By Gabriella Wass
We first came across Gabriella Wass when she contacted Good Energy as part of her research into how individuals in business relate to the effects of their decisions on other humans – her thesis for an MA in Understanding and Securing Human Rights. Participating as a case study sparked our interest further so we asked Gabriella to write a blog for us outlining her findings.
How does someone as influential and with as much responsibility as Juliet Davenport relate to the people affected by her business decisions? Quite easily, the answer seems to be – a response quite different from those given by many other business leaders and, arguably, contrary to what logic might predict.
For my Human Rights MA thesis, I interviewed the leaders of some of the world’s largest energy providers, supermarkets, banks and manufacturers, asking them how they relate to the people their business activity might affect: employees, consumers, those inhaling petrol fumes, communities living next to a factory, even society as a whole. A question open to (revealing) interpretation.
Backing up these interviews was a broad analysis of academic theories as to why business leaders would or wouldn’t relate to these ‘others’. At the pessimistic end of the scale humans were represented as fatalistic, greedy, self-interested animals. On the other hand, psychologists tend to paint us as a trusting lot on the whole, unlikely to question structures that prevent people from being able to relate to each other.
Evolutionary theory offers another angle; human brains are designed to deal with small social groups so that when our actions may affect millions we lose our capacity to compute such responsibility. Furthermore, one could argue that the self-selecting group of cold-headed business people who end up at the top of the pile represent a particularly ruthless section of society.
Lastly, there is the argument that our economic system prevents businesses and individuals from taking responsibility by tying us into irresponsible, competitive legal obligations. For more on this issue I recommend the documentary ‘The Corporation.’ This 2003 Canadian film shows the development of the contemporary business corporation, from a legal entity that originated as a government-chartered institution meant to effect specific public functions, to the rise of the modern commercial institution entitled to most of the legal rights of a person. You can watch the trailier here.
But on the positive side is the concept of humans as a moral, empathic species, capable of understanding one another’s needs and pain, consistently considering ourselves responsible for our actions throughout history. Laws and norms evolving from the UN and within individual countries provide benchmarks against which companies can measure their responsibility, not to mention the efforts that companies themselves are taking.
Yet despite this, as evolution and psychology would predict, it remains difficult for individual leaders to see quite how they relate to those most remotely affected by their business’ activity.
And this makes Good Energy a particularly fascinating case example. In a company geared towards responsible activity, it seems logical that it should be led by someone for whom a sense of responsibility towards customers and employees should be paramount. Yet Juliet Davenport’s answers to questions about ‘the impact of Good Energy on people’s lives’ (an intentionally broad question) were so comprehensive as to encompass humanity as a whole by relating Good Energy’s activity to climate change.
And that may be the key to responsible business – to accept that the scars of evolution have ensured it does not come naturally or easily to our species to see a child in a remote village affected by changing climate as our responsibility. Yet our logic and sense of morality can remind us that they are, and that through responsible and careful decision making we can make that chain of responsibility one of benefit rather than harm.
Companies like Good Energy stand out as being particularly valuable to the world’s business community because at the very root of their activity lies a commitment to taking responsibility for the business’ actions. As international business law eventually hauls itself towards this idea – that a company cannot be immune from respecting our world and its people – our market economy can allow space (currently almost non-existent) for businesses to be innovative about taking responsibility, with Good Energy an example of a shining leader.

