Lancaster University Management School - 54 Degrees Issue 9

ISSUE 9 FIFTYFOURDEGREES Lancaster University Management School | the place to be 6 14 Caring forHealthcare Staff , Caring for Patients One app to track them all 26Gender Matters COVID-19 MICHAELWEST,MONIDEEPATARAFDAR, BENHARRISON, EYALWINTER, DARRENDALCHERANDMARWAN IZZELDIN PROVIDE INSIGHT INTOTHECORONAVIRUSPANDEMIC.

SeniorLeaders MastersDegreeApprenticeship: Shapingthe leadersof todayandtomorrow Findoutmoreat • Enhance your career and support your organisation • Flexible and practical digital learning enables you to study part-time around your work • Suitable for managers in public, private and third sectors across the UK • Fully-funded for employers through Government Apprenticeship Levy – 95%Government subsidy for non-levy payers • 18-30 month course featuring interactive learning workshops and one-to-one mentoring • Endorsed by the Chartered Management Institute and Institute of Leadership & Management • Programmes start in September and December 2020 “We know from speaking to employers who have used the programme that it helps them to build a talent pipeline for the rising stars in their organisation, while also providing the launchpad for organisational transformation through their learning.” Dr KatieWillocks, Programme Director. CeTAD entre forExecutiveTrainingandDevelopment

FIFTY FOURDEGREES | 3 Foreword These are unusual times for all of us. The Covid-19 pandemic hasmeant a complete reassessment of the way we work, both in terms of teaching and in for research. 6 Caring for Healthcare Staff , Caring for Patients TheCovid-19 pandemic is a global health emergency that has impacted the lives of billions of people. In the NHS, the disruption, the impact, the effect on tens of thousands of healthcareworkers has been immense. 10 The world of work during and after Covid-19 The Covid-19 pandemic is reshaping the UK and global economies in ways unimaginable just a few short months ago. 18 30 In this issue... 34 A university at the heart of the region Lancaster University has a longestablished reputation around entrepreneurship in the NorthWest, working with businesses and entrepreneurs for their benefit and that of the whole region. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Business Dr Mike Ryder asks: what can science fiction tell us about the future?When we watch Star Trek, Blade Runner or Star Wars, or read the works of Philip K. Dick, Arthur C. Clarke or Ursula Le Guin, dowe see what lies decades or centuries in the future? 38 4 My Grudge against the (COVID) Nudge Quite differently frommost other European countries, theUK’sCovid-19 policy has been characterised by the minimal use ofmandatory restrictions. Covid-19 offers valuable lessons in making project management more adaptable Projectmanagement isobsessedwith riskaversion,withpreparing for and predictingeverythingdown to thefinest of details,withgovernancestructures. Gender Matters Organisations face complex challenges in their pursuit of gender equality and inclusivity. 22 One app to track them all The spread of Covid-19 has seen governments worldwide developing and implementing new policies and guidelines to tackle and contain the pandemic. 14 Counting the costs of a pandemic Financial markets react quickly and erratically to unexpected events, but the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic is unprecedented during peacetime. 26

4 |

These are unusual times for all of us. The Covid-19 pandemic has meant a complete reassessment of the way we work, both in terms of teaching and for research. As Darren Dalcher notes in his piece in this edition on the lessons to be learned from the pandemic for project management – both the profession and the process at large – there are both challenges and opportunities presented by Covid-19. This is equally true for academic research, and as this issue – presented to you in a new digital format, which we hope you enjoy – demonstrates, our LUMS researchers have been working hard to put their skills to work around the pandemic. Michael West has a long track record when it comes to improving the mental health of healthcare staff , and never has his expertise been more pertinent than in these last fewmonths. His collaborations with the NHS have helped provide vital support networks for those key-workers who have been so much in our thoughts of late, and he hopes the pandemic offers the chance for long-term positive change. Marwan Izzeldin looks at the consequences of the pandemic on countries and economic sectors around the world, Monideepa Tarafdar has been examining the issue of tracing apps, and Eyal Winter and Darren Dalcher each have their own valuable areas of expertise, allowing them to provide insight into the wider crisis and its impact on people and businesses. Though it is hard to fathom at times right now, there is life beyond Covid-19, and that is reflected by a selection of pieces looking at the wider research taking place in the School – no more so than in the work of Mike Ryder as he examines the relevance of sciencefiction to marketing. Ben Harrison, who has come in as Director of the Work Foundation at a fascinating time, explains what the organisation will be doing alongside LUMS and wider Lancaster University experts to shape the future of the world of work. Valerie Stead’s work on the Gender Matters project highlights the issues around the pursuit of gender equality and inclusivity in the UK workplace, many of which have come to the fore event more during the pandemic. This work reflects our long-term commitment to positively influence business and society. We are building on two decades of successful partnerships with North West SMEs. This is the focus of Sarah Jack’s research on the influence and impact universities can have on the regional entrepreneurial ecosystem. LUMS has an established reputation for working with businesses large and small, and that is one we strive to maintain and expand. You canfind further information on the research contained within this issue by following the hyperlinks or clicking on the videos that have been embedded in the articles. Professor Angus Laing is Dean of Lancaster University Management School and Chair of Academic Advisory Board at Nurture Higher Education Group. Foreword Within these (electronic) pages, youwill learn about some of thewide-ranging, impactful research we have been carryingout at Lancaster University Management School. FIFTY FOURDEGREES | 5


Covid-19 has hit theUK’s National Health Service like nothing in its 72-year history. Professor Michael West has beenworking with theNHS throughout the pandemic to ensure staffon the frontline have high-quality support. FIFTY FOURDEGREES | 7

8 | TheCovid-19 pandemic is a global health emergency that has impacted the lives of billions of people. In theNHS, the disruption, the impact, the effect on tens of thousands of healthcareworkers has been immense. But even before the pandemic, staffwere in the darkest place, with stress, staffvacancies (therewere 100,000 in England as of December 2019) and the intention to quit at their highest ever levels. And then came the pandemic. It is vital that those on the frontline experience high quality and compassionate support so that they can deliver safe, high quality and compassionate patient care. The better the health andwell-being of staff , the safer the care they provide – and the more likely patients are to be satisfied and recover. Since the start of the pandemic, I have had the privilege of being a part of the NHS England/Improvement Covid-19 national task force for staffsupport andwell-being, and I amnowamember of the Recovery Commission, using our research at Lancaster University and others’ research to protect the well-being of frontline staff . It is a hugely challenging time for staff . They have had to face the fear of anticipating a very high intensity of work. Those in critical care have often been working for several hours wearing hot PPE equipment, unable to take a break, get a drink or go to the toilet; plus there is the fear of catching the virus yourself – the fear that everybody has, that you may ormay not surviveCovid-19 – as well as the very real fear of bringing the virus home to your families. The pressures onmost NHS and care staff have been enormous. WhileCovid-19 has presented our health servicewith unparalleled challenges, it also offers an opportunity for us to better protect themental health of NHS staffand put processes and programmes in place that recognise just how important they are to us all and to introduce compassionate leadership to unleash their collectivewisdom. During the crisis, a support website and a mental health hotline have been launched following Taskforce advice, with NHS staffreceiving support and advice for the pressures they face every day during the global health emergency. This has been an important way of offering the vital support staffneed in extreme One of the most extraordinary features of the crisis is the scale and pace of innovation ʻʻ ʼʼ

and dangerous circumstances that are emotionally and physically challenging. A suite of free apps has been offered to assist staffwith theirmental health, with everything fromguidedmeditation to tools to battle anxiety and helpwith sleep problems. There have beenmany calls to theNational Helpline to date, text conversations, tens of thousands of downloads of apps and self-help materials and huge numbers of sessions on thepeople.nhs.ukwebsite. I have had the privilege of participating in aseries of webinarseachwithmore than 1,000 participants andvideos , with more than 4,000 views each, for NHS staffand leaders to explain howwe can bestmanage stress andwellbeing, lead andwork in teams, and promote cultures of compassion. It is crucial to generate a climate of compassion and support withinNHS teams – there have been wonderful outpourings of compassion and lovewithin our communities , but this also needs toflow into health and careworkplaces to support staff . TheNHS has always had a hierarchical command and control culture, and it is not helpful, because theworkforce – as we have seen – is highlymotivated and highly skilled. We need to be less controlling, less demanding of them, to give themmore scope to shape health services andwemust value their contribution. One of themost extraordinary features of the crisis was the scale and pace of innovation. NHS stafftransformed entire hospitals and it is illustrative of what can happenwhenwe release stafffromthe bureaucracy, regulation and administrative burden, that have contributed to staffstress levels for many years. There is a need for leaders tomodel compassionate leadership – to take the time to listen to staff , to understand the challenges they are facing, to empathise with them, and then to continually ask how they, as leaders, can help. It is vital to ensure that staffhave a voice and influence if we are to retain them. The danger is that in crises leaders adopt more of a threat rigiditymode rather than listening to people on the front-line. Of course, in an emergency you do need an emergency response – clarity of structures and processes – butmore than ever at a time like this, we need to be listening to front-line staffand drawing on their knowledge skills and experience. We have to build strong teamwork in, so that people feel part of effective teams, and that those teams, despite all the pressures, are regularly taking time out every day –whether 10minutes at the start, 10minutes at the end – to come together, to review, to support each other, and tomake surewe are not placing staffunder conditions of stress andworkload that are unmanageable. Of course, this has been a pressured situation and there are huge demands on staff , but it is also vital that leaders realistically appraise theworkload of staffbecause chronic excessive workload is the biggest threat to staff health andwellbeing in health care; It is also themain reasonwhy staffintend to quit or actually quit. And it threatens patient safety and high quality care. We are notmachines, we get ill, and the more staffwho have avoidable illnesses, the less wewill be able to cope. After the dark times of this crisis, we must let the light come streaming in and make changes that will be a catalyst for theNHS becoming aworld leader in caring for the health andwellbeing of its 1.4million staff . Some staffwill feel they have grown as a result of theCovid-19 challenge, but therewill also be a lot of trauma and stress. Staffsupport during the recovery periodwill be vital. NHS staffhavemade an enormous sacrifice and contribution, and some have risked their lives in this pandemic. After we come through theworst of the crisis, wemust transformtheway that we support them, given how they have supported and cared for the country. In order to provide high quality and compassionate care for patients and communities, wemust provide high quality and compassionate support for staff . Michael West is a Professor in Organisational Psychology in the Department of Organisation, Work and Technology. FIFTY FOURDEGREES | 9 It is a hugely challenging time for staff . They have had to face the fear of anticipating a very high intensity of work. ʻʻ ʼʼ

Director BenHarrison recognises the role theWork Foundation and Lancaster University have to play in supportingworkers and businesses navigating the current crisis, and helping themto thrive in the years to come. 10 | THEWORLD OFWORK DURINGAND AFTER COVID-19


12 |

The Covid-19 pandemic is reshaping the UK and global economies in ways unimaginable just a few short months ago. Whole sectors were essentially ‘switched off’, with millions of businesses and workers reliant on unprecedented levels of Government support in order to try to mitigate the worst impacts of this crisis. Those who have not found themselves out of work or furloughed have had to adapt to home working, many having never done so before. The truth is that even now it is still too early in this crisis to fully understand exactly what the implications of this virus, together with the responses from the UK Government and their counterparts across the globe, will be. But even the most optimistic forecasts do not predict a quick return to normal, with longer term impacts expected on economic demand, consumer behaviour, investment decisions and almost all associated areas of public policy. In taking over as Director earlier this year, my ambition was to reconnect withthe Work Foundation’score purpose and re-establish the role we can play in the Lancaster University family. That meant a renewed focus on how we, together with colleagues across LUMS, can successfully influence policy and practice so that everyone in the UK has access to rewarding and high-quality work, no matter their starting point in life. I believe that the scale and severity of the Covid-19 crisis makes this mission more important than ever. We know that compared to the state of the nation on the eve of the Great Recession of 2008, we now have higher levels of household, consumer and student debt, together with greater levels of in-work poverty, lower levels of household savings, and key state services weakened following a decade of austerity. Data from the ONS in Junesuggests the UK claimant count went up by a staggering 1.6 million between March and May this year, and sat at 2.8 million. With nearly a quarter of workers having been furloughed, the Institute for Government estimated that nearly twofifths of UK workers were doing little to no work, and having their income provided in part, or in whole, by the state. Looking ahead, as the crisis recedes and Government support begins to taper, the Office for Budget Responsibility have suggested theUK’s GDP is likely to have fallen by 35% in the second quarter of this year , with unemployment likely to go up by at least two million. The likelihood is those who were most vulnerable going into the crisis – the unemployed, the lowskilled, those on low wages, or those who live in parts of the country with big economic challenges – will be hit hardest. Sectors that were already struggling in many parts of the country – such as high street retail and leisure and tourism services – can expect to face new battles for survival. All of these factors raise significant questions regarding the kinds of Government intervention that will be required over the long term to support workers, businesses and places in the future as we seek to recover from the Covid-19 crisis. They also prompt serious questions for business leaders and practitioners exploring ways to safeguard and grow their enterprises as national and global economic turbulence continues. That is why we are working with colleagues from across the Management School as we launch our new collaborative research and engagement programme aimed at supporting practitioners, firms and policymakers to navigate the immediate and longer-term challenges presented by this crisis as the situation continues to evolve. This programme will be made up of a range of different research projects which engage directly withfirms and workers in the North West and across the UK, so that we can gain an understanding of how things are playing out on the ground for differentfirms in different sectors. To launch thefirst phase of this work, we have published ashort briefingon the ways in which the COVID-19 crisis is increasing insecurity across the labour market. This initial output will be followed by more detailed analysis of which parts of the population are most likely to be affected, and which sectors are most vulnerable to the volatility and disruption over the months ahead. We will also explore what this means for different places depending on their economic geography, and in particular the sorts of businesses and employment opportunities they are home to. In later phases, we will provide insights and recommendations on the kind of support Government will need to provide individuals, firms and industries, and the kinds of changes in employment practice we will need to see if businesses and workers are to adapt in the future. I want to ensure the Work Foundation plays its part in supporting Lancaster University to deliver on its civic role across Lancashire and the North of England at this challenging time. By harnessing the leading academic research produced in our institution and utilising the policy expertise and links to business practice of the Work Foundation, this new programme will support workers and businesses to navigate the current crisis, and thrive in the years to come. Ben Harrison is Director of the Work Foundation FIFTY FOURDEGREES | 13

14 | ONEAPPTOTRAC Track and trace apps are a crucial tool in battling the spread of Covid-19. Professor Monideepa Tarafdar looks at howgovernments canmake themmore appealing to the public.


The spread of Covid-19 has seen governments worldwide developing and implementing new policies and guidelines to tackle and contain the pandemic. Integral to lockdown exit strategies have been contact-tracing apps. These apps are designed to tracks a person’s location throughout the day, identifying and informing anyone who might have come into contact with an infected person, reducing the risk of contagion and curbing Covid-19’s spread. They area controversial topicand there have been civic debates in many countries: Why should healthy citizens use them? Are theygathering sensitive data ? Are they running down mobile phone batteries? With most mobile apps – and health apps in particular – it is important to meet the requirements of a target group in order for the app to be installed. But tracing apps are different – they must reach the vast majority of the population to work effectively, encompassing different groups with sometimes conflicting demands. Without that widespread coverage, their efficacy is greatly reduced and the risks of new outbreaks orflare-ups in case numbers increases. The challenge policy-makers have faced as they scrambled to introduce them is meeting the needs of populations who are split in their acceptance of the necessity and desire to use them. There are the Proponents, the Undecided, and the Critics – the latter, particularly, need to be convinced. This is difficult, because tracing apps are characterised by unclear benefit structures, sensitive data requirements and the fact that installation brings certain inconveniences. App installation intention is shaped by this trio of factors, and the balance between them, but demands and desires are not the same for all three groups. Yet, there can be only one set of features for the app, which needs to be rolled out to everyone. Governments, therefore, need to understand how to achievemass acceptance when designing and promoting such apps for them to be useful. There can be no gradual uptake: the apps need to be used enmasse and at speed. Working with colleagues at the University of Goettingen, Alfaisal University and Hong Kong Baptist University, we took advantage of a unique window of time in Germany – after the government announcement that an official app would be introduced but before its release. This was a period when a debate over privacy and the usefulness of the app took the spotlight in the public media. We conducted an experimental study with 518 participants to better understand the specifications that matter most for all three groups. We showed themdifferent designs for 16 |

afictitious Covid-19Watch app, featuring varying degrees of privacy and convenience, along with three benefit related communications in the app. The benefit communications in the apps were for the self (being informed about high-risk contacts); for society (contributing to broader tracing coverage and informing others of a risk of infection); and for a combination of both. With thefirst, people install the app for their own wants and needs, while the second prioritises others, a form of social altruism. While policymakers might prefer a combination to reach more people, that can dilute the message. It comes down to a contest between benefit to the self and benefit for the greater good. Privacy concerns arise over the storage and use of personal data, and are a common reason for people not installing an app, but contact tracing apps only work if they can access and process this sensitive information. How this is dealt with – using GPS or Bluetooth, with central or decentralised storage, with restricted or extended data use – shapes decisions on whether or not to install; thus we presented high and low privacy options. Around convenience, we presented apps that required little time and effort to install, run and update, and those needing extra user-input and which can lead to higher battery consumption. High conveniencemay seem the obvious choice, but building such an app entails a greater investment of time and money, and time is something in short supply for a pandemic like Covid-19. We found distinct groups among our participants, with differing preferences, information that is vital to policymakers needing to reach critical mass for their app distribution. Societal benefits are key for theCritics. They are less concernedwith how the app can benefit themselves, thanwith how it can have a positive effect on the population as awhole. Ahigh privacy design is alsoparamount. Among the Undecided, societal benefits are similarly important, with convenience of use having the strongest effect on installation intention. For Advocates, none of the three factorswe varied had a substantial effect on their intention to install. Theremay be other issues beyond the design of the app at play here, and specificationsmatter little to them. Precise targeting of all three groups is unfeasible, so policy-makers must determine, perhaps through surveys, which, if any, group the vast majority of the populationfit into, and design the app accordingly based on which aspects are important to that group. But if there is no majority, we suggest targeting the Undecided and the Advocates with high levels of privacy and convenience while speaking to altruistic rather than self-focused motivations. For example, the deployment of Singapore’s tracing app was accompanied by the message “Together we can make our world safer for everyone.” The problems with the design and early implementation of the UK tracing app and the low uptake of the app in France – where fewer than 70 people used it to report a positive Covid-19 test in itsfirst three weeks – demonstrate the difficulties governments have faced. But there have been more successful implementations – the German app was downloaded almost 10 million times in itsfirst week. Our research provides a glimpse into why all countries have faced difficulties in deploying these apps to reach a critical mass of the population. Only time will tell which have been successful. Monideepa Tarafdaris a Professor in the Department of Management Science, and Co-Director for the Centre for Technological Futures. The paperOne app to trace them all? Examining app specifications for mass acceptance of contacttracing appsis co-authored with Professor Simon Trang, Professor Manual Trenz, Professor Welf Weiger and Professor Christy Cheung, and is published in the European Journal of Information Systems . FIFTY FOURDEGREES | 17

18 | TheUKgovernment has reliedmainly on soft guidelines for it’s Covid-19 exit strategy, and has introduced little in the way ofmandatory restrictions. Professor Eyal Winter examines the difference in approach compared to other countries. MY GRUDGE AGAINST THE (COVID) NUDGE


20 | Covid-19 nudging does not satisfy any of these conditions. The stakes are huge, as are the spillover effects, and the alternative of mandatory restrictions is not really repugnant. ʻʻ ʼʼ

Quite differently frommost other European countries, the UK’s Covid-19 policy has been characterised by theminimal use of mandatory restrictions and hardly any enforcement. Onemight be tempted to ask whether this policy is effective. One useful thought experiment is to imagine the abolition of all traffic laws and replacing themwith voluntary guidelines helped by some cool nudges (psychological manipulations). This would be done, for instance, by installing a sign on every traffic light, saying “Most people who arrive at this busy intersection do stop on the red light.” If this imaginary scenario scares you, you should have similar feelings about an exit strategy that relies mostly on soft guidelines and hardly at all on enforcement. Why can we not actually rely solely on nudges to get people to abide by traffic rules? One would think that the fear of losing one’s life in a car accident would suffice to get people to follow the rules and drive carefully. But, unfortunately, this is not the case. A car accident is an event too remote, fanciful, and low probability to affect our decisions. The likelihood of a £100fine froma policeman standing around the corner, together with the feeling of shame when violating the law, is far more effective. Some of my behavioural economics colleagues, including those at the Nudge unitwhich advises the Cabinet Office on a regular basis, have propagated the use of primarily soft policies to deal with the Covid-19 crisis. A soft policy advisory is a wonderful deal for almost all parties involved. Governments love it because it allows them to avoid unpopular policies, and it will be endorsed by experts. Academic advisers enjoy it, because they can claim to have come down from their ivory tower into the realm of policymaking, and feel that they are being listened to. But too often there is one party that loses: the public! Take the use of facemasks as an example. In spite of the unequivocal recommendationof a study by a Royal Society groupin favour of their use by the general public, the British Government – who requested the study – decided not tomandate it. While masks are effective, they do not really protect the people whowear them, but rather those with whom they come into contact. This dilutes the incentives to use them. Mandatingmasks is, therefore, absolutely necessary, especially when the lockdown is gradually easing, andmillions of people who are “starving” for shopping, entertainment, and pubs will start pouring into narrow spaces. Masks are likely to be the only thing standing between themand the virus. The politics of categorisingmasks as countereffective or even dangerous in spite all the evidence is an excellent research topic for sociologists to investigate. What sort of environments would allow nudging to replace stricter policies? While it is hard to answer this question categorically, I will try to address it with three rules of thumb, at least one of which needs to hold: 1. When the alternative of mandatory rules is so repugnant that it makes many of us sick in terms of the violation of human rights. 2. When the stakes are small. 3. When the spillover effects are minor. That is to say, when the person’s decision has no major effect on the well-being of other people. Using nudging, as the sole tool, to increase organ donationisfine because the alternative of mandating it is repugnant. Nudging for the purpose of reducing electricity consumption is acceptable because the stakes are small. Nudging people to get tested for colon cancer is alsofine. The stakes are high, but there are no spillover effects. Covid-19 nudging does not satisfy any of these conditions. The stakes are huge, as are the spillover effects, and the alternative of mandatory restrictions is not really repugnant. While behavioural tools such as nudging cannot by themselves maintain safety during the Covid-19 exit phase, they can increase compliance if added to mandatory restrictions. When asked by the governments that I advise about the one tool that would be most effective, I answer transparency. People have an innate mistrust of governments. This is a global phenomenon that harms incentives to follow rules even when they are made mandatory. This mistrust is fed by the understanding that governments and individuals have different objectives. Governments want to survive and get re-elected, while we, individuals, want to survive and “re-enjoy” life. A clear exit strategy that explains the rationale behind every rule, presented in the form of a schedule that would only be amended if the epidemic changes course unexpectedly, increases trust and with it compliance. It also allows each of us to plan our own individual exit strategy to get our life back on track. Professor Eyal Winteris the P.W.S. Andrews and Elizabeth Brunner Chair in Industrial Economics FIFTY FOURDEGREES | 21

22 | Covid-19offers valuable lessons in makingproject management moreadaptable ProfessorDarrenDalcher believes therearemany lessons tobe learned for planningandmanaging projects fromthe circumstances forceduponus by thepandemic.


24 | We are outside our comfort zones... ...Now, everything is urgent, critical, it must be done by tomorrow. ʻʻ Projectmanagement is obsessed with risk aversion, with preparing for and predicting everything down to thefinest of details, with governance structures. During theCovid-19 pandemic, that often excessive need to consider every eventuality has had to be forgotten and replacedwithmore pragmaticmeasures. The emergency nature of the reaction to the global outbreak means decisions must be made immediately, plans must be enacted in a matter of hours – or minutes – and contingency cannot always be accounted for. There are important lessons to be learned from the pandemic about operating in different ways, becoming more adaptive andflexible, and enabling rapid innovation. What we have seen through this crisis is that we need to become better at dealing with turbulence and uncertainty. Normally when you start a project, you have a grand vision that drives what you do. Here, we have an emergency: we need to do something quickly, and we do not know how what we do will impact anything else – we just need to restart, to do something new or differently. We are outside our comfort zones. Normally on projects, we work from left to right, we have an idea of what we want to be doing, we start shaping and planning, developing a business case. Now, everything is urgent, critical, it must be done by tomorrow. There is no time to plan as we move from one phase to another because action is needed. I have worked with the Red Cross and other organisations who deal with disaster response . Much as with Covid19, they cannot plan in advance – when they land on the ground, they see what they can do based on the resources they have; they prioritise based on urgency. You go through phases: saving lives, reestablishing certain things in the shortterm, then looking to the longer term and planning the recovery. There are lessons for our current situation, but with those emergencies you are trying to get back to normality after a sudden stop. This is different. We have essentially frozen life – everything around us – and we are trying to reestablish all of it at the same time.We need to deal with things on different timescales; we can think about schools today, tomorrow, in a month’s time, in six months’ time, and each of them is a different project. There are multiple phases of recovery and post-crisis – some operational and immediate, some longer-term – and it is about how we do these things in parallel. The Covid-19 situation is unprecedented in scale and scope, but also in dimensions – thinking about today, tomorrow, next week and next year at the same time is not something we normally do. We do not understand all of the parameters, so we cannot possibly imagine all the potential results. Elements that are usually known – how people shop , how they go to school, how they work – have gone and we are in a whole new reality where we know nothing. Everything has to be redesigned as you start running the projects – it’s urgent, it’s in-your-face with no time to stop and think, no opportunity to deliberate and renegotiate time and cost. All the projects are urgent, but we must be reasonable in accepting that we do not know all that will happen – you are prototyping answers to a situation nobody understands particularly well. What is more, everything is connected, it touches on everything else. When yousend schools back , there are implications for parents, for driving, for cars; when workers return, there are issues over office space, dining areas, supply chains. Normally in society, we tinker with one element at a time – here we have stopped all the elements, and restarting even one impacts everything else. I have been fascinated by the impacts of policy changes. When somebody makes an announcement saying you can go back to work, it is never that simple. Policy decisions from the top need to be connected all the way down ʼʼ

– there are thousands, if not tens of thousands, of elements that need to be aligned. You cannot easily imagine all the things that will be impacted, but by simply saying people cango back shopping , to work, to school, you are connecting all these little projects. Every time you do something it will impact everyone else. Everyone will respond – it is a multi-dimensional game where you cannot see the other players, or the moves they are making, but you do see the results. When you have made your move and somebody else has also responded, you think you have advanced to a certain space butfind yourself somewhere completely different, because you have impacted and been impacted by all the other actions. You do the best you can, recognising you do not understand the full implications. But as soon as you introduce part of the solution, you understand more of the problem, because it touches on aspects that you might not have considered, but which are clearly important. How does this all apply to industry? Some of the manufacturers I have spoken to looked at urgent needs within the health sector, providing equipment for them. They are doing that whilst trying tofigure out how to work with new rules, with social distancing, challenged supply chains and an uncertain future. It is about realigning operations while still thinking in the long-term that when this is all over you have to return to what you were doing before. However, people are slightly obsessed with the current situation and are not looking forward sufficiently. I have spent a lot of time working with organisations on agile approaches, and those who have experience in employing such approaches are more sensitised to the need to probe the environment and change course rapidly. A lot of organisations are fixated with the disaster aspects of what is happening. The biggest challenge is the need to shift between thinking about today, to thinking about tomorrow, two weeks, two months and two years from now. Survival now is about learning to become more adaptive, rather than just being risk averse. We normally do that because we want to justify the investment, the cost, but what this new reality is forcing us to do is become more adventurous. Solving problems in turbulent environments is about speeding up innovation. We do not understand all of the parameters, there is a lot of uncertainty, so we need to champion experimentation; we have to ask ‘what will happen if we try this?’ If it doesn’t work, we try something else. We take lessons from all approaches and see how we can move forward. This is not something we asked for, but there are opportunities to learn here. We can try out new approaches, we can become more adventurous. Change is happening all the time, we are learning new things, and we are going to need to become more resilient and more adaptive in how we do projects. We do not have time to start projects properly – if we normally have due diligence for a fewmonths, we cannot have that now. We need tofind a new way of balancing our anticipation and our love of planning, risk management and governance with the requirement to do things quickly and make rapid changes based on circumstances. There are tremendous opportunities because crises force us to rethink, change and improve. Professor Darren Dalcher is the founder and Director of the National Centre for Project Management in LUMS. FIFTY FOURDEGREES | 25 We do not understand all of the parameters, so we cannot possibly imagine all the potential results. ʻʻ ʼʼ

26 | The impact of Covid-19 on theworld’s economies has not been uniform. Professor Marwan Izzeldin investigates howdifferent nations and sectors of the economy have been affected.


Financial markets react quickly and erratically to unexpected events, but the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic is unprecedented during peacetime. Covid-19 has produced, and is continuing to produce, rising economic and social costs on an international scale. However, the impact has not been uniform. Working with colleagues at Queen Mary University of London and the Universities of Kent and Westminster, we have analysed the intensity, timeliness and homogeneity of the impact of Covid-19 across the G7 markets – the USA, the UK, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan – to see which areas (geographically and financially) have been hardest hit Our reviewof 10 business sectors (Consumer Goods and Services, Financials, Healthcare, Industrials, Materials, Oil & Gas, Technology, Telecommunications and Utilities), shows evidence of the crisis across all sectors and in all G7 countries, though neither the intensity nor the timing are uniform. More capitalised and with better liquidity, financial institutions were better placed generally to cope with these unparalleled circumstances than they were in 2008, when they reacted tothe Lehman Brothers collapse . In 2020, financial markets again face record-breaking stock market losses. These began on February 24th, a full two weeks before the World Health Organisation declared Covid-19 a pandemic. Severe disruptions to supply and demand are the consequence of school and business closures, employee furloughs and lay-offs, the shutdowns of hotels and restaurants, national and international travel restrictions, operational overhauls for the world’s airlines, and general population lockdowns, all of which prioritise the control of the virus infection rate. Our analysis found strong evidence of a crisis in all G7 countries and each of the 10 business sectors, suggesting a universal impact of Covid-19. However, not all business sectors were affected with the same intensity or at the same time. Overall, volatility increased by an average of 22 per cent. These spikes are comparable to the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, Black Monday, and even theGreat Crash of 1929 . The reaction was most intense in the Healthcare and Consumer Services sectors, with uncertainty related to hospital bed capacity and the search for an effective vaccine in the former, and the shutdown of restaurants, hotels and the travel industry, combined with the dire situation facing the world’s airlines, key factors in the latter. Telecommunications and Technology were among the sectors least severely affected as lockdown measures meant people were looking for distraction and entertainment online and at home. We found that the UK and the USA financial markets were hardest hit, with more uniform impact across business sectors. It is interesting that these are the markets with the highest heterogeneity in the Covid-19 response, a possible reflection on the financial markets of the indecisiveness and ambiguity of the political response to the pandemic crisis in those countries. Our analysis brings unique insight to the intensity, timeliness and the homogeneity of volatility shifts as well as the rankings of countries and sectors. The asymmetric impact on the various sectors suggests that tailored financial support packages from governments will be needed to aid survival and speed recovery in those areas hit most severely. Extraordinary stimulus packages are in place in many nations to boost the economy, including direct payments to affected households and businesses, funds for healthcare system, extended outreach of the social safety net, and even prohibiting of lay-offs in certain jurisdictions. Governments must soon pass the initiative to employers and employees, where capital investments are more likely to be directed to longterm viable activities. Beyond the immediate short-term reactions to the crisis, the world economy faces obvious risks. Furlough schemes, such as that employed here in the UK, with the Government initially paying 80%of staffwages , might delay the transition to a post Covid-19 world, while the provision to ameliorate immediate needs may result in essentially ‘zombie’ companies 28 |

receiving unwarranted support from government. Predictions for the long-terms effects vary. The IMFhas forecast a contraction of 3% in the global economy, up to 6% in advanced economies; the ECBsuggests a shrinkage of between 5% and 12% for the eurozone. The latter compares with the narrower range of 4% to 5% following the globalfinancial crisis of 2008. Only in the longer termwill we know the full impact of Covid-19 on global economies and sectors of the economy in each country. We can already see which countries and industries have been hardest hit at the start of the pandemic, and future analysis will seek to investigate the links between recovery policies and industrial growth. Marwan Izzeldinis Professor of Financial Econometrics in the Department of Economics. The research paper How Covid-19 affected the G7 Stock Markets: Early Evidence from a ST-HAR Model, is co-authored with Professor Yaz Gulnur Muradoglu, Dr Vasileios Pappas and Dr Sheeja Sivaprasad. It is available on the SSRNwebsite. FIFTY FOURDEGREES | 29 ʼʼ ʻʻOverall, volatility increased by an average of 22 per cent. These spikes are comparable to the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, Black Monday, and even the Great Crash of 1929.

30 | GENDER MA ERS + Organisations face complex challenges in their pursuit of gender equality and inclusivity. Professor Valerie Stead explains how the Academy for Gender, Work and Leadership Gender Matters project is identifying challenges and opportunities to bring about change.


Businesses have gender equality and inclusivity high on their agendas. Media coverageof gender issues at work has never been greater, and in recent years we have seen increased legislation to recognise the importance of gender equality, includingpay gap reportingandshared parental leavepolicy in the UK. Yet despite this attention, women continue to be under-represented in positions of power in organisations. The Gender Matters project, created in 2018 , aims to shed light on this resilient problem by drawing on a range of international and national sources to identify the scope and range of gender challenges facing UK organisations. Our2020 brochure , funded by theUKRI Quality Strategic Priorities Fund (QRSPF), was published before the unprecedented changes brought about by Covid-19. The gender and inclusion challenges identified in our brochure persist – the gender pay gap, the leadership pipeline and the challenge of managing the personal and the professional. However, the consequences of the restrictions in force due to the pandemic will inevitably have an impact on how each of these challenges are manifest, and how we think about and respond to them in our adjustment to the ‘new normal’ at work. Already we are seeing the implications of the pandemic, including the suspension of UK gender pay gap reportingthis year, with onlyhalf of companieschoosing to volunteer their data. The pandemic brought reduced working times and furloughing for some, while those in the health and care sectors may be working longer hours. All of these measures have a significant impact on women, who dominate in part-time and low paid work and in social and health care roles. We are also experiencing alternative forms of working and the move to home-based working environments. This shift can also affect women disproportionately, as they typically take on the majority of domestic care, and there remains limited access to external support. Revealed through the blurring of home and work boundaries, these new complexities are bringing to the fore the importance of understanding how we experience, and how we tackle work-based and work-related gender inequalities. Our brochure brings together infographics frommultiple sources to illustrate the three challenges. We also focus on these challenges in the financial services sector; a key player in the UK economy and a sector where gender inequalities are particularly pronounced. , By illustrating the range and scope of these challenges, we aim to provoke discussion and encourage action on tackling gender equality at work as we establish new working practices in the light of the pandemic. While each of the challenges we identify poses particular problems, as outlined below, we can also see how they interconnect to reinforce and maintain inequalities. THEGENDERPAYGAPCHALLENGE The pay gap measures the difference between men’s and women’s average pay. Globally, and in the UK, women’s pay lags behind that of men. The UK gender pay gap is close to zero for those under 40, but widens for those over 40. There are multiple reasons for this: older women are less likely to be in managerial roles, are more likely to be in lower-paid occupations, and have increasing family responsibilities. The pay gap has consequences for later years. In the UK, women have 40% less on average in their pension pot than men. In thefinancial sector, the pay gap is more pronounced, with a significant gap at executive level, and with an average 40% gap in bonus pay. Going forward, with increased homeworking and a dispersed workforce, monitoring pay becomes a vital tool in measuring progress and keeping gender equality firmly on the agenda. THELEADERSHIPPIPELINECHALLENGE Women's progression into senior and leadership roles is persistently problematic, creating a clear status gap. Women remain over-represented in junior roles and under-represented in senior roles. Figures show women's representation decreases sharply after middle management level. In the UK financial services sector, the gap in senior roles is particularly stark, and greater than the average across all industries at board level. We also see a perception gap in this sector where 32 | Gender Pension Gap The gender pay gap has consequences for women’s wealth into retirement. £24K £40K Onaverage,women intheUKhold40% less intheir pensionpots thanmen. Women’s Representation in Leadership Roles Globalfigures show the underrepresentation of women across leadership roles. Source: Global Gender Report (2020). World Economic Forum. Percent offirms with majority female ownership Percent offirms with a female topmanager Percent offirms with females in senior roles 14% 18% 36% Source: Profile Pensions (2019).

women are 20% less likely to perceive they have equal opportunity to advance compared to men. Thesefindings indicate the need to examine how organisational cultures and systems, including recruitment and reward processes, can prevent advancement. THECHALLENGEOFMANAGINGTHE PERSONALANDTHEPROFESSIONAL Family responsibilities affect perceptions of women andmen differently, and this in turn has an impact on behaviours. For instance, data shows that many businesses still feel it is reasonable to question women about their family and family plans during the recruitment process. This challenge therefore brings to light a practicepolicy gap, where well-intentioned policy fails to be realised in practice. The practice-policy gap is evidenced by the minimal take-up of the shared parental leave policy in 2014. Poor take-up by menmay, in part, be explained by perceptions that having a family will mean less commitment to work, a perception that could affect the chances of career progression. An example in the UKfinancial services sector, is where a strong culture of presenteeism risks mitigating the impact offlexible working practices. Gaps between practice and policy in turn increase the difficulty of managing the personal and the professional. The impact of family responsibilities has come more into focus during the Covid19 pandemic. The task of having to manage caring for others with no or little access to external help has shed light on how norms of working long hours disadvantage some more than others. Illuminating these issues offers organisations a unique opportunity to appraise their working practices and the culture that they generate. Looking at the three challenges together, reveals two important issues: how the challenges interconnect to reinforce inequalities; and how the challenges are shaped by continuing stereotypes of men’s and women's roles in society. Women's continued underrepresentation in senior roles helps us understand the persistence of the gender pay gap. Women's progression slows at middlemanager level, typically at an age where women andmen have family responsibilities. Perceptions that women are less committed to work than men on becoming a parent reinforces stereotypes of women as primary caregivers. Such perceptions can influence the extent to which women are seen as suitable for certain roles, and so maintain status and pay gaps. The challenges, underpinned by enduring stereotypes, can fuel behaviours and practices that affect the take-up of wellintentioned policy. By failing to take into account gendered social assumptions, policy can prove ineffective, leading to a practice-policy gap that adds to the stubborn persistence of gender inequalities at work. The Covid-19 crisis has brought into sharp focus the gendered assumptions on which we base our everyday behaviours and routines, and how they can reinforce the gender equality challenges we identify in our brochure. This presents us with the perfect opportunity to re-examine how we can move forward to develop more inclusive and equitable organisations that will make the most of all employees’ talent. Professor Valerie Stead is Director of theAcademy for Gender, Work and Leadership. Find out more in the Gender Matters online feature, and hear podcast discussions involving Professor Valerie Stead; Work Foundation Director Ben Harrison; Ann Francke, OBE, Chief Executive of the Chartered Management Institute; and Julia Hoggett, Director of Market Oversight, Financial Conduct Authority. FIFTY FOURDEGREES | 33 Gender Pay gap (%) Women Financial institution managers and directors Men £’s per hour 0 10 20 30 40 50 33% The Gender Pay Gap at Executive Level A significant pay gap despite women holding 42%of executive roles. Source:OfficeforNationalStatistics(2019).