2026 Member Conference Hub - Business in the Community

2026 Member Conference Hub

2026 Business in the Community Member Conference Hub

Thanks for joining us at the 2026 Business in the Community Member Conference. This page is your quick, practical companion for the day: session takeaways, actions you can implement immediately, and the Business in the Community resources that can help you go further.

How to use this page

  • Find your workshop below and pick 1–3 actions to take back to your organisation this month. 
  • Download or bookmark the linked resources to share with your team. 
  • Before you leave the conference, please complete the 1-minute poll. Your feedback shapes future events. 
  • Over the next few months, we will update this page to include new material based on workshop discussions and member experience. Bookmark this page and check back for additional suggested actions and resources to help you navigate your responsible business journey.

Workshops

Strategy, Communication & Systemic Barriers

Summary of Table Outputs

This workshop explored why organisations committed to responsible business are finding it harder to communicate openly and authentically, and what practical steps can help move from caution to confident action. 

Session Overview 

Dr César Jiménez-Martínez (LSE) set out how expectations of business communication have shifted. Authenticity today is judged less by intent and more by alignment between values, actions, evidence, and response. In a visibility-driven, low-trust environment, silence is interpreted, not neutral. With regulatory scrutiny increasing through FCA anti-greenwashing rules and ASA rulings, authenticity now carries both cultural and legal consequences. 

Andy McLennan (Aviva) then shared how organisations can move from fear to action by building a clear license to operate (using insight and commercial evidence) and combining boldness with control; focusing on material priorities, supported by governance and partnerships that reduce risk while enabling confidence. 

These inputs framed two rounds of table discussion. 

Table Work 1: Barriers to Authentic Communication 

Across all tables, delegates described a shared sense of constraint. While ambition to communicate responsibly remains high, several consistent barriers emerged: 

1. Fear dominates decision-making

Fear appeared in every discussion; fear of backlash, being accused of virtue signalling, misusing language, or being perceived as insincere. Many organisations felt that the perceived cost of “getting it wrong” now outweighs the benefits of speaking at all. 

2. Evidence and assurance gaps

Delegates highlighted the challenge of communicating without robust, defensible data. Concerns included accuracy, longterm proof, assurance processes, and clarity on what constitutes a legitimate “right to speak”. 

3. Fragmented and polarised stakeholders

Tables noted increasing difficulty in navigating: 

  • Different expectations across customers, communities, investors, and regulators 
  • Global vs UK sensitivities 
  • Internal polarisation at senior levels 
  • The risk of excluding certain groups through language or framing 

What feels authentic to one audience may feel alienating to another. 

4. Leadership confidence and mandate

Authenticity was seen as heavily dependent on senior leadership. Where leaders are misaligned, cautious, or divided, communication stalls. Several tables noted a lack of permission to act rather than a lack of commitment. 

5. The permanence and politicisation of digital communication 

Participants stressed that messages live indefinitely online and can be reinterpreted years later. Certain terms (e.g. “net zero”) are now politically loaded, increasing hesitation and over-analysis. 

Table Work 2: What Enables Action 

The second discussion focused on what organisations can do, practically and quickly, to act more boldly while staying credible. 

1. Create a clear leadership mandate 

Tables consistently emphasised the need for explicit agreement on: 

  • What the organisation stands for 
  • Which issues it will speak on (and which it won’t) 
  • Who has authority to approve messaging 

Some organisations are experimenting with new internal mechanisms (e.g. assemblies or forums) to build permission and confidence. 

2. Strengthen insight and evidence 

Delegates called for better use of: 

  • Brand and customer insight 
  • Community impact data 
  • Measurement of how communications are received and understood 

While some expressed fear of uncovering uncomfortable insights, there was consensus that confidence depends on knowing whether actions and messages are landing as intended. 

3. Focus on what is material and credible 

Rather than broad claims, tables recommended concentrating on areas where organisations can demonstrate real impact, alignment to strategy, and long-term commitment. 

4. Use governance to unlock, not restrict, communication 

Clear frameworks, guidance, and review processes were seen as enabling confidence rather than slowing progress, particularly for communications and legal teams. 

5. Work through trusted partnerships 

Many delegates felt more confident communicating alongside charities, community partners, and networks such as BITC, where shared credibility reduces perceived risk. 

Overall insight

The table work revealed that the challenge is not a lack of intent, but a lack of confidence, clarity, and permission. Organisations are navigating a complex mix of scrutiny, polarisation, and expectation yet there is strong agreement that with clearer mandates, better evidence, focused priorities, and supportive governance, businesses can communicate more authentically without retreating into silence. 

Key resources for this workshop:

Summary of table conversations

Moving from risk… 

Whilst agility is key in a fast-changing context and ever-changing markets, a purpose and strategy is the foundation to understand and shape new opportunity and risks – a ‘north star’ to work towards. One member asked ‘how does a company even make decisions if it doesn’t understand its purpose?’ 

Requirements:

  • Leadership – leaders need to stop being a barrier to change and consider the long-term legacy of the business 
  • Resource to report and be compliant, but also be strategic and impact led 
  • An understanding of the business case – seems to be a continued suggestion that ESG / RB is not commercially driven. BITC believes is a company doesn’t consider its community and environment; it will cease to exist. 
  • Ownership across the business – sales, procurement, human resources, there is no team that doesn’t require a long-term ESG approach. 
  • Consideration of timing (but wait forever and the business will have missed the boat!) 
  • Continuous horizon scanning 

Potential actions:

To impact…

BITC advocates the Theory of Change model as it addresses key issues raised: 

  • Concerns about attribution 
  • Ability to track tangible activities whilst evidencing long term impact 
  • Short term research leading to long term collection of data 
  • Provision of common goals (with pieces of the pie to address each stakeholder’s priorities) 
  • Focus on priority issues (ideally linked to materiality) 
  • Connect ambition with achievability 
  • Consider negative impact alongside positive impact 

Potential actions:

Key resources for this workshop:

Summary of table conversations

This session explored how rapid advances in AI, automation and digital tools are reshaping work, skills and organisational models. Speakers from Capita and BITC set out the scale of disruption facing both public and private sector organisations, alongside the opportunity to use AI as an enabler of human potential rather than a driver of exclusion. 

Drawing on Capita’s journey as an early adopter, the session highlighted a shift from automating individual tasks to redesigning end-to-end workflows, with digital agents augmenting human judgement, accountability and creativity. Panellists emphasised that successful AI adoption is less about technology itself and more about leadership, learning agility, skills visibility and trust. 

What emerged from the tables

The table discussions reinforced that AI adoption is experienced first and foremost as a people and skills challenge. 

Participants consistently returned to the tension between AI as a tool for efficiency and AI as a force for positive impact. Many expressed concern that, without intentional leadership, AI risks defaulting to cost-cutting at the expense of inclusion, job quality, and long-term resilience. At the same time, there was a strong appetite to use AI to redesign work in ways that create better outcomes for people and communities. 

A dominant theme was learning agility. Delegates described the pace of change as unprecedented, noting that the critical capability is not mastery of specific tools, but the confidence, permission and motivation to keep learning. Many organisations acknowledged gaps in their current skills strategies and a lack of clarity on how to move toward skills-based workforce models. 

Entry-level roles and future pathways surfaced as a shared concern across tables. Participants observed that automation is already reducing routine early career opportunities, raising questions about how new entrants build experience. The discussion shifted from which roles may disappear to how entry-level pathways need to be redesigned, with greater emphasis on judgment, coordination, problem-solving, and human skills. 

Bias, fairness and inclusion were seen as make or break issues. Delegates agreed that AI will amplify existing inequalities if applied to biased data or processes. However, there was also optimism that AI could help level the playing field, if inclusion is designed in from the outset through diverse input, transparency and ongoing human oversight. 

Leadership and trust emerged as decisive factors. Many participants noted that leaders often feel underprepared to guide AI-driven change, which can exacerbate anxiety and change fatigue across the workforce. Tables favoured distributed ownership models, such as AI champions embedded within teams, combined with clear ethical guardrails and a consistent narrative about why AI is being adopted. 

Across all discussions, delegates were clear that responsible AI requires slowing down in some areas to build confidence, capability and psychological safety. The strongest message was that organisations that invest early in leadership capability, learning culture and ethical governance are best placed to turn technological disruption into inclusive, sustainable growth. 

Actions you can take:
Key resources for this workshop:

Summary of table work:

This workshop examined how rising social and political polarisation is reshaping public trust in business, drawing on BITC’s State of the Nation 2025 and practical leadership experience from Skyscanner. Speakers framed the core challenge facing leaders as navigating when to speak, when to act and when to exercise restraint, in an environment where expectations are intensifying, consensus is rare and both action and silence carry risk. Participants were introduced to two practical decision support tools, the Trust in Practice Matrix and the Trust Lens, designed to support sound judgment under pressure rather than default communications responses. 

A feature of the session was the depth and honesty of table discussions, where participants applied the tools to live dilemmas from their own organisations. Across sectors, tables highlighted that polarisation is no longer abstract but is experienced directly inside workplaces, affecting wellbeing, belonging and perceptions of safety. Groups explored tensions between values and visibility, speed and governance, and authenticity versus performativity, particularly in geopolitically charged or legally constrained contexts. 

From these conversations, participants collectively distilled five shared principles for values-led decision-making in polarised contexts: 

  • Communicate with timely, transparent clarity, including the ethics of silence 
    Trust is strengthened by early, honest communication and by clearly explaining when restraint is necessary. Silence without explanation erodes trust, while silence with integrity can protect it. 
  • Centre human wellbeing, dignity and felt inclusion 
    In polarised contexts, organisations must ensure people feel acknowledged, safe and supported. Wellbeing and inclusion are inseparable from trust. 
  • Hold firm to values while resisting performativity 
    Credibility comes from consistency over time, embedding values into everyday systems and decisions, and avoiding symbolic or reputational gestures. 
  • Exercise disciplined judgment within legal, governance and capacity constraints 
    Responsible leadership requires balancing stakeholder expectations with legal duties, governance processes and organisational capability, even when tensions cannot be fully resolved. 
  • Build enduring trust through relationships, cultural intelligence and systemic consistency 
    Trust grows through dialogue across difference, alignment between leadership and lived culture, and consistency between values, voice and action. 

The session concluded with a shared recognition that while polarisation cannot be solved, trust can still be built through credible leadership, care and consistency over time. 

Actions you can take:
  • Clarify your “red lines and responsibilities” Be explicit about the issues where your organisation has a duty to act and where it chooses restraint. Trust grows when boundaries are clear.
  • Invest in listening before messaging: Build structured ways to hear from employees and communities before decisions are made, not just after responses are drafted.
  • Focus on behaviours, not just positions: Ask what consistent behaviours demonstrate your values in practice, especially when no public statement is issued.
  • Plan for repair, not just response: Decide in advance how you will acknowledge missteps, learn publicly, and rebuild trust when things do not land as intended.
Key resources for this workshop:

Collaboration: People, Place & Planet

Speaker Insights

This workshop explored how businesses can unlock an underutilised talent pool by addressing the barriers faced by ethnically diverse young people who are not in education, employment or training. Speakers set out the scale of the challenge, highlighting that nearly one million young people in the UK are NEET, with disproportionately poorer access and outcomes for ethnically diverse groups. 

Drawing on evidence from Youth Futures Foundation and BITC research, the session challenged misconceptions about NEET young people and reframed the issue as one of unequal access rather than lack of capability. Speakers shared the business case for action, including closing skills gaps, improving retention and futureproofing organisations, alongside a spotlight case study from Grant Thornton showing how early intervention, redesigned work experience, strong school partnerships and intentional network building can create credible pathways into work. 

The session also introduced the Talent Unlocked programme and BITC’s evidence-led approach, emphasising the importance of targeted, data driven interventions across outreach, recruitment, onboarding and progression. 

What emerged from table discussions 

The defining feature of the table conversations was a strong consensus that early, joined up and personalised intervention is critical, and that employers have more agency than they often realise to remove structural barriers. 

Participants identified that the core challenge is not talent but access. Young people face socialisation barriers, limited networks and a lack of exposure to the “lifestyle of work”, which erodes confidence and belonging well before recruitment. Tables repeatedly highlighted the transition years, particularly Key Stage 3, as a critical point where aspiration drops and where earlier employer engagement could prevent young people reaching NEET status. 

There was strong alignment on what works in practice. Tables pointed to redesigned work experience mapped to skills frameworks, early exposure to role models, and structured buddying and mentoring as effective ways to build psychological safety and confidence. Participants stressed that onboarding needs to be tailored, recognising that young people arrive with very different levels of prior exposure, and that support should extend beyond the first few weeks. 

Discussions also surfaced the importance of trust and data. Many noted that young people are more willing to share personal data during recruitment than once in role, and that anonymised or voluntary approaches are essential to improving disclosure. Without trust, organisations struggle to understand where barriers sit or whether interventions are working. 

Finally, tables emphasised that tackling the NEET challenge requires a long-term, ecosystem approach. One-off opportunities are insufficient. Meaningful progress depends on sustained partnerships with schools, community organisations and charities, leadership commitment to inclusive recruitment, and a focus on capabilities rather than credentials. While no single organisation can solve structural inequality alone, participants agreed that employers can play a decisive role in widening access and unlocking talent when action is intentional, evidence-led and embedded across the employee lifecycle. 

Actions you can take:
  • Share your progress on hiring and retaining ethnically diverse young people through completing the Talent Unlocked survey.
  • Sign the Race at Work charter and/or join the Opening Doors campaign to demonstrate your organisation’s commitment to race equality and inclusive recruitment in the workplace.
Key resources for this workshop:

Actions you can take:
  • Baseline and benchmark your organisational approach to workforce wellbeing using BITC’s Workwell Self-Assessment Tool – it’s simple, accessible and free to use
  • Build healthy and inclusive line management skills across your business.
  • Put wellbeing on both your Executive agenda and risk register. Review performance using defined leading and lagging indicators at least quarterly.
  • Audit workload and workplace stressors to identify where work is a cause or contributory factor of poor wellbeing. Act on what you find.
Key resources for this workshop:

Setting the context: Why place-based partnerships matter 

Speaker input

The session opened with BITC and Orbit setting out why place-based working is moving up the agenda, but often remains fragmented or short-term. Drawing on the State of the Nation context, speakers highlighted the risk of businesses being positioned as funders rather than partners, and the need to move towards long-term, trust-based collaboration that can deliver resilience and scale.

What came back from the tables

Participants strongly agreed that short-termism is the biggest barrier to impact. Many organisations described pressure from contract cycles, political timelines or internal targets that make it difficult to stay the course. The dominant insight was that scalable change requires organisations to be explicit upfront about how long they are willing to commit, what success looks like, and how partnerships align to core business strategy rather than sitting on the margins. 

Working in communities: Moving from ‘for’ to ‘with’ 

Speaker input

Orbit shared practical reflections on what meaningful community partnership looks like in practice. Their ‘with, not for’ approach emphasised co-design, closing feedback loops and recognising community members as assets rather than recipients. The session also explored common challenges such as consultation fatigue, low trust and apathy created by past experiences.

What came back from the tables

Tables consistently reinforced that trust is built through behaviour, not branding. Participants shared that small, consistent actions, showing up, listening, and following through, often matter more than high-profile interventions. Many highlighted the value of identifying trusted local champions early and being patient, even when progress feels slow. A recurring theme was that activities that may look low-impact on paper can have long-term value if they help establish credibility and relationships.

Sustainability and resilience: Beyond one-off interventions 

Speaker input

The discussion moved to the difference between short/long-term activity and long-term resilience. Speakers challenged the tendency towards one-off projects or isolated volunteering days, arguing that real partnership requires organisational commitment, resourcing, outcomes and accountability over time.

What came back from the tables

Participants acknowledged a clear tension between aspiration and reality. Many organisations operate within 2–3 year contracts or funding cycles, which makes long-term thinking difficult. The key learning from tables was the importance of layering social value into existing activity rather than treating it as a standalone programme. Where partnerships had endured, they were backed by senior leadership support and embedded into core ways of working, not driven solely by enthusiastic individuals.

Community assets and stakeholder mapping 

Speaker input

Orbit introduced stakeholder and asset mapping as a practical tool for understanding interest, influence and impact, and for avoiding the common mistake of treating all stakeholders the same. The session encouraged participants to think strategically about who to engage, how and why. 

What came back from the tables

This exercise generated some of the strongest discussion. Participants reported very different levels of maturity, from sophisticated systems to knowledge held informally “in people’s heads”. Three key insights emerged: 

  • Internal stakeholders matter as much as external ones: many groups noted that the hardest conversations are often inside the organisation, not in the community. 
  • Stakeholder maps must be dynamic: priorities shift over time, and maps need to be revisited rather than treated as static documents. 
  • Purpose comes first: mapping is only useful if there is clarity on what the organisation is trying to achieve and how the partnership supports that aim. 

Several tables also highlighted the importance of pairing stakeholder mapping with a clear communications plan, so engagement is meaningful and consistent rather than ad hoc. 

Partnership in practice: What works, where and why 

Speaker input

Orbit shared real examples of partnership working in action, from housing-led collaboration to food insecurity and wellbeing initiatives. These case studies demonstrated how trusted local presence can act as a bridge, enabling other organisations to engage more quickly and effectively, and how modest infrastructure combined with local leadership can unlock sustained impact.

What came back from the tables

When discussing themes such as cost of living, employment and skills, food insecurity and energy, participants consistently emphasised the need to focus on root causes rather than symptoms. Employment and skills emerged as a particularly powerful entry point, but only when linked clearly to place and community need rather than business convenience. 

Tables also highlighted that the most effective partnerships: 

  • Align clearly to organisational purpose and expertise 
  • Combine multiple sectors rather than working in silos 
  • Use storytelling alongside data to demonstrate value and secure buy-in 

There was strong appetite for more regional and place-based collaboration, with participants keen to explore how businesses could align activity rather than duplicating effort in the same communities. 

Overall takeaway from the room

Across the session, participants agreed that scaling local impact is less about doing more, and more about doing things differently: committing for the long term, investing in relationships, understanding stakeholders properly and embedding partnership into core business strategy. The workshop reinforced that when businesses shift from transactional activity to genuine collaboration, local partnerships can become the foundation for scalable, sustainable change. 

Actions you can take:
  • Consider how your existing approach to community partnerships fits the principles we have shared.
  • Develop a stakeholder plan – seek support from BITC Advisory colleagues if you’re not sure where to start.
  • Consult existing partner organisations to understand where your support can best add value and think through where there might be opportunities to collaborate with other ‘community assets’.
  • Take a look at the Place Learning Hub and sign up to upcoming opportunities to learn more about making place-based partnerships work.
Key resources for this workshop:

Summary of table outputs

This workshop explored how businesses can strengthen long-term resilience by embedding environmental and social action into core strategy, co-creating credible transition plans, and investing in community resilience. Drawing on BITC and Royal London’s Creating a Future Ready Economy report, the session combined short case studies with table discussions to surface what businesses are already doing and where collective learning can accelerate progress. 

Session 1: Embedding resilience into core strategy and transition planning 

Speaker input

Royal London outlined how it has embedded sustainability into its purpose, governance and decision-making, treating climate and nature as systemic risks rather than stand-alone ESG issues. The case study showed the importance of co-creating transition plans across the business and with external stakeholders, focusing on real-world impact rather than paper decarbonisation, and holding progress to account through transparent reporting. 

What came back from the tables

Across sectors, participants framed resilience as a strategic, long-term capability rather than a compliance exercise. Five clear themes emerged: 

  • Resilience is about fundamentals, not side projects 
    Businesses highlighted the importance of focusing on assets, supply chains and skills that will remain critical regardless of market shifts. Examples included securing climate-resilient raw materials, improving the fabric and energy efficiency of buildings, and aligning supplier expectations to avoid conflicting demands. 
  • Supply chain and workforce resilience are as critical as operational resilience 
    Many tables pointed to growing risks from supplier fragility and skills shortages. Upskilling employees, planning for job transitions, and supporting suppliers to adapt were seen as essential to maintaining continuity and competitiveness. 
  • The cost of inaction is higher than the cost of transition 
    There was strong consensus that delaying action increases long-term risk and cost. Participants described transition planning as essential to future profitability and, in some cases, business survival, particularly in highly regulated or climate-exposed sectors. 
  • Fairness strengthens resilience 
    Businesses emphasised that transition plans must work for people. Examples included supporting workers into future roles, engaging customers on affordability and access, and ensuring climate action does not exacerbate inequality. 
  • Clear regulation helps unlock faster action 
    Several groups noted that well-designed policy, such as biodiversity net gain requirements, provides clarity and confidence for investment, enabling businesses to move faster and more decisively. 
Session 2: Investing in resilience with the communities you serve 

Speaker input

Royal London demonstrated how community investment can build environmental and social resilience while reinforcing business purpose. Through long-term partnerships, funding, and shared expertise, the focus was on place-based action that delivers tangible benefits, such as access to renewable energy, green jobs, and improved local environments. The shift towards deeper, more targeted partnerships was highlighted as key to achieving meaningful impact.

What came back from the tables

Table discussions showed strong alignment around the need to be more intentional and strategic about community engagement. Key insights included:

  • Community is broader than geography, but place still matters 
    Participants defined community in multiple ways, including local neighbourhoods, customers, employees, supply chains, and future talent pipelines. Many felt that impact is strongest where businesses are physically rooted and can build long-term, trusted relationships. 
  • Materiality helps focus effort and resources 
    Businesses recognised the challenge of doing too much in too many places. Applying a materiality lens helped identify where community investment most directly supports long-term business success, such as workforce pipelines, licence to operate, or customer resilience. 
  • Co-creation builds trust and relevance 
    Rather than designing initiatives in isolation, participants emphasised listening to communities, working with local partners, and co-designing solutions that reflect local needs. This was seen as critical to credibility and impact. 
  • Collective approaches increase scale and effectiveness 
    Pooling resources through collective funds or partnerships was viewed as a way to achieve greater impact than isolated, single-company projects, while reducing duplication and dilution. 
  • The strongest initiatives deliver shared value 
    The most resilient community investments were those that delivered clear social and environmental benefits alongside business value, helping protect these programmes even during economic uncertainty.  
Overall takeaway

The workshop reinforced that restoring our shared environment is not separate from business performance. When resilience, fairness and environmental action are embedded into strategy and community relationships, they become powerful drivers of long-term prosperity for both business and society.

Actions you can take:
  • Identify your biggest nature-related dependencies and impacts (land, water, supply chain)
  • Add one nature-positive commitment to your sustainability plan (with dates and owners).
  • Work with suppliers on practical changes (standards, data, incentives, shared targets).
  • Connect environment and social outcomes: link climate/nature work to health and inequality.
Key resources for this workshop:

Sponsors of the 2026 Member Conference

Business in the Community would like to acknowledge and thank our incredible Member Conference sponsors for 2026. Events like this are only possible with the generous support of organisations like AVK, Bupa, Orbit, Royal London Group and Skyscanner. We truly appreciate their partnership and commitment to driving responsible business best practice across the UK.

Royal London
Bupa

Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

a

What skills are companies looking for in young people, such as school or university graduates? How can schools and universities help to close the skills gap?

The World Economic Forum Future of Jobs Report 2025 highlights the key skills employers are looking for. The insights are from over 1000 leading employers, covering 15 millions jobs and 22 sectors. The top skills employers are looking for are Analytical thinking, Resilience and Agility, Leadership and social influence, Creative thinking, Self awareness and Technological Literacy. Schools and Universities should embed the Skills Builder Universal Framework into their curriculum and employability development programmes and ensure they provide real world/experiential projects for students. This should include  the ability for students to reflect and communicate how they will apply these skills in the world of work.

a

How do you recommend closing the future skills gap?

Map your future skills needs by identifying capabilities that will drive your business forward, from AI fluency to sustainability leadership.

Understand your current skills gaps and prepare to align with key national policies such as the introduction of the Lifelong Learning Entitlement and Growth & Skills Levy with your workforce development strategy. Work with other employers in your sector and/or value chain to address emerging skills gaps.

Engage with Local Further Education Colleges and Higher Education providers about flexible course design aligned to your future workforce needs.

Partner with skills development organisations, focus on skills based hiring. Work with BITC through our Opening Doors Campaign, 53% of Opening Doors employers are reporting improving their skills gap through embedding actions from the campaign framework.

a

Is BITC trying to do too much? Would it not be more impactful to narrow its focus? 

BITC works across a broad agenda because the issues businesses face are interconnected and our members need support across the whole agenda. However, we know focus is important, which is why we prioritise a small number of flagship programmes and provide clear pathways for members which includes signposting to other expertise as appropriate. Breadth gives us system impact; focus ensures we stay practical.

a

What are BITC’s thoughts on AI and the environment as many companies are integrating it?

AI has the potential to be a force for good by improving efficiencies and enabling better monitoring and analysis. But, as with social impacts, we need to be thoughtful about how we use it, rather than assuming the good will outweigh the bad. For example, energy demand for data centres is forecast to double by 2030, consuming more than a country like Japan does in a year. And they need significant quantities of water to cool servers. There is still a long way to go to fully understand the potential positive and negative impacts of AI, so businesses need to be part of measuring and analysing the data related to their own usage so that evidence based decisions can be made as the technology progresses.

a

How do you see the government’s social value agenda can help to better engage businesses on the responsible business agenda? 

When social value becomes embedded in public procurement, it stops being optional for those organisations that spend public funds and those businesses can see the clear commercial driver to invest in social value. Social value legislation creates common understanding and language, metrics and expectations. The shift in social value means that businesses are being challenges towards more strategic partnerships, and long term investment.

a

Do you think those leaders that are trying to regress sustainability goals are being short sighted, especially given the fact that renewables and energy efficiency has taken a strong foothold and that it is better for operational cost, as well as improving their social value credentials?

Rolling back action doesn’t just create long‑term costs and risks. It is creating risks and costs right now. Investors still expect progress, employees want to work for organisations that are acting, and customers—especially in B2B—demand demonstrable results. And with the extreme rainfall the UK and many other regions have faced this year, it’s clear that every business must build resilience into operations, supply chains and the communities they depend on. That’s the heart of sustainability: not something to pursue only when conditions are favourable, but the foundation for a business that can survive and thrive today and tomorrow.

a

We’ve got a real challenge on our hands squaring the downsizing across many businesses with food insecurity – you need to be in good work to be able to feed your family. How do we balance long term sustainability with the current economic reality? 

This is a real challenge. The most effective responses balance short-term support with efforts to strengthen long-term financial resilience. Businesses can: protect good work wherever possible, support employees through transitions, and collaborate locally to tackle food insecurity. Maintaining responsible business commitments during tough periods helps preserve trust and stability.

We also need to help communities build their own resilience to food insecurity. Through the Future Proofing Communities programme, we’re supporting people to grow and cook food. For example, in Teesside we are supporting primary school pupils to set up and run social supermarkets; growing produce to sell; offering small amounts of affordable store‑cupboard staples; and providing cookery lessons for parents. Together, this helps families access food with dignity and gain the skills and confidence to feed themselves—both individually and as a community.

a

Would you mind expanding on why businesses are de-publicising their responsible business activity? Is it a resource issue, in that businesses may have reduced marketing and communication budgets and have therefore prioritised other things to publicise?

For some businesses reduced communications budgets are part of the picture, but there is also a growing sense of caution. Companies want to avoid accusations of over-claiming, and many are choosing to “prove before they promote”. We’re seeing a shift toward quieter, more evidence-based reporting rather than a decline in action.

a

How long term should/ could businesses think in terms of impact- should we invest in the early years who are the future workforce of a community, especially in areas of disadvantage

Businesses should think generationally about impact, particularly as they move from adopting and embedding responsible practices to leading and transforming them. While earlier stage organisations may focus on short to medium term one-off interventions to support early years, leading responsible businesses recognise that improving social mobility and talent development begin long before recruitment. Investing in early years settings (0-11) especially in disadvantaged communities, is not simply philanthropic but a strategic, long term investment in future workforce readiness, wellbeing, inclusion and skills development. If businesses want sustainable access to diverse talent and stronger local economies, they must see themselves as part of the wider ecosystem shaping future outcomes, with a 5 to 10 year strategy to develop and deliver their social impact objectives. The Royal Foundation Business Taskforce stipulates that an extra £45.5billion could be generated for the national economy by investing in support for children, parents/carers and staff in early years settings (0-5yrs).

a

What do you say to business leaders who say that DEI/Sustainability etc. is a “nice to have” but not required for making more money so cannot justify time and investment in it?

If inclusion, wellbeing or sustainability are framed as moral extras, they will always feel optional, especially under commercial pressure. But BITC research increasingly shows these issues are not peripheral to performance (e.g., ‘Unlock the Value of a Thriving Workforce’ analysis with the McKinsey Health Institute estimates that improving employee wellbeing could unlock £130–£370 billion in annual UK economic value, driven by gains in productivity, retention and reduced absence.)

DEI and sustainability don’t guarantee short-term profit. But the evidence suggests they are increasingly part of the conditions that enable sustainable performance, resilience and growth.

a

How do I get more support from BITC on these topics?

Speak to your RM for more information.

a

I couldn’t attend a session — can I access the resources anyway?

Yes. The actions and resources above are suitable even if you didn’t attend the workshop.

a

How do I follow up with speakers or other attendees?

If you’d like a specific introduction after the member conference, please contact your Relationship Manager (RM).

Related content

What we do

Learn what we do to convene business leaders from across the UK, grow the economy and drive a better future for people, place, and planet.
Read More What we do