Welcome, this is the final session of the MOOC on managing responsibly. In today's session, we are going to look at the different ways in which the parts of materials that we presented to you in the last weeks can be connected. And as you probably already understand by now, if we talk about sustainability, about ethics and about responsibility. There are many dimensions that you can look at and over the past few weeks we have all the time looked at specific pieces to be able to present you the basic materials for this. But of course, in real life these things, they happen at the same time. And you need to somehow balance them in the situation where you are working. And as much as it is possible, in a session like this, Oliver, Sallie, and me. We are going to try and show you the different connections that we make in the material that we have provided to you. And that is an invitation to you to also look at this material again. So, go back to the interviews, go back to our proceeding lectures, go back to the other materials that we've given to you. And see for yourself where you can make sort of connections between the different levels from individual, to organization, to the global system. Or between sustainability and ethics or responsibility and ethics, or responsibility and sustainability. So, this is the word that we want to do in this last session and that we hope sets you up for doing the final assessment. And it will also help you to develop your confidences beyond this MOOC in your actual job. Sally, do you want to tell us a little bit more about how we are going to do this? >> Yes, so during the last six weeks, we've been also interviewing practitioners as part of this MOOC. >> Mm-hm. >> I think that's quite different and unusual. Basically, we're trying to get the voices of practitioners on the topics that we're interested in. But they don't speak in the same kind of fragmented boxes that we've had to deliver our MOOC through. So, when we interview people, they bring through all these connecting themes quite naturally. So, what we'd like people to do, is go back over those ten or so interviews. And use that as our material that we've used to draw out some connecting themes. And we are going to organize this session, around the connections that we see. From illustrations that we have through those interviews that's how we're going to do this session. So, what we did in fact is we reviewed those interviews and we pulled out six themes that struck us, that gives some examples, and there are many more of our how material connects in different ways. So, maybe we could look at those six themes just very quickly, and then that will structure the kind of following conversation. >> Yep. >> So, our office connecting theme is about individuals and organizations. So, we will look at what people say about their individual work links to their organization prospective. The second links organizations and systems, so what happens in individual organizations links to what happens at the systemic level? And then we found that a few of our interviewees talked about different temporalities and different scales, so local, global organizations on how they kind of interact at different levels. Another thing that we can draw out from all the interviews is about diversity. And we have a number of interviews from different parts of the world. And that naturally takes us into thinking about the global level differences in culture, differences in business practices, and how things are done differently around the world. We have a theme that is about power structures and tension, so even though we might like things to be smooth and easy to achieve. We all know that the world is very complicated and full of tensions and power relationships. So, we can draw some of that out of the interviews. And the final one is about people's individual careers, the pathways that they've been on so far in their careers. And how that helps people watching the MOOC to connect what we hear in our interviewees story line to their own lives and where they're going in their career. >> Mm-hm. >> So, if we were to take the first theme that we drew from the interview material. We were looking at the connections between individuals and organizations, and I think Oliver, you had a few things to say about that? >> Yeah. I think particularly the interview with Pierre from the startup Ooh La La was very interesting in that respect, because what happened there was actually that she as founder of the company, was very, very concerned about how her values actually are reflected in the organization that she was creating. So, from the very beginning they were actually trying to manage, trying to somehow steer that towards consistency between who she is and who the people working in the team are and what the organization is. So, that she was talking about how important the code of ethics actually was from the very beginning, shaping the company. And she was talking about different meetings they were doing in order to discuss potential issues and to talk about their values and how everything comes together. And finally also to think about what or who are the people that actually can reflect those values and those ethics of the organization when they were hiring. So, I think that's something that's very interesting and I think that's something that also was present, possibly, in some of the other interviews. >> Yeah, and for sure, I think what's interesting is when an organizations values, shapes the employee's then and how they act and behave in the organization. So, the point you make about codes of conduct is really interesting. So, I know for example, Rolls Royce has a code of conduct of ethics which actually facilitates and encourages whistle blowing. So, there's an activity or a behavior which is around ethics, but in fact the organization doesn't just reflect the values of the staff and employees. It actually shapes them because it facilitates and enables staff and employees to behave in a particular way, in a way that is consistent with the values of the organization. But then also I think at the systems level, when you start to get the idea that Mary Jan Timmi brought in about super norms. So, that asks the question, is there even a cross-cultural set of norms of ethics and behavior? That if you like institutionally, human rights may be culturally specified. But then maybe a kind of a standard that is approved or is generic or this is a debate whether they're not their own universal super gnomes. And marrying her into the, seem to feel that wherever she worked whether in India, or South America and Europe, there were some super gnomes. So, that's quite interesting I think when we moved to The systems level as to the connection in ethics terms between the individual, the organization, and system level. >> But what would that mean for people in a practical situation. Because for me, supernorms, I find it attractive, the idea, but it's also a bit difficult to actually see how people are participating in the Mook, how they could apply or work with the idea in their own practice. Do you have any thoughts about it? >> That is a debate. And I think what Mary suggested. So the other side of what she was saying in her interview was, for the leaders of organizations, where a particular ethics is maybe compromised, such as bribes or corruption. She had some examples which were kind of different to the ideas of supernorms that said the leaders of the organization can actually help their employees to counteract those cultural tendencies towards fraud or bribes or whatever, in very simple ways like not putting their employees in a position where they might be tempted to take bribes from external. So I think it kind of comes back down the ladder again to say not always are there supernorms and in fact the cultural context of ethics is very important to how organizations behave. So that in fact would be the opposite idea of universal supernorms. >> So, and the next theme is about organizations affecting system levels. So this is basically about the idea that, and for me this is something that almost immediately the word uncertainty comes up. In the sense that thinking about sustainability then one of the big challenges I would say is that you are working within an organization, sometimes even a part of an organization that you really know very well, and then sustainability very quickly leads you into discussions, and debates, and questions that are about global problems. And then one of the major connections that you somehow have to make is how does my behavior relate to that big problem, yes? And one of the ways of course to make that sort of decision is to say okay, what I am doing or what we are doing is just a small part so it doesn't really matter. But of course if everybody thinks like that then the problem will never be solved or be resolved in any way. But if you do want to think about the consequences of what you're doing and how you might be able to change something, then it's quite difficult to actually see how that's, how that could work. So and I wonder, do we have in our interviews or in the material, do we have people sort of wrestling with that specific type of uncertainty? >> It brings to mind Raina's interview at the Institute of Biotechnology where we were having a discussion about the societal implications about synthetic biology. So here we have a new and emerging area of science and knowledge where, similarly to genetic modification and nanotechnologies, the future is uncertain. And in the face of that uncertainty, what can people do collectively and in group work or a participative modes to maybe anticipate or at least debate what the implications for those uncertainties are for society. So basically it never stops uncertainty, you can't stop uncertainty, but it really brings a lot of people into the discussion as to what the societal implications of technologies down the line might be where some new technologies can be used for many different applications, they can be used for bio-weaponry as easily as they can be used to replace fossil fuels. So how we have that debate within collectives, within organizations at an early stage, is the point about anticipative governance on the uncertainties of technology and responsibilities of distributed debates about emerging technologies. >> So this connects also then to the theme, in a way, that we have about dialogue. And so it's not really about making decisions, but it's more about being in contact with other people. And in that sense, sort of as the technology develops stay in contact with other people and in that sense the uncertainty reduces in a way as the technology develops, but then the uncertainty reduces in a way that is maybe more sustainable than it otherwise would be. >> And I think that has implications for organisations and this is really a new area of research and work that we're interested in, what you might call responsible innovation. Which is how can organizations become involved in doing these new kind of inclusive techniques, and how would they actually systematize processes so that that becomes normalized into the organization? And I think Reyna's interview brought that out really nicely. He said, we're scientists. We don't make decisions about the future of technologies. That's done by other actors. And therefore, how are those actors brought into the dialogue at an early stage. >> So this might actually be an interesting connection between this theme and the previous one we had because we've seen a couple of situations where actually individuals started to think about how they could use organizations to affect that systemic levels. What Frank said before about what can I do as an individual, could be answered in one way saying well, I could actually start changing, transform an organization or trying to use an organization to make an impact on the systemic level. So on the one hand you're hearing from Madeleine Cop who actually said well, she moved from work in the governmental and also the NGO sector to work in a for-profit company because she thought this is the kind of organization that can actually make a big, big impact. And on the other hand also we've seen how said that her organization actually was very sensitive about how society or the external stakeholders think of what they're doing. And how they're trying to navigate that very tricky topic that you called it which is online dating. So I think there's a couple of more connection that actually can be made as well. >> Yeah, okay, nice. >> Moving on to the third thing. >> Yes, we thought there was a number of the interviews that we did that drew out, not local to global tensions but actually tensions in time between short termism and long termism, for example, and that came about even the role of the Turkish boss and how a long term ethical finance approach can actually help companies do things in a different way and that theme came out as well with Kosheek's interview in South Africa where his view was that a global financial system which is organized around quite a short term. Perspective of short-termism is quite difficult for South African companies to cope with because they have many difficulties of their own to cope with about kind of rebooting the South African economy and how to work in the South African context. And there, the case study that Kaushik brought to us was how the longer term perspective would help South African companies to be more sustainable in their work. And I think that the idea of temporal scale came out there. >> I think that this issue of short-termism is actually quite interesting, because in a way, it's almost it's like the opposite of what you were just talking about, the ability to as an individual or using the organization as a tool to make change. Because short-termism for me, something that I hear very often as a cause of problems. The fact that we don't seem to be really able to think about the longer term, and everybody almost complains about this, which basically means that we could change this really easily. So if tomorrow, everybody starts thinking in the longer term, then it wouldn't be a problem anymore. But somehow, we are not able to do that. So we are keeping each other prisoner almost in this thinking, in terms of very short term and even making that short term shorter still. And that might actually be an experience that a lot of people who are watching this having one way or another that you have this sort of expectation of other people, which in itself is not really a very, very strong thing. But because everybody is expecting it, it actually becomes like a structure that is imposed on you, and you can't do anything else, but sort of give in to it, almost. I think that in terms of managing, responsibly, that is, something that you actually walk into quite often, because in trying to manage responsibly, you basically are aware of things that other people take for granted. And once you become aware of it, then, in a way, that's sort of liberating because you sort of see alternative ways, but at the same time, it's also quite difficult because it's not always possible to sort of start that alternative course of action. >> I think one thing that individuals actually can do in that respect, as well, is to start thinking about how to help create that kind of behavior that actually helps us to think more in the long run. And one very concrete thing that Rodrigo was doing with the bank, he's working at the Mexico, is actually financial education for people. So then, as they're buying and using one of their main competence as an organization, which is around finance and how to manage financial resources, to teach their customers to use their financial resources well. And in the long run, to be someone who's sustainable in a financial way and who's able to manage their finances very well. because one of the main reasons why we actually got into the mess of the financial crisis was rooted very much in how individual people would accept or not accept to go into a long relationship, which finally led to very, very long run consequences. So maybe as individuals, we can also start thinking about how can we actually not only do it ourselves, but also how to create kind of a bubble of people who are actually able to think not only in the short run, but actively make decisions in the medium and long run, as well. >> And I think, as well, we saw from Nick Bishop's interview, and Nick saw the fact that he left a large bank that is, in many ways, involved in all these structures, and left that and set up his own business. And in a sense, being in charge of your own business, your own destiny, means that you can work with other like-minded kind of social movements. Where there are other kinds of values going on, so the short-termism is not part of a different kind of alternative movement, where you might be interested in sport or well being or other kinds of business activity that also rooted in other kinds of values. And really then, it's about finding alternative, the modes of doing business that maybe aren't driven in the same short termist kind of approach. And I think Nick's interview brought that out in terms of his choice of collaborators that weren't necessarily in the same sphere as the bank that he'd been involved in previously. >> Well, looking also a little bit at a time, we don't want to do all the work for the people who are watching. They still need to have some connections left that they should make themselves. And we talked, I think, also already quite a bit about globalization and diversity in relation to the other themes, so maybe we can move on to the issue of power. And again, it relates a little bit to the structure. So we talk a lot, and I think also in the MOOC, we have quite some material that is about the tools that you have, collaboration, and sort of this idea of developing partnerships. And this is a lot of the language that you'll actually see. But at the same time, I think that a lot of people who are watching this, they will have an experience, where as soon as they get into the areas that we are talking about, that very often, there's also the possibility of conflict and tensions. So actually, people have values, but they don't necessarily connect into sort of a joint goal. So I think that maybe you cannot call it exactly a connecting theme, but it's sort of a theme that runs through everything that we have seen. One of the examples that I sort of remember from the interview that they did with Kenneth from Tesco is where he talked about supply chain. And I think that he sort of didn't mention it very explicitly, but if you look back at the interview, he talked about Tesco and their suppliers. And on the one hand, when sort of discussing the projects that they were doing in terms of sustainability, he was emphasizing how important it is to actually collaborate with the suppliers. So you need sort of the knowledge of the suppliers, and you need to make that combination in order to develop new solutions. But he also made remarks that made it quite clear that Tesco, of course, is a very powerful buyer. So if, as a supplier, you don't necessarily have a lot of sort of possibilities to actually say no to any company that you're connected to in that way. So in that sense, there's collaboration, but at the same time, there is also the exertion of power, I would say. So that's sort of the example that I can think of. I don't know if you have any other examples that sort of come to mind. >> And I think what's interesting is there are different forms of power. So Tesco, they're exerting commercial power directly over the supply chain. But those are the forms of power, which are about reputational power and legitimacy. So in something that we're interested in and it's about legitimacy construction. You can see then that's it not always the biggest or the mightiest organization that can exert some influence over a dialogue or a distributive process. Because the power then that the NGOs might have or another organization that has a form of legitimacy that they're believed by consumers or believed by different parts of the system gives them actual power. So, in examples, where say Friends of the Earth or Greenpeace gain power really is, in fact, that people are interested in what they have to say. So it may not be commercial power, but it may be reputational power, influence through the media. And of course, the media is a very powerful instrument that is available. So I think what's interesting here is there are some really strong structures that are in place that sometimes look absolutely impossible to break. But then if you also look at some case studies and some examples of what different kinds of power exist. Therefore, when you look at large organizations and small organizations, you have to look quite carefully about where the structures of power reside and where they originate from. I think that's an important message for our MOOC. >> I think what comes to mind as well as there's another type of how power actually might come into play would be what Madelyn Caple is saying about how important it is for people who want to make responsibility sustainability happen in a big organization like ITV. That they actually stopped, persuade people, like to invite on board to in a certain way exert their power in order to make them part of this kind of sustainability and responsibility eventually. And these people might actually have very different agendas. So these people might not from the very beginning want to do part of that agenda. So persuasion is one type of exerting power might be something that on an individual level as friends had before something that might come into play with as well. >> Maybe not directly from interviews but that makes me think about some work on institutional entrepreneurs. So there is a capability that I think is really important to the agenda of responsibility and sustainability in ethics. Which is an ability to verbalize and voice a concern which other people feel is an important concern and thereby enroll other people to that narrative and to that discourse in a way that doesn't rely on any kind of hierarchy. So it may not be the most powerful hierarchical person that is able to articulate a debate or an issue and then enroll to it. So that's another example of kind of inverting or changing. Taking for granted structures that seem to be too powerful for us but actually changing those relationships. >> I would say that is a very nice sort of way to lead in to our last theme which is about individual careers. Because it would be really nice if people from our MOOC begin to acquire skills that actually make them in to these institutional entrepreneur's. And what I really like about the interviews we did is that I think all of them in one way or another, they sort of give information about the scenes that we talked about. And that we wanted to sort of share information about, but at the same time they also give you an insight into how each individual developed into the role that they currently have. What was their starting point? What were their motivations? And how that also is quite important in what they then, at this moment are doing in the position that they occupy. >> And I think that really brings in nicely the final assignment that. So in the very beginning in session one we introduced that assignment and said have a go at applying the things that we're going to be talking about to an every day problem or context that you might have come across in your everyday life. And what we want people to do now at the end is revisit and redo that assignment with the insights of all of our interviewees and the idea of connections and the different tools that we've offered as resources during the six weeks. And in a way to really think and reflect themselves on some of these issues of power structures, of ethics responsibility, of environmental sustainability of the use of technologies or any kind of problem or situation that people face themselves. And really use what we've been giving over the last six weeks into redoing that assignment and seeing then whether. Completing it now looks different to how it looked when it was first done six weeks ago. >> So I think that actually connects very well to the kind of skills, abilities, competencies, that people, my development of that MOOC. And what Madeline Caple was saying before is that you need actually a variety of different things you need to be good at in order to actually make the change to what responsibility and sustainability and ethics happen. So she was talking about persuasion which you already mentioned, you mentioned before about how influencing and rolling other people is important. She was talking about technical skills as well so all of the people in the normal job stacks, you have to be very, very good at what they're doing anyway in order to integrate this topic into their jobs. Piere was talking about how important it is for her to make ethical, good decisions because she's working in an area where these decisions really, really are key to how you're behaving. So I think this is one of the very important points that we can take away. And hopefully that people got out of this MOOC. >> And I think as well, another link to Lin Prime's interview and the way she talked about AstraZeneca is when you have a very large organization you have a division of labor. Almost with different kinds of skills and competency. So she was saying if you come from a very technical background and you are in this technical side of environmental impact. And all, from her side she came in via a language and communications. And she called them the soft skills. But in a sense, the interdisciplinarity of the work we're doing on the MOOC shows that you can have a multiple background of different kinds of competencies, and that in a way they connect at some level, and they're all very relevant. Complete a plethora of different kinds of skills and competencies are relevant to this field. >> Yeah. >> Okay, well that sort of rounds it up I would say. We have shown you a number of connections that we can make in the material and that's of course based on our own histories and our own sort of expertise. And you can do the same thing with the material based on your own situation, where you are. That would also be the way that I would summarize, I think, the way to work with connections, yeah? So once you start to see the bigger picture, you see a lot of connections and it can be overwhelming almost. In the sense that the individuals and the organization and the global problems. It's all connected. But what I think that we also indicated through a number of examples and what you can see in the interviews is that people. When they make some progress and they are in one way or another successful in dealing with these situations. It's by simply starting from the point where they are at that moment, and from that point they develop it. So they take the problem that they have or they opportunity that they have and they start looking at how it spills over into other areas. How they might involve the suppliers of the consumers or even other stakeholders into a debt. So, in the way they make the system bigger and through that they work towards a solution. And I think that would be my way of sort of summarizing one of the core principles that we're trying to work with in this MOOC. And hopefully, that has also been something that is inviting for you to do. Because what we tried to do in this MOOC is basically to provide a platform for you to start learning the skills and competences to do this kind of work, to make these connections. Also, to have some experience with doing that through the assignment, through looking at the interviews and sort of working with it in your own practical situation. And finally, hopefully, also by making connections to other people who are participating in the MOOC. And maybe also sharing the material with other people in your own context and, in that way, building up a network. That will help you after you have looked at the material of this MOOC a number of times, that you can still sort of work with it and improve your skills and competencies. Because that network of people is something that you can continue to work with. It doesn't end with this MOOC. I think that's what we wanted to share with you. I can only say that I really enjoyed it a lot to work with Sally and with Oliver, and also the people behind the camera, to make this work. So I thank you very much for being a part of this and we wish you all the best in whatever you are going to do with this material.
