On Tuesday 5th January, the Office for National Statistics published the latest official figures for the number of registered voters in each parliamentary constituency and ward.
Normally, this is of passing interest. But this year’s figures will be used by the Boundary Commission for the redrawing of constituencies.
The new figures for the electorate will mean constituencies will be allocated in each part of the UK as follows:
England – 543 (+10)
- East Midlands – 47 (+1)
- East of England – 61 (+3)
- London – 75 (+2)
- North East – 27 (-2)
- North West – 73 (-2)
- South East – 91 (+7)
- South West – 58 (+3)
- West Midlands – 57 (-2)
- Yorkshire and Humber – 54 (unchanged)
Scotland – 57 (-2)
Wales – 32 (-8)
Northern Ireland – 18 (unchanged)
Why does this matter?
The redrawing of constituencies will, bluntly speaking, shift political power to areas where the population is growing fast, and away from those where it isn’t.
The geographic beneficiaries are those which have seen their electorate grow fastest since constituencies were last reviewed. That means the South East, South West, East of England and London, and especially the rural and suburban areas in London’s orbit. Parts of northern England will have reduced representation, and Wales will see 20% of its constituencies eliminated – an exaggerated impact as Wales has been purposely over-represented in the past.
Even areas which look like they will see little change on paper will actually see substantial changes which could shake up political affiliations. For example, Scotland will lose two seats, but within Scotland, there will be much wider changes as Glasgow and many of the surrounding areas are over-represented currently while much of eastern Scotland is under-represented.
The partisan political impact of these changes will be watched closely. Though the work of the Boundary Commission in drawing new boundaries is still to come, it’s likely the new boundaries will probably result in 5 or 6 net gains for the Conservatives. That might not sound huge, but it would have given Theresa May a small working majority in 2017.
However, Conservative hopes that updated boundaries would yield them 10 or more seats are likely to be misplaced. While it is likely the Conservatives will win all of the newly created constituencies outside London, which would gain them 14 seats, a significant number of currently Conservative constituencies are also likely to be abolished; and the creation of new Conservative seats in the commuter belt will have unpredictable knock-on effects on other seats, which might become more competitive as a result.
In Wales, for example, the average electorate in Conservative-held constituencies in Wales is just 57000 – well below the UK average of 73000. The extent of the changes needed in Wales means both major parties can expect to lose a handful of seats – though the precise split will be driven by decisions of the Boundary Commission.
It could also pose trouble for a number of the Conservatives representing the former Red Wall. In the English seats the Conservatives gained in 2019, the average number of voters is 70,652, compared to 73,546 in Labour-held seats and 76,138 in the other Conservative seats. All else being equal, the new Conservative intake are the most likely MPs in England to find their constituencies abolished or substantially altered.
Overall, CCHQ will be happier than Labour HQ when these changes are made, but up to a dozen Conservative MPs may need to relocate if they want to stay in Parliament. That could cause some internal dissent, but the change in the law to remove the need for parliamentary approval of new boundaries reduces their capacity to stand in the way of these changes.
On 2nd December, the UK became the first country in the world to approve the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, following review by the MHRA.
This announcement comes a ground-breaking seven months after the start of clinical trials and marks a major breakthrough, but it’s clear that the COVID-19 pandemic is far from over. Recent criticism that the approval was “hasty” and the spread of misinformation about vaccines on social media has already resulted in vaccination hesitancy.
Providing regular, clear and transparent communications about the new vaccine will be critical to increase public confidence and encourage vaccination uptake.
Globally vaccine mistrust is growing
Vaccination is the most effective public health intervention available, ranking second only to clean water for disease prevention. Yet in 2019, the World Health Organisation listed vaccination hesitancy as one of the top ten threats to global health; at the time they couldn’t have imagined how soon the potential impact of that threat would be realised.
A recent study from UCL found that a fifth of people in the UK said they would be unlikely to get a vaccine for COVID-19. Worryingly, vaccination hesitancy appeared to be higher for the COVID–19 vaccine than the flu vaccine, particularly in older adults. These findings clearly highlight the effect of the ongoing spread of misinformation around COVID-19 and the vaccines.
This growing infodemic, a term used to describe the flood of information on the COVID-19 pandemic, has made it difficult for people to make informed decisions about their health. It’s therefore crucial that communications around COVID-19 vaccines be clear, honest and openly address the public’s concerns.
Compassion and clear communication will be key to increasing public confidence
The unprecedented speed of the development of COVID-19 vaccines has led many to, perhaps fairly, question whether they have been rushed. These are legitimate concerns and they need to be treated with respect and compassion to avoid alienating a large group of people and risk them turning to non-trustworthy sources of information.
Professor Heidi Larson, Director of the Vaccine Confidence Project, has emphasised the importance of trying to understand these concerns and encourages open and balanced dialogue about both risks and benefits.
Not only are the types of messages important, but the way they are communicated to the public must be considered. The public will inevitably be exposed to rumours and false information, and this must be countered by developing trusted spaces, via social and mainstream media, to share accurate information in an accessible way for the public.
It is exciting to see that healthcare professionals are already starting to adapt, with live Q&As on social media becoming increasingly popular. Doctors are even starting to use TikTok to bust myths about vaccines.
These strategies, along with other innovative methods to share transparent and compassionate messages, will play a critical role in countering the spread of vaccine hesitancy and ultimately ensuring we return to something close to normality in the future.
Follow Madano on our social media channels. You can find us on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram!
How can we know what kind of impact the communications outputs we publish are having on our target audiences? Are they cutting through the noise to affect beliefs and behaviours?
In previous blogs, our sister agency AXON have identified an upward trend in the volume of publications presenting real world evidence (RWE) in healthcare journals. This trend was observed irrespective of the impact factor of the journal, which calls into question our industry’s reliance on impact factor when evaluating the reach and impact of published data. So how can we better understand which articles are effective?
The team at Madano have been working closely with AXON and their clients to try and find a more satisfactory answer to the question of impact. While we’re little a way off a definitive answer, we are now able to provide a much more nuanced and client-specific assessment of the value of a publication plan – at brand and therapy area level.
Our starting point was to take a step back and ask: what are our publications for? Addressing this more fundamental question soon had us and our clients thinking differently and we were able to build ‘theories of change’ for individual publication plans – i.e. a framework that articulates the changes in beliefs and behaviours we want our publications to trigger in our target audiences, and the outcomes that need to be measured to detect these changes.
Based on this framework, we are able to build a bespoke model of impact for each client. First, we identified all of the outcomes clients hope that publications could influence; for example, raising awareness of particular biomarkers or improving front-line practice. We then identified data sources that could act as proxies for these outcomes; for example, volume and nature of social media engagement using specific terminology, or seeing publications referenced in treatment guidelines.
To really assess the impact of an individual publication or publication plan as a whole, we needed to situate outcomes associated with our clients’ publications within the broader competitive landscape. To do this, our data science team have built web harvesting scripts to capture the specified outcomes for all publications within a given disease area – a total of around 14,000 across the last five years for psoriasis, for example. We then visualised this landscape as a topic map, highlighting high-frequency and high-impact topics, and comparing average impact scores for groups of publications to benchmark client performance.
The insights this approach generates provide huge value to publications teams and should be the foundation for designing a RW publication strategy. It can help you:
- Identify gaps in the landscape that, if filled, would create the most impact;
- Maximise a publication’s impact with key audiences by making informed decisions about author, journal and topic selection;
- Measure relative performance against your competitors and identify the most effective types of article or outputs for your different audiences;
- Deliver consistent reporting showing the overall value of each of your publications and their contribution to broader medical objectives.
This bespoke approach delivers a more nuanced answer to the question of publication impact. It generates insights that drive future strategy and tactical decisions to improve reach, engagement and impact. If you would like to hear more about how our approach can support your RWE publication efforts, please get in touch here.
Follow Madano on our social media channels. You can find us on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram!
We hope that the Prime Minister uses his forthcoming 10-point plan to demonstrate clear ambition on, and pathways to, the various existing and future low-carbon technologies that will need to be developed, deployed and scaled in the 2020s. This decade will prove critical in the fight against climate change and should be defined by UK leadership, thanks to the country’s Presidency of COP26.
A detailed 10-point plan, however, may prove unwieldy in both policy development and delivery, as well as difficult to communicate to audiences. We believe that actions and inclusive messaging around fewer, more realistic policies are essential to ensuring the buy-in and cooperation of the public, alongside industry and government departments.
We have therefore produced a five-point plan to highlight those vital policy measures and technologies that can be swiftly unleashed by government in what is likely to be a short decade, as the UK seeks to up the tempo on cracking the net-zero puzzle.
1. By 2021, the Government should publish a public-facing net-zero roadmap for the UK, and a supporting communications programme, alongside the net-zero strategy.
Madano Analysis: With the UK holding the COP26 Presidency, the Prime Minister and the government can build a climate change-focused legacy and demonstrate global leadership. Combined with a net-zero strategy, a public-facing roadmap and communications programme needs to be developed. This will outline the leadership that government is taking to equitably tackle climate change and how the public will need to modify its behaviour for the country to reach net zero by 2050. This roadmap could feed into the government’s ‘levelling up’ agenda by outlining clear guidance and investment.
The UK requires an ambitious framework that outlines the policies and fiscal/regulatory levers that will be used to develop and scale low-carbon technologies by 2030. The forthcoming net-zero strategy should be published in early 2021 and demonstrate the benefits of low-carbon technologies to the regions, deliver the confidence required by industry and give government departments the framework needed to consult on interlinked policies.
2. The Government should unleash the offshore wind and solar sectors in the 2020s by removing artificial targets and current regulatory constraints imposed by the nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIP) process.
Madano Analysis: There is concern that the Prime Minister’s promise to raise the target for offshore wind power capacity from 30GW to 40GW by 2030 could be viewed as a cap. Electricity generated from wind may only account for 24 per cent of household energy demand in 2030, given our appetite for electricity-hungry appliances and the increasing preference to work from home. The upcoming Contracts for Difference (CfD) auction could raise £20bn+ of investment, and government and industry will need to capitalise on this windfall if the PM’s claim that wind could power all homes by 2030 is at all feasible.
A government framework is required to give the solar industry confidence and harness those advancements that can optimise existing assets. The first step should be to streamline the NSIP process which constrains the development of assets exceeding 50MW without considering technological upgrades that enable these assets to generate higher outputs on the same area of land used. Restructuring this process would allow the upgrade of existing assets that could unlock several clean GW for the grid by 2030.
3. The Government should facilitate the widespread rollout of a small modular reactor (SMR) programme and a novel siting assessment for new reactors, with the aim of deploying an SMR by the end of 2030.
While the Prime Minister has declared that UK household electricity needs will be met by offshore wind in 2030 (projected to be only one-third of the UK’s electricity demand), the Government should take the opportunity to further the development of SMRs and AMRs to pick up demand that wind may struggle to supply. A fleet of SMRs can be deployed across the UK, providing locally embedded low carbon energy generation, and when manufacturing for export is considered, this presents a long-term opportunity for the UK, and the UK nuclear supply chain. These technologies also present an opportunity to help decarbonise heavy industries with dedicated power plants providing low carbon heat and power, and produce clean hydrogen, which could be the building block of tomorrow’s low carbon economy.
A crucial step to realising the SMR opportunity is the development of a rationalised planning framework that would enable the rapid siting and deployment of SMRs at trial stages, without their being lost in the regulatory and public consultation web that has stymied large-build, new nuclear sites.
4. The Government should establish two industrial hydrogen clusters in the north of England and Scotland by 2025, and six more clusters by 2030 across the UK.
Madano Analysis: Currently, the government is heavily focused on hydrogen production, as the UK hydrogen strategy will outline. Understanding the demand profiles for this resource, across a swathe of end-uses, has proven difficult for government and industry. Support for two industrial hydrogen clusters by 2025, which feature large-scale demonstrator pilots, will offer a stronger indication of demand and opportunities for the early adoption of hydrogen. Moreover, understanding which technologies can be easily deployed in these sandboxes will drive costs down for both production and demand. Placing these clusters in the north of England and in Scotland will create high-quality jobs in strategically important regions and serve to buttress the Government’s ambitions to ‘level-up’ communities across the UK.
5. The Government should establish a 2030 plan for the development of tidal energy in the UK.
Madano Analysis: The UK has established a substantial offshore wind sector, but tidal energy remains untapped potential. Tidal is a potentially significant source of low-carbon, reliable energy, but faces one major barrier: high construction costs, especially due to the lack of experience at scale. But with current borrowing costs relatively low, it may never be cheaper for the government to invest in the development of a tidal energy industry in the UK and, if action is taken quickly, the UK can seize a first-mover advantage in this sector. A clear plan from government on the development and delivery of tidal energy should be a priority for the 2020s and would work to shore up and benefit the economies of coastal communities in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Our short, yet targeted, plan outlines those actions that the Government should take now, if it wishes to ‘jump start’ the UK’s drive towards net-zero through the 2020s and reach its goals by 2030.
Crucially, measures that support existing and developing low-carbon technologies must be closely aligned with other significant issues, such as ‘levelling up’, and be steeped in an overarching and inclusive narrative that outlines the impacts and benefits of the energy transition to all.
Madano advises clients across the energy sector– if you’re interested in learning more please drop our team a line at [email protected].
By James Watson, Senior Account Executive, and the team in Madano’s Energy practice.
In global trust barometers, scientists have long featured among the professions most trusted by the public, but pharmaceutical companies remain the least trusted. This is an interesting dichotomy, given that most pharmaceutical employees are scientists.
Public trust has been an issue for the pharmaceutical industry for many years, driven principally by a few high-profile examples of negative practice from several years ago. Even in 2019, it was still the most poorly regarded of industries.
That was until the world was hit by COVID-19.
Since the outbreak, confidence that scientists will act in the public’s best interest has grown, as has trust in the healthcare industry as a whole.
Industries banding together in the global response to COVID-19, coupled with increased curiosity about how medicines and vaccines are developed, has also had a positive impact on pharma’s reputation. This provides an opportunity for the public to change their perceptions of ‘big pharma’ in the long term, but what’s the best way to achieve this?
Transparency in communication is vital
Scientists and researchers have been increasingly visible across media channels during the pandemic to address the public’s concerns and advise those in charge. However, their increasingly public-facing position means that quality of communication is vital. Dr Cevat Giray Aksoy, Lecturer in Economics at King’s College London and co-author of a paper on public trust in science, stated that “if scientists fail to explain their findings clearly and concisely enough to inspire trust in public, people may perceive them as elitists or inaccessible.”
When a participant in a large late-stage AstraZeneca study testing a COVID-19 vaccine suffered a serious adverse reaction, the company immediately, and voluntarily, paused vaccinations and issued a statement where they firmly reiterated their commitment to maintaining “the integrity of the trials.” The following week, as part of efforts to maintain public transparency, researchers at Oxford University, published a comprehensive document explaining that the adverse event was unlikely to be related to the vaccine.
Following the science, not the headlines
Increased public and political pressure to accelerate development of a COVID-19 vaccine, such as President Trump’s ‘Operation Warp Speed’, have only created greater uncertainty about the intentions of drug companies.
In response to this, as part of efforts to engender trust and maintain public confidence, CEOs of nine leading biopharma companies announced a historic pledge in September. They outlined a united commitment to uphold the integrity of the scientific process as they work towards approval of the first COVID-19 vaccines. This includes high scientific and ethical standards, stringent requirements for approval submission and ensuring global access to a range of vaccine options.
Public pledges like this only strengthen the power of collaborations of this kind between academics, pharma companies, regulatory bodies and, most importantly, trial volunteers. Continuing to communicate good practices and ground-breaking science, while keeping patient safety at the heart of the process, will provide optimism and hope for the development and approval of a vaccine.
As the world continues to follow the scientific progress around the COVID pandemic, the pharma industry has the opportunity demonstrate its integrity and commitment to human health, to inform and educate with transparency, and, fundamentally, to win back trust at a time when the world needs it most.
By Amisha Bhudia, Account Manager in Madano’s Healthcare practice.
Expectations across the energy sector were high yesterday, as Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s gave his “winds of change” vision for the energy sector by committing the Government to the modest target of increasing offshore wind power capacity from 30 GW to 40 GW, by 2030. He breezily claimed that this source of low carbon energy could generate enough electricity to power all the UK’s homes within a decade.
Alongside this pledge, the Prime Minister promised £160m to upgrade ports and infrastructure for building turbines and boosting offshore wind capacity, which he claimed will create 2,000 jobs in construction and support 60,000 more. We will, according to the Prime Minister, see 1 GW of floating wind turbines hove into view by 2030, too.
The Prime Minister’s backing for offshore wind is not a major surprise in and of itself, given the Government’s focus on tackling climate change in much of its messaging. And given the scale of investment announced yesterday is modest by international standards, industry will be looking for much more in the Government’s 10-point “Build Back Greener” plan if the UK is to establish itself as the ‘Saudi Arabia’ of wind power and renewable energy more broadly.
The Prime Minister’s lofty assertion that offshore wind, alone, can solve a large part of the energy question should be taken with a large pinch of sea salt or viewed as a symptom of his broad brush, oratorical style. His claim that offshore wind could power all the UK’s homes by 2030 omitted to mention that homes account for only about a third of power use. The Government is well aware that wind is only one piece of the testing net zero puzzle and that other low carbon energy sources, such as solar and nuclear power, will need support to scale up and meet the needs of wider energy challenge.
While the Prime Minister’s press release did take the opportunity to breathe fresh life into the Government’s plans for renewables by indicating that the Government will set a 2021 target to “double the capacity of renewable energy in the next Contracts for Difference auction,” he provided little detail on its proposals for solar, hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, energy efficiency or nuclear power.
Still, we can be confident that this announcement is the first stage of the “Build Back Greener” plan for a green industrial revolution from the Government, with No 10 promising further, concrete details later this year to “accelerate our progress towards net zero emissions by 2050.” There are conflicting reports on the date that this plan will be published, with both late October and late November suggested.
The long-delayed Energy White Paper is also reportedly set to be published this month. The paper will outline the Government’s approach to delivering its net zero target and will hopefully clear the air on various issues, such as large-scale nuclear, and provide confidence to the renewables sector that has weathered COVID-19 admirably and produced record-breaking levels of low-carbon energy.
To our mind, what is most notable from this policy announcement is not its content but the fact that a commitment to offshore wind is the headline announcement of a Prime Minister at the Conservative Party Conference, during a time of public health and economic crisis.
Whatever the rationale behind this decision, it confirms that addressing climate change has much greater importance for this Government compared to recent predecessors.
Written by James Watson, Madano.
In April this year, Madano reported on the challenging situation faced by the UK’s universities as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Likening the sector’s difficult circumstances to a game of Kerplunk in which all of the straws have suddenly been removed, we predicted that “a university degree could be a tough sell to the 2020/21 intake who may consider a gap year instead.”
That reads like a real understatement following recent events at Manchester Metropolitan University. Students at the campus described themselves as “completely neglected” after they were forced to self-isolate for two weeks when 127 of them tested positive for COVID-19. The situation left 1,700 students all trying to source food – and, more importantly for them, alcohol – from the same local supermarkets. Security guards prevented residents from going outside to shop amid complaints of “little in the way of pastoral care”.
Gavin Williamson, the education secretary, is also less of a fan of the university experience than some of his predecessors. He recently ditched the target, introduced by New Labour and adopted by successive governments, of 50 per cent of young adults going into higher education, replacing it with a focus on further education and vocational training.
Accusing universities of failing to prepare graduates for the UK workforce, he said: “For too long, we’ve been training people for jobs that don’t exist. We need to train them for the jobs that do exist and will exist in the future. We have to end the focus on qualifications for qualifications’ sake.” And, this week, prime minister Boris Johnson finally delivered on recommendations from the Augar Review into post-16 education, pledging to end the gulf between further and higher education, commenting:
“We seem on the one hand to have too few of the right skills for the jobs our economy creates, and on the other hand too many graduates with degrees which don’t get them the jobs that they want.”
The prime minister and education secretary’s comments chime with the sentiments of a couple of recently published books. Both political philosopher Michael Sandel – in The Tyranny of Merit – and journalist David Goodhart – in Head, Hand, Heart – argue that it’s time to reassess our notions of success and failure, and particularly how they relate to higher education and work.
And last month, Stefan Collini, professor emeritus of intellectual history at the University of Cambridge, delivered a withering assessment of the UK’s higher education sector:
“Universities are overcrowded and understaffed; contact hours are reduced; most teaching in the first two years is done by temporary and part-time staff; and underprepared students suffer debilitating stress. Moreover, instead of reliably leading to a better job, all it guarantees is a higher tax bill for the next 30 years.”
As a number of voices begin to question the actual purpose of universities, many institutions may need to adapt by reframing what they stand for and the benefit they deliver to society.
Despite mounting challenges, there are still opportunities for universities to thrive. One possibility is the government’s levelling up agenda, which promises to redirect investment to regions outside London and the south-east. Keen to retain its newly won “red wall” across the Midlands and the north of England, the present administration is likely to welcome potential development in those areas.
Universities have a real opportunity to play a central role in transforming their local area, whether through forging partnerships with local authorities and businesses, providing students with the skills needed for the region to thrive or persuading students to live and work in the area following graduation. Showing their commitment to their community in this way would allow universities to demonstrate their ongoing relevance and value in what is likely to remain an unpredictable environment for the foreseeable future.
What students want
As discussed by Sandel and Goodhart in their respective publications, traditional academic criteria provide a limited measure of an individual’s overall knowledge, skills and intelligence.
In fact, Madano’s own research into the higher education sector has found that students are seeking to acquire more tangible skills that they can apply directly to the workplace, and often in more practical disciplines.
Today’s students regard employment at the end of a degree as a given. Considering the huge amount of money they’re expected to shell out in tuition fees and the tens of thousands of pounds of debt they’re destined to graduate with, is it any wonder?
Given the current expectation that a degree will inevitably lead to a job, perhaps it’s time for universities to improve the vocational support they offer students beyond simply academic preparation. Many already give advice on job applications and interview skills to improve undergraduates’ chances of securing a position once they’ve completed their studies, but they could develop this offer and make it available to a greater number of students.
Aside from traditional employment, there could be an opportunity for universities to broaden their role by encouraging greater entrepreneurship and helping students to help themselves. By advising students how to set up their own company and putting young entrepreneurs in touch with potential partners, the higher education sector could recast itself as a genuine friend to business and safeguard its continuing relevance.
More than at any other time in recent history, the value and purpose of universities are being questioned right across the political spectrum. Outside of the familiar top-tier names, universities need to reassess and rethink why they do what they do and then rearticulate that concept in a way that speaks to students and meets wider societal objectives, keeping both government and the general public on side.
Universities that are agile, maintain two-way communication with their student body and take advantage of the current government agenda are likely to be best positioned to take the lead in shaping the sector as it moves forward.
By Dan Townshend, Senior Research Manager in Madano’s Insights practice.
As lockdown is gradually eased in the UK and life slowly begins to return to a semblance of normality (with collective fingers firmly crossed that spikes don’t lead to a second nationwide lockdown), now seems like an opportune moment to look back over the last five months and pick out some of the organisations who successfully adapted their communications strategies to fit the extraordinary circumstances imposed on them by the COVID-19 pandemic.
It may be an obvious choice, but it’s hard to ignore the way BrewDog took the closure of its 100 bars around the world, and the loss of 50 per cent of its export business, in its stride. Instead of bemoaning the situation forced upon it, the company decided to seize the initiative in a way that aligned with its manifesto pledge: “We do things against the grain. We will do what we think is right – and we really don’t care what people think.”
Deprived of its traditional purpose (“to make incredible craft beer”), BrewDog decided to switch its operations completely. Two days before it closed all of its UK bars, the company announced that it would now be producing hand sanitiser instead and donating it to the NHS and healthcare charities.
“We believe businesses should be a force for good,” explained James Watt, BrewDog’s co-founder and boss, and he went on to put his (lack of) money where his mouth was by refusing to take any salary in 2020, along with fellow co-founder Martin Dickie. The firm’s senior team also took pay cuts in order to protect jobs.
BrewDog also then cheekily waded into the furore surrounding Dominic Cummings’ infamous trip to County Durham. In a fine example of social media brilliance, the company invited its Twitter followers to christen its latest, limited-edition beer, and the Barnard Castle Eye Test IPA was launched under the strapline: “Short-sighted beer for tall stories”.
It proved too good to resist for Keir Starmer, who popped into one of the brewer’s bars in London to be photographed holding a can. BrewDog were understandably keen to publicise the Labour leader’s endorsement, but careful to point out that proceeds from the IPA had funded 100,000 bottles of sanitiser for front-line workers.
Supermarkets were faced with a plethora of communication challenges in the early stages of lockdown as they sought to explain the intricacies of the new shopping reality to their customers while reassuring them with a basic message that it was still safe to visit their stores.
Tesco was among the first to launch a campaign promoting its social-distancing measures. On 27 March, it unveiled its “Keeping You Safe” ad to highlight the steps it had taken to protect customers and staff at important points in the shopping process. Featuring real employees, the ad detailed how parking attendants would be marshalling customers as they arrived at stores, and showed that signs displaying social distancing advice and queue markers had been arranged to ensure shoppers remained two metres apart. The campaign also underlined measures such as floor markings and one-way aisles, plus protective screens erected at tills to protect cashiers.
At the same time, supermarkets responded to concerns from shoppers worried about catching the virus by expanding their online services. Tesco upped its delivery slots to 1.2 million in a six-week period, more than doubling capacity. Morrison’s, Asda, Iceland and Waitrose also significantly increased their deliveries, while Sainsbury’s online grocery sales went from 7 per cent to 17 per cent during lockdown.
“Our business has fundamentally changed,” said the supermarket’s new chief executive, Simon Roberts. Alluding to the 25,000 new staff the chain had recruited, he continued: “A number of the decisions we have made have materially increased costs, but meant that we have done the right thing for our customers.”
All of these reputation management efforts have paid off handsomely. A recent survey carried out by IAB UK and YouGov revealed that 79 per cent of those questioned would be likely to favour brands that had acted and communicated well during the COVID-19 pandemic. Three quarters of respondents (75 per cent) said clear and frequent communication was a factor in their choice and close to two thirds (62 per cent) were swayed by the implementation of new safety measures.
The research also listed the brands that consumers felt most impressed by during lockdown. Supermarkets dominated the top 10, with Amazon and Boots the only non-supermarket brands to feature.
Like supermarkets, garden centres were quick to respond to the introduction of the government’s lockdown measures. In early April, the BBC reported that the outlets were providing personalised online shopping services to combat huge potential wastage (millions of plants, shrubs and trees) brought about by social-distancing measures.
Traders took advantage of the digital technology at their disposal to live-stream videos of their premises and give customers advice on orders via FaceTime and email. Chessington Garden Centre promoted its products through Facebook Live and offered a delivery service to fulfil orders received through its website.
As staff broadcast a walking tour through the centre and its goods, they replied to questions left by customers in the comments. The video began by assuring viewers that the centre was doing all it could to stick to government guidelines and make sure people stayed at home, but went on to insist that “what we do want to do is encourage you out into your gardens or outdoor space.”
Lessons from lockdown
Business strategy and communications strategy should be inextricably linked. The winners highlighted above have managed to either find a new role for the business that stayed true to its brand identity or reorganised their operations to respond to huge changes in customer demand, while restricted by measures introduced to fight COVID-19.
But if lockdown has taught us anything, it’s that the companies who have been most successful during this period are the ones who have quickly adapted to a sea change in the business environment and then taken their stakeholders with them on that journey.
Things were so much easier in 2020 BC (before COVID-19):
“A client wants us to organise a workshop? No problem! We’ve arranged loads of similar events before. We’ll use our experience, follow our tried and tested formula and then tailor the content to meet the specific requirements of this event…”
[Cue a global pandemic shutting down vast swathes of the economy and forcing large areas of the planet into lockdown. The reality of 2020 AC (Anno Coroni) suddenly hits home.]
“… Ah, this is not going to be as easy as we’d imagined! What do we need to do now to make this a success??”
That was basically the internal monologue of Madano’s Healthcare practice leading up to what would become a two-day virtual event for 80 internal stakeholders working in Alzheimer’s disease, with participants scattered around the world from Brazil and Europe to the UAE and Australia. We weren’t entirely sure how we were going to get this one over the line, faced with such unforeseen circumstances and pressures, but we love a challenge, and get it over the line we did! Here are the lessons we learned along the way.
As you can imagine, the event’s virtual setting presented a whole new set of considerations and challenges to overcome, and we wanted to ensure that the event was engaging and fun for everyone sat in their home offices, living rooms, kitchens, and even childhood bedrooms for those who locked down with family!
We began by circulating a survey among participants to help us plan the event in a way that would be of most interest and use to those attending, as well as requesting their current location and time zones (as many people were locked down in areas outside of their offices’ cities!) to help with the scheduling.
The survey also enabled us to determine the type of content attendees would like to be included in the sessions, with a mix of workshops, co-creation, information-sharing and training sessions. In addition, we asked attendees to indicate whose perspectives they would most like to hear – whether neurologists, caregivers and family members of people living with Alzheimer’s, or team members for best-practice examples.
The end result included neurologist and Alzheimer’s specialists’ perspectives for two of the sessions; fortunately, we were blessed with a group of personable, energetic and passionate presenters, so each session produced a lot of interaction and questions from the audience. Making sure your presenters are enthusiastic and able to transmit that enthusiasm to those listening is important for any event, but it’s almost mandatory in a virtual environment.
Another tip that we’d offer is to include an unexpected but relevant addition to your event to surprise attendees and maintain their interest. We did this in the form of a digital illustrator who sat in on the first day’s sessions, producing sketches of each session’s content, and then presented the illustrations back to the audience on the second day. Aside from providing a very creative way to summarise the first day’s discussions for attendees, those illustrations will now be used as a follow-up to produce an infographic tracing a patient’s journey through their condition and the team’s goals to help improve this. A short break for a team scavenger hunt – finding every day items around their homes in the fastest time – also added a very enjoyable element to the second day.
Make it personal!
Prior to the meeting, attendees were asked if they’d be willing to share country-specific experiences at the event (nine agreed) and their personal experiences with the disease (four were willing). We also asked employees to provide a 10-second video clip of themselves stating a pledge they wanted to make for the future – either patient-focused or within the business. These clips were compiled into a video shown at the start and end of the event, and individually hosted on an internal team platform (which we also completely rebranded and reformatted in preparation for the meeting).
Some presentations used videos and photo montages to tell very emotional stories. These poignant personal narratives, of parents and grandparents who had been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, demonstrated the real passion that this team has to keep patients at the heart of every discussion (and made both the clients and our team shed a few tears!), especially during a meeting otherwise quite focused on expertise and strategy.
Lessons and recommendations
At the end of the meeting, we circulated an evaluation survey to determine what had worked well and identify areas where we could improve future events. We were pleased to discover that all respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the meeting had met their expectations in terms of content, was well organised, and the sessions were relevant and useful. Encouragingly, many felt that the virtual format was as effective as if the meeting had been face-to-face, a positive step for the new world we live in.
Our recommendations for similar virtual healthcare events would include sharing more best-practice examples from internal employees, including more time for Q&A sessions and giving plenty of emphasis to the patient and caregiver voice. As the organiser, we would also advise having more sessions that are shorter in length, with more frequent breaks in between (even if only for a few minutes), to allow the audience to refresh and maintain their concentration levels.
And finally, as anyone who’s been working remotely for several months now will tell you, anticipate technology not always working in the way you had planned and try to come up with an alternative for when it does… and when that happens, above all else, keep calm!
By Sam Marshall, Programme Manager, Madano Healthcare.
After the downturn comes the recovery. At least that’s the theory of how things should pass.
Over the past few months, Government and industry have spoken out on the urgent need for a green recovery based on investment, jobs and growth in the UK’s burgeoning low-carbon sector.
The message has been delivered and Government has sought to get on the front foot by bringing leading industry players around the virtual roundtable in recent weeks to determine what the green recovery should look like and the support mechanisms that need to go into it.
The wider context of the green recovery extends further than a reflex response to the post-COVID-19 world as the Government has promised to level up Britain’s regions, increase productivity, deliver on the many Brexit promises and ultimately create a world-beating net zero economy by 2050.
But like the “57 varieties of Heinz” slogan, green recoveries come in various shapes and sizes.
A case of history repeating?
For seasoned observers, it feels like we’ve been here before, most notably in 2008-2010 when governments first saw the opportunities of renewable energy markets and provided bazooka-like fiscal stimuluses.
The Obama administration provided US$90 billion to promote clean energy through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. This led to a fundamental global restructuring of how renewable energy was financed and developed.
Create the conditions and investment for a market to develop and the ‘invisible hand’ will work its magic, or so the theory goes.
Ten or so years on, it could be argued that this approach has worked as many renewable forms of energy, such as offshore wind and solar, have become developed industries and are moving to a model where they no longer need government support (i.e. “zero-subsidy”).
However, some have argued that the UK fluffed its lines over a decade ago by not being ambitious enough. Nick Molho, Executive Director at the Aldersgate Group, was quoted recently in Business Green: “The UK did not seize the opportunity to transform its economy for the better when it responded to the 2008 Global Financial Crisis.”
With hindsight, it’s easy to conclude that Government failed to deliver a long-term plan for low-carbon technologies to transform the economy.
Now Government has bought into the idea that low-carbon infrastructure and growing industries, such as hydrogen, electric vehicles and retrofitting our building stock, can create jobs and provide a long-term low-carbon economy.
Pressure is also building from a cross-party selection of MPs who, just this week, urged Government to accelerate the transition to net zero to “get the UK on track”.
The idea of a “green industrial revolution” has gained further urgency given the sharpest economic contraction of modern times, as well as rapid global climate change.
As Michael Liebreich of Bloomberg NEF highlighted, we need to remove carbon from our economy at a rate three to seven per cent faster per year than we have been doing in order to meet our Paris commitments.
The post-COVID-19 world has brought a new reality. Months of lockdown have provided obvious benefits. Fewer planes, trains and cars mean cleaner air in our cities. Biodiversity has flourished in many places across the world as humans have retreated. A consensus is emerging for these positive changes to continue.
Importantly, investment continues to pour into renewables and most analysts expect this to carry on, despite the COVID19 pandemic. While the energy sector has been hit hard by COVID-19, the renewables sector is showing remarkable signs of resilience.
How do companies and organisations shape the green recovery?
With Government and MPs making weekly statements about the green recovery, and with public acceptance of renewable energy higher than ever, companies in the energy and environment space will never have a better opportunity to push forward the green agenda.
Government is listening, ministers are keen to deliver, MPs are engaged, and the electorate wants to see the creation of new jobs and industries
The awarding of new funding is being accelerated and made available to companies with new innovations and technologies that progress the low-carbon transition, such as sucking CO² out of the air.
Communications are central to this.
Companies will need to show commitment to the green recovery, showing that they understand the Government’s agenda with a clear strategy and vision, impactful messaging and narrative, and a roadmap on how they are going to deliver, as well as a clear recommendation or ‘ask’ of Government.
One clear lesson is to be bold. Companies can draw on the recent precedent of lockdown lobbying from Manchester United striker Marcus Rashford. His free school meals campaign, as my colleague Evan Byrne noted in his excellent blog, was successful because it delivered a simple but uncompromising ‘ask’ to Government.
Know who the key stakeholders are. The shifting sands of the post-COVID-19 world mean that the stakeholders that a company or organisation might have communicated with in the past might not be the same ones who are shaping the green recovery. Take some time to map the stakeholder landscape and find out who the influential stakeholders really are.
And don’t forget to engage the public on this journey. They are also important stakeholders. They influence the influencers.
More broadly, the green recovery isn’t just a reaction to the post-COVID-19 world, it’s an opportunity to commit your business or organisation to creating a better world – a net-zero world. The promise of new jobs is an exciting one.
Those companies that have committed to net zero, with tangible goals and attainable milestones, have been well received by media. Outlandish net-zero commitments will likely be met with scepticism and negativity, just as “greenwashing” has been called out and rejected in the past. The public will want to see proof of progress as well as sincerity.
There is surely no better time to cement the goal of net zero in the public consciousness than now as people demand greater action to protect the environment, with many inspired by the actions of Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg.
With COP26 taking place in Glasgow late next year, it is also an opportunity for companies and organisations to get a head start on their competitors, positioning themselves prominently in an increasingly crowded space. There’s a business imperative to being ahead of the game on net zero.
The signs are there that, this time, the green recovery will be a defining pillar of the UK and other countries’ post-industrial development. The scale of the economic and climate crisis dictates this.
But this will only happen if leading companies and organisations understand the new reality and seize the opportunities that it has provided them.
Madano advises clients in the energy and infrastructure sectors adapting to the impacts of COVID-19 and transitioning to lower carbon operating models. If you’re interested in learning more, please drop me a line directly at: [email protected]om. You can also follow Madano on Twitter.