By Kevin Moss - Head of CR - BT Americas

Earlier in the year I was invited to deliver a speech at an event in Houston, the U.S. centre of the oil industry, on how British companies and companies in the high-tech sectors have led the way on environmental issues.   I preceded my remarks by noting that I felt a bit of a fraud. Why? Because BT’s activity in this space were partly stimulated by an oil industry executive and by American models of good practice.

A few days before the event, a friend of mine, Sam Simon of Intersections International, came across a set of booklets on CR that were produced by BT in the late 90s.  The environment booklet traces the history of BT’s involvement in environmental issues since the late 80s. (The other three booklets cover customers, disability and corporate ethics).

According to the text, in the late 80s BT took on a new non-executivce deputy chairman John Raisman, previously Chairman of Shell UK, which the booklet describes as   “A company whose activities placed it firmly in the environmental front line”.   The text goes on to quote…

“Environment is an obvious area where it is important to be seen to be behaving well,” Raisman says “and the only sure fire way to achieve that is to conduct a thorough environmental audit.” With the staff pushing from the bottom, and Raisman shaping opinion at the top, the company had an increasingly open ear to environmental suggestions from outside.

Our current chief sustainability officer, Chris Tuppen, in the early 90s a scientist working in BT’s research laboratories made an environmental fact finding trip to the U.S. and as described in the booklet:

He soon found they [American companies] were well ahead of BT, largely because of the regulatory pressure from the EPA. “I was struck by the coordinated way they managed their waste streams; they had a system in place to track where everything went.” Back in the UK he soon found that BT had nothing of the sort.

Our heritage in this space includes learning from the oil industry and from the U.S.  As recent events have shown though, no sector or region has a monopoly on good practice or a guaranteed leadership position.

By Kevin Moss - Head of CR - BT Americas

I have started work with others in BT on our annual sustainability report for 2011. The process takes almost a full year.

I am especially interested in the summary document we produce, called our 2010 Sustainability Review. Click on the picture of the cover above to download a PDF of the document.

I struggle with this document: should it be long or short, a reference document or more promotional?, comprehensive or a bird’s eye view.

Right now I am pretty sure that not enough people are reading our 2010 Sustainability Review, let alone tell us what they think of it.  I think we could be using it better to engage and enthuse civil society.

Stakeholder engagement is one of my primary purposes for blogging.  This post is a request for you to engage.  Click on the link above. Take a look at the PDF – it is 17 pages but you don’t have to read it all.  Read whatever you are moved to read and then give me one critical comment – no obligation to send a comprehensive analysis (although that would be gratefully received).

Were you compelled to read it all or not?  Did it leave you feeling good about BT or critical? Did it give you a complete picture or only a partial one..... the answers to these questions or any other feedback is welcomed.  No prizes, just a commitment from me that your feedback will be included in our planning for next year.

Thanks in anticipation.

By Kevin Moss - Head of CR - BT Americas

As a dual citizen who has worked for BT extensively in both the US and the UK, I am continually interested in the different ways in which people interpret words, and hence how they absorb meaning.  Differences can be subtle but I believe that they can nevertheless be important.  All the more so when people are negotiating or when organisations communicate with stakeholders. 

Sometimes the differences are so subtle that they are hard to notice or to articulate. 

Sometimes they are so obvious that both parties are very aware of them. Transatlantic examples abound, including cutlery and fortnight, which most people in the USA do not use and may not even understand.  And there are a number of risqué words whose different meanings provide the opportunity for jokes and anecdotes when used in the foreign context.  But you will have to go to a different type of blog to find those stories !

But I am especially interested in a couple of words whose different meanings are subtle enough to the extent that the parties are often not aware.  But different enough that they cause a real misunderstanding.  I describe them not just because they are interesting, but because I think they illustrate the importance of language and of discourse to our understanding of each other. 

It’s all quite different

Quite in British English is a word most commonly used to temper the adjective. Depending on intonation, a restaurant meal that was quite good, a team which played quite well, have some significant room for improvement.  In American English quite always accentuates the adjective. An American employee told by his manager he is quite happy with his performance will expect a big bonus at year end.  The British employee might expect a smaller one. The Brit working for the American, or vice versa, may have a big surprise at year end.

And there’s scheme - another favourite of mine. In British English a scheme is a programme.  Most companies have pension schemes in the UK. The predominant usage of scheme in the USA is a plot, with the implication of deviousness. Even with an explanation, the word still carries baggage.

Now for illustration, put these words in the mouth of a oil industry executive being heard by an American audience and imagine the difference between intent of the speaker and what the listener hears “The outcome of our latest attempt to collect spilled oil was quite good and we have a new scheme to improve the public’s understanding of what we are doing.” 

Good communications are one of the most important binders of a cohesive society. I hope you find these examples interesting, but more importantly that you can use them to continually look for and overcome other unintended differences in meaning, between friends and colleagues, between companies and their stakeholders, across the Atlantic or just next door.

‘Two nations separated by a common language’ (George Bernard Shaw).  I frequently hear that quoted in reference to the British/American divide. As a dual citizen who has spent more than half my working life here, I see both similarities and differences all the time. And I think we can learn from both.

BT recently launched a program that allocates a proportion of our community investment resources to partnerships outside of the UK.

In the US we have settled on a partnership with One Economy.  

One Economy is focused on digital inclusion - a major component of BT’s community investment strategy.   Just this morning I booked an appointment for a blood test for myself. The particular lab only books appointments online.  I saw first-hand the extent to which use of the internet is a critical component of gaining access to day to day services. 

What stops people getting on the internet?    Surprisingly, although cost of broadband is a component, it is not the only factor.

A recent FCC study in the USA shows that digital literacy (how to use computers and the internet)  and awareness of the beneficial impact on one’s life are also critically important.

Bridging the gap

The generation gap between the young and old defines a key digital inclusion barrier.  This is so in the UK and the US.    BT runs a very successful programme in the UK called Internet Rangers that inspires young people introduce their grandparents to the internet. This has proven to be a very successful route to helping grow digital literacy in older generations, and in parallel encourage good communications across generations.

In launching a partnership in the USA my aim was to leverage some of BT’s experience from the UK and use our grant to build a US online program for young people to inspire older generations to use the internet.

The program may be slightly different over here to accommodate cultural and other differences, but I am certain that we will have a lot to learn from the experiences on both sides of the Atlantic that will make both programmes better.  I hope someday that we can run a joint initiative across the programs and connect young people and adults across the pond to compare experiences.

You can see more about what we are doing together with a short video interview with our partner at One Economy on my blog.

We will need a new name though. In the USA, the Ranger either rides with Tonto or works in the National Park Service. I guess we really are two nations separated by a common language after all!

Kevin Moss has a blog at www.csrperspective.com exploring diverse views on corporate responsibility.