of the
questions we're going to make this a
video available for anybody who
signed up and obviously anyone who's
listening
please watch out for future
announcements if you've given us your
information
so we can get hold of you we will keep
you updated on all our future events so
without any further ado i'm gonna call
proceedings to hold
thank you very much for listening thank
you for joining us and have a good
rest of your day thank you very much
you

---

### think ahead: Ripple Effects - The Global Economic Impact of the US Election
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9870bYAiZfE

Transcrição não disponível

---

