Last week I attended the PURPOSE Conference in Sydney. The overall atmosphere at this conference is quite different to many of the other business conferences I’ve attended in my life. Everyone is very passionate about doing something positive for people and planet – in their own unique, personal way – with creativity, passion and very different skills. It’s a great melting pot of purpose, passion and power.
Most (if not all) of the 600+ participants feel the urgency to create change. Climate action is most likely the most urgent topic. Followed by biodiversity loss and waste. Add a variety of social change problems as well as politics and technology.
Presentations and conversations took the audience on an emotional roller coaster. Hearing the sobering facts about how much time is left to prevent climate or biodiversity loss tipping points (only a few years…not even decades) and then discovering the breadth of solutions – spreading inspiration and hope.
In the middle, there was a note-worthy, thought-provoking moment.
Sam Elsom from Sea Forest presented the opportunities coming from Asparagopsis – a red seaweed that is fast growing while capturing carbon and can be used as a food supplement for cows and sheep, significantly reducing their Methane production. Livestock contribute 16% of global greenhouse emissions. Thus, seaweed solves an urgent problem in different ways.
Someone in the audience asked why Sea Forest is even working on this solution as it would be better if everyone became vegan and we wouldn’t need to have livestock at all. Theoretically true…however, as Sam Elsom pointed out: behaviour change in diet will take time and we can’t wait for this to happen. Climate tipping points are too close to focus on behaviour change alone. Interim solutions have to be developed in parallel.
My summary: both sides are right. Time frames for change (and risks) were looked at differently. Too often, we discuss for too long what’s best or right. Not often enough, we play with different time horizons when influencing others.
Depending on who your stakeholder is, you might work with them on an individual, group or societal level. These different levels mean they are facing different levels of risk when implementing change. Their timeframe of relevant thinking differs from short term to long term. Being aware of this helps you to better understand what their sweet spots for change might be. Wherever possible, add the long-term perspective into every short-term activity. How does this initiative contribute to the whole? However, sometimes a band-aid is good enough to help your project survive.
How often do you think about specific solutions in different timeframes?
Naturally yours,
Ingrid