Category: Works, Skills, Industry

Written by Anna Triandafyllidou, Ryerson University; Laura Lam, University of Toronto. Photo credit: AP Photo/Frank Augstein. Originally published in The Conversation.

Uber drivers of the App Drivers & Couriers Union celebrate as they listen to a British Supreme Court decision that ruled Uber drivers should be classified as workers and not self-employed contractors.

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom recently ruled that Uber drivers are employees of the company and not simply using its technology as self-employed contractors.

Nicholas Humblen, a Supreme Court justice, explained:

“Drivers are in a position of subordination and dependency to Uber, such that they have little to no ability to improve their economic position or professional or entrepreneurial skill.”

The ruling makes clear that platforms should be required to offer basic benefits for the people “collaborating” with them. This ruling can have an impact beyond those in the U.K.

But where does the decision leave migrant gig workers?

These implications were discussed in a study recently presented under the auspices of the CERC Migration program, focusing on newcomer migrants who work in the gig economy, notably on platforms like Uber, TaskRabbit or Amazon Flex, to name a few.

Lack of Canadian experience

In Canada, new migrants are over-represented in the gig economy compared to Canadian-born populations. The stories are familiar — a newcomer enters through Canada’s points-based immigration system, rich in education and experience. But without Canadian experience, it’s next to impossible to land a job that offers career opportunities in their area of expertise.

While studying for a Canadian diploma, completing professional qualifications’ exams or volunteering in their field to get local experience, many newcomers take jobs in the platform economy. Such jobs offer a necessary stepping stone and are seen as a better alternative to typical, low-income work in the service or manufacturing sectors.

The flexible nature of the work allows for a sense of control over one’s time and one’s finances — the more hours you work, the more you earn. But in time, they soon realize that there is no safety net for illness, income fluctuates unexpectedly with demand — you may drive for a whole day and earn just enough for your gas — and of course there are no career prospects. And yet newcomers feel platform work is worth it.

Why? Because the alternatives are even worse. Working for the low-skill service industry offers long hours, low pay, no flexibility, little security and no career prospects. The lack of meaningful alternatives facing newcomers can make platform work all the more attractive.

Not a lifelong job

Most newcomer workers who have spent a few years in the platform economy don’t believe the job is for life. To them, it’s only a means to an end. At the same time, the flexibility, freedom, and opportunity to generate extra cash can make platform work difficult to walk away from.

So where does the problem lie? From a short-term perspective, it’s the lack of a safety net for those who work in the platform economy. There are ongoing debates globally about whether platform workers should be treated as employees instead of independent contractors or even become unionized. None of these debates have yet resulted in a significant change, but there may be some hope on the horizon.

Changing the working conditions in platforms requires political will and regulations must apply to all platforms. It’s still a turbulent process – Foodora simply abandoned Canada when their workers made a move to unionize. And gig companies in California are taking advantage of the state’s Proposition 22 ruling to further exploit workers as contractors.

Increasingly precarious

Migrants who face labour market barriers are stepping into platform work that is growing increasingly precarious. The aftermath of COVID-19 has the potential to create a flood of gig workers, as data from Statistics Canada show an influx of gig employees during periods of economic recession. There are dire implications if gig companies end up absorbing the migrant workforce.

The longer term solution in Canada is to restructure the labour market and look at how we are matching qualified migrants to work. The work available to highly skilled newcomers doesn’t match their education and experience. Canada has to do more to help newcomers find decent work.

One interesting initiative under consideration involves reassessing competencies so that previous professional experience is more easily recognized in the labour market.

Another avenue to explore is educating employers on the skills possessed by newcomers and how they can be applied to the Canadian labour market. This should be easy in a country like Canada, where more than 20 per cent of the population was born abroad. Organizations like the Immigrant Employment Council of BC and the Toronto Region Immigrant Employment Council are doing this work. Their efforts must be supported and boosted significantly.

Written by Stein Monteiro, Ryerson University. Photo credit: ukblacktech.com. Originally published in The Conversation.

Canada’s tech sector, in particular, is in need of highly skilled tech workers if it’s to maintain momentum.

The major world economies of today are innovation-driven knowledge centres. To move innovation forward, an economy cannot operate from a limited pool of local knowledge and skills. It must be able to access the larger pool of global talent.

Foreign knowledge and skills bring new ideas, new perspectives and links to new markets that benefit Canadian employers enormously. A recent study by Statistics Canada shows that immigrant workers contribute significantly to business productivity over the long term. This impact is even stronger among firms in technology-intensive and knowledge-based industries.

Multinational corporations play a major role in the world economy by connecting knowledge resources through the placement of skilled people at branches around the world. Intra-company movement of skilled workers improves the overall productivity of the firm but also allows for countries to participate in the exchange of knowledge and ideas.

On a similar note, international students in Canada alone contribute to $21.6 billion in tuition, accommodation and other expenses, and also contribute in non-monetary terms by connecting Canada to the world economy through cultural exchange. International students and study-abroad programs introduce new perspectives into the classroom and create future global citizens.

Written by Cheri Bradish, Ryerson University. Photo credit: AP Photo/Seth Wong. Originally published in The Conversation.

A New York Mets employee places cutouts of fans in the seats before the team’s first game of the year on July 24.

Professional sports are a multi-billion-dollar business, including the revenues generated by sports advertising and sports media organizations.

One Canadian example of the size and scope of pro sports is the $5.2-billion deal Rogers Communications signed in 2013 for the rights to broadcast NHL games across the country until 2025.

But the current COVID-19 climate has posed serious challenges to the business of sports. Professional sports teams are resuming play in the midst of the pandemic, largely at odds with the rest of society as lockdowns continue, businesses remain shuttered and millions of people work from home.

The start of the Major League Baseball season is an indication of the chaos that comes with these unprecedented times. Less than a week into the season, half of the members of the Miami Marlins tested positive for COVID-19. MLB subsequently suspended the Marlins’ season, and the positive tests have postponed other teams’ games too.

With other professional sports leagues like the NBA and the NHL preparing to resume, there are concerns about the ethics of prioritized access to coronavirus-related health care for professional athletes, the relationship between sports and politics and renewed athlete activism, particularly in the midst of the resurgent Black Lives Matter movement.

And what about the athletes? What do they want from both a social justice and mental health perspective?

As Nick Kypreos, a former NHL player, recently said:

“Players aren’t playing because they want to … they’re playing because they have to.”

Sports typically reflect society

Sports is typically a reflection of society, not an exception to it. COVID-19 seems to have turned the model of professional sport inside out. Never before in the modern era of North American professional sports have fans been so displaced from the game.

Historically, sport in North America developed into an industry with the advent of industrialization and urbanization more than a century ago.

As workers were gaining both increased leisure time and discretionary income, early sport organizers were adopting the elite British model of “leisurely pursuits” for the well-heeled in a more democratic way for society at large — and it worked.

Sport as entertainment, to play and watch, was born, and sports leagues and teams became organizational and commercial success stories.

But yesterday’s athletes were regular citizens compared with the highly paid superstars of today, living in step with their fellow fans, which made them relatable.

Communities and cities embraced sport as a driver of commercial and economic activity, which required significant infrastructure support (including the public financing of stadiums and arenas) over the years.

This era also began to benefit from technology, including transportation advances that made for faster and easier team and fan travel. Sporting goods companies like Spalding emerged, making better equipment. New methods of promoting and selling professional sports quickly followed, heralding the birth of sports marketing.

This introduced new stakeholders into the sport business mix, in particular advertising and media partners, who also began to recognize the value of sports fans — an engaged and captive audience — who would buy their merchandise and read their newspapers for sports commentary. Eventually, those eyeballs began to be tracked and measured.

Fans were central to sport success

The citizens who engaged in this growing sport and entertainment model — sports fans — were fundamentally central to its success. The symbiotic relationship between fans and the professional sports industry grew and thrived, in particular from the 1950s, when creative, fan-centric strategies became popular for many leagues and teams.

Contemporary sport professionals routinely discuss the importance of what’s known as fan avidity, a key metric of success because research shows passionate fans have “been found to spend considerably more money, time, and effort for sports-related activities and goods than their non-avid fan counterparts.”

The fan experience and related consumer activities have traditionally been central to key management decisions of professional sports organizations — unlike now, when fans are at a distance, participating at arm’s length via large video-game like screens, cardboard cutouts and canned crowd noise.

Professional sports is back for a number of reasons, but none have much to do with why it was fundamentally established: For the fans, for the contributions sports teams made to social cohesiveness and for the communities that have traditionally supported pro sports, both financially and emotionally.

Instead, pro sports is back primarily to staunch the significant COVID-19 financial losses on behalf of ownership groups and to satisfy media and corporate partners.

Orlando bubble is costly

The resumption of professional sports, however, is also hugely costly to pro sports leagues. The NBA recently noted that the price of its Orlando bubble will exceed US$150 million. There’s also a personal and health cost: Professional athletes are still testing positive for the virus.

So the important question here is: Will resuming professional sports work, can it thrive without fans and is it safe for players?

In the current COVID-19 environment, the preferences and priorities of fans are complicated at best, with some suggesting that they may never fully return to professional sport.

Public opinion surveys are varied and inconsistent — as many as 60 per cent and as few as 30 per cent of sports fans have told various pollsters that they’re eager for pro sports to return. Information from actual sport teams, however, on the topic of what their fans want is conspicuously lacking.

There’s little consensus on how enthusiastically fans will return to professional sport, specifically when it comes to congregating in stadiums or arenas. That’s due to a host of potential post-pandemic realities, including unappealing levels of security and strict legal requirements in terms of liability waivers.

A recent New York Times study reported that of 511 epidemiologists who ranked “everyday activities to do again” in a year, “attend a sporting event” came in last, well behind the No. 1 pick of attending a wedding or funeral.

Now what?

So how can professional sports organizations get their fans back?

First off, they should keep fans at the core of their business strategy, customizing and tailoring messaging and engagements with fans via brand partnerships as much as possible.

They should make broad commitments to re-engage their diverse community and work to restore their position of social unifiers in society. They must break down the extreme barriers currently in place between athletes and fans while supporting and celebrating their athletes whenever possible.

And, as they did when the professional sports industry was born, they should continue to embrace innovation to drive enhanced fan engagement. They should extend the spirit of these efforts to their dealings with their key stakeholders, including corporate and media partners.

While the COVID-19 pause has created huge challenges for professional sports, organizations can use this opportunity to rethink and reshape the fan-centred experience for the next era of the industry throughout North America.

Written by Cory Searcy, Ryerson University & Pavel Castka, University of Canterbury. Photo credit: AP Photo/Tsvangirayi Mukwazhi. Originally published in The Conversation.

Do you know where your coffee comes from? The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of knowing about our supply chains. Here, a woman carries harvested coffee beans in a coffee plantation in Mount Gorongosa, Mozambique, in August 2019.

Six months ago, you may not have thought much about where your groceries were produced. But chances are you’re thinking about it now.

The COVID-19 crisis has put food supply chains under incredible stress, and stories on shortages of everything from meat to baking ingredients have been plentiful.

But even with the increased recent attention, most supply chains remain murky. Consumers can play a key role in lifting that cloud.

Supply chain transparency has sporadically received widespread attention before. In the 1990s, Nike was famously the target of global consumer boycotts due to concerns about working conditions in its manufacturing plants.

This consumer activism forced the company to make major changes, such as establishing minimum working ages, conducting regular factory audits and publishing where Nike products are made.

Despite progress, calls for consumer action on dangerous working conditions in supply chains for a range of products continue.

An array of claims to decipher

The COVID-19 crisis highlights the prospect of greater consumer engagement in the food supply chain. Browsing the shelves at your grocery store, you may come across a bewildering array of claims related to a product’s characteristics or origins.

There are, for example, nearly 150 different eco-labels on food that certify claims about a product’s environmental and social characteristics. Seafood, beef, coffee and bananas are just some of the many products covered by eco-labels.

Many claims of where products come from or other characteristics, however, rest on weak foundations. But consumers can push companies for continued innovation to illuminate the invisible parts of the supply chain and strengthen the credibility, transparency and veracity of their claims.

In many cases, this can be done with existing technology. Blockchain, chemical footprinting and drones are becoming more reliable as they become cheaper. They are also increasingly being used in supply chain auditing and eco-labelling, and there’s scope to do much more.

Consider the example of the Marine Stewardship Council that provides fishery and seafood traceability certification programs. The council’s eco-label is “only applied to wild fish or seafood from fisheries that have been certified to (the MSC’s) standard.”

It uses state-of-the-art DNA testing to ensure the traceability of certified seafood, resulting in mislabelling rates of under one per cent, an impressive statistic since mislabelling of seafood can average 30 per cent.

DNA testing is not applicable to all foods, but it is rarely used despite its potential in improving supply chain integrity.

In-person audits are ineffective

Most supply chain certifications draw only sparingly on the latest technologies. Instead, they rely heavily on in-person audits, which can be ineffective.

Our recent research has shown that technology-enhanced auditing can improve the timeliness and veracity of audit data collection and analysis, which can in turn strengthen the credibility of supply chain certifications advertised to consumers. In another study, we’ve further found that the COVID-19 crisis can help accelerate the use of technology in supply chain audits.

Technology can also increase the resilience of supply chains, so they are better able to respond to shocks like a global pandemic.

For example, technologies such as sensors, satellite imaging and cloud computing can improve visibility deep into the supply chain and improve co-ordination between suppliers and buyers. Real-time supplier monitoring can provide early warnings of potential problems such as working conditions, inventory shortages or production breakdowns.

These technologies cannot, of course, eliminate the possibility of future shortages, but they can make supply chains less likely to break.

Consumers can play a more active role in driving improvements throughout supply chains. Purchasing decisions are one key lever.

Consumer engagement is key

For example, consumers have indicated a willingness to pay a premium for products made under good working conditions, but the lack of trustworthy information on those conditions is a barrier. Consumers can also actively push for the sharing of more and better quality information to reduce mislabelling and other undesirable activities, such as the trade of endangered species.

Going further, consumers can get more directly involved in supply chain monitoring. For example, in addition to satellite imaging, Global Forest Watch has used crowd-sourcing to monitor forest change. Unilever, which makes dozens of products you’ll find at your local grocery store, has used Global Forest Watch to better understand deforestation in its supply chain.

Portable technologies on the rise

And in the near future, consumers might even be able to validate the content of food labels by using simple portable technologies. No matter how they engage, consumers need to take a more active role in promoting and demanding greater supply chain transparency.

The pandemic has more people thinking about supply chains than ever before.

This increased awareness presents a chance for consumers to become more engaged in where and how products they buy are produced.

Consumers need to push for more transparency and higher veracity information on where products come from, but they also need to take greater responsibility for what they buy and to participate wherever they can in supply chain monitoring.

Written by Anatoliy Gruzd, Ryerson University, Elizabeth Dubois, University of Ottawa, & Jenna Jacobson, Ryerson University. Photo credit Shutterstock. Originally published in The Conversation.

Users’ online activities can be reviewed by potential employers as a way to pre-screen job candidates.

As businesses around the world slowly start to reopen after being forced to shut down operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the graduates of the class of 2020 are sharpening their presentation skills and updating their resumes to look for employment opportunities. But will their polished resumes make them more competitive relative to their peers?

The answer may surprise you. In today’s digitally mediated world, well-prepared resumes may not be enough to make you stand out among hundreds of candidates.

Due to the increasing use of social media around the globe (especially now during #socialdistancing), many recruiters and hiring managers find social media attractive as a readily available source of real-time data to find and vet candidates.

Social media is used by potential employers to check job applicants’ qualifications, assess their professionalism and trustworthiness, reveal negative attributes, determine whether they post any problematic content and even assess “fit.”

Written by Frederic Dimanche, Ryerson University. Photo credit The Canadian Press/Paul Chiasson. Originally published in The Conversation.

Shoppers line up in front of a Zara clothing store waiting for the opening after being closed for nearly two months in Montréal on May 25, 2020.

Retail was in trouble long before COVID-19 hit. The past five years saw daily reports of store closures and retailer bankruptcies.

The growth of online commerce eroded many retailers’ top-line revenues, forcing them into an ongoing cycle of discounts and promotions just to keep up.

But even amid this debacle, direct-to-consumer brands increasingly expanded their physical presence. Warby Parker, the online eyewear provider, currently operates 65 outlets and Away, the luggage company, recently raised US$100 million to open 50 stores.

But when COVID-19 brutally put a stop to physical retail, many strained small- and medium-sized businesses quickly moved their business online, as shown by Shopify’s 47 per cent revenue growth in this year’s first quarter.

Customers previously reluctant to shop online placed their first orders, boosting e-commerce numbers proportionately.

Typically, it takes an average of two months before a new behaviour becomes a habit, adding more pressure on struggling brick-and-mortar retailers that don’t have good online offerings if they can’t get customers back in stores promptly to satisfy them. Some worry they might never recover.

Not all bleak

Nevertheless, all is not gloom and doom. After months of confinement and a surprisingly flawed online experience, people yearn to return to normal. The COVID-19 restrictions have exacerbated our natural need for social connection.

Despite being digitally connected, people crave face-to-face human contact. That’s evident in the retail activity in recently reopened countries.

At its Guangzhou, China, flagship store, Hermès registered US$2.7 million in sales on its first day.

In Paris, long lines stretched in front of the Champs-Élysées H&M store.

And in Montréal recently, dozens stood patiently outside a downtown Zara, eager to buy summer clothes. The urge to get out and socialize prevailed over safety concerns.

Some employees are similarly impatient to leave the house to resume work. While most office staff transitioned easily to remote work, some suggest COVID-19 has exacerbated the loneliness and lack of social interactions, despite companies’ claims of sustained productivity.

For retail staff who thrive on human contact, the situation has been difficult. Most are itching to return to their stores.

Personal human connection versus digital

Beyond the craving for social contact, the human touch is also what many retailers rely upon, especially in the beauty and luxury sectors, where sensory experiences are critical.

A recent PwC Consumer Intelligence Survey of 15,000 global consumers confirms what has been observed in countless shopper-retailer interactions: The human touch still matters, with 75 per cent stating they want more in the future, not less. Furthermore, most shoppers consider customer experience more important than price and product quality.

Similarly, in the hospitality and travel sectors, human contact prevails. When COVID-19 hit, personal connections with travel advisers helped hundreds of travellers return home after their flights were cancelled. Customers with e-platform reservations, meantime, struggled.

In the COVID-19 recovery period, physical stores are uniquely poised to offer this crucial human interaction. A 2015 study led by Marshall Fisher, professor of operations, information and decisions at the Wharton School of Business, clearly shows the importance of human interaction in retail, and its impact on revenues.

Yet in 2020, as retailers slowly reopen, they’re focusing on safety and hygiene protocols but continuing to fail to invest in their own human capital. Instead of recognizing the long-term benefits of devoting attention to their employees, they obsess over minimizing labour costs, leading to increased employee turnover and poorly managed stores.

With less traffic coming into stores, expectations from those brave enough to venture out are significantly higher, and retailers must invest in their teams if they want to stay relevant.

They could borrow from a Toronto bike store’s playbook that saw revenues double during COVID-19, the owners recently told me. Open less than 18 months, the Dismount Bike Shop team built a reputation for cutting-edge merchandise selection, precise product and industry knowledge and outstanding customer experience.

When the crisis hit, the company’s seamless pivot to online bookings with well-organized physical appointments helped achieve 100 per cent conversion rates.

Training is key

Product and industry expertise are not negotiable. Fisher’s study found that retailers who train their front-line employees sell 125 per cent more than those that offer no training. To overcome the current COVID-19 sanitation requirements and foster an authentic human experience, retail workers must also demonstrate specific interpersonal soft skills.

To do so within a no-touch situation means capitalizing on other senses to engage. From that initial eye contact and open body language to a warm welcome, empathetic and friendly communication is key. Companies that commit to training sales advisers to expertly sell products while demonstrating high levels of relationship-building skills won’t just attract and retain the best employees. They will also drive in-store sales and customer retention.

It’s time to stop considering employees as a cost and stores as showrooms. Instead, retailers should invest in their in-store teams and train them to become revenue generators. The human touch will define who the winners will be post-coronavirus.

Written by Joanne E. McNeish, Ryerson University. Photo credit Shutterstock. Originally published in The Conversation.

In an era of data breaches and privacy intrusions, the majority of Canadians want paper bills. So why aren’t organizations listening to them?

Once again a telecommunications company is telling its customers that they will no longer receive a paper bill. This time it’s Rogers.

What seems to some to be a non-issue evokes a strong reaction in others. When Telus eliminated paper bills, customers who prefer paper bills were shamed online. Others expressed solidarity with digitally disadvantaged groups or listed reasons why some consumers need paper bills.

But why do banks and billing organizations feel it necessary to stop sending paper bills and statements?

One reason is the cost to print and mail paper. Strangely, most of these organizations are highly profitable, generating healthy returns to shareholders.

The cost to send paper bills is negligible as a percentage of the service cost and the advertising and promotional budgets of banks and most billing organizations. Telecoms are not only profitable, but since they provide Canadians with internet services, they earn revenue from consumers using the web to access, pay their bills and download their billing information.

People like paper bills

Paper bills and statements have value to most consumers, especially those who bank and pay online. Research that I have been conducting since 2010 indicates that almost 90 per cent of online Canadians aged 18 to 90 continue to receive paper bills.

When I ask why, they indicate wanting control over their own behaviour, and some semblance of control over the organization.

They also want the paper bill as a reminder to pay. They say that e-reminders get lost in their digital in-boxes because they are busy people. This is also due to the lack of any clear indication on e-bills that differentiates them from other email correspondence or spam.

They worry that if the bill is only in digital form, they won’t review it, or they won’t notice errors. This could cost them due to mistakes made by organizations, overcharging for services that the consumers did not understand, charges for products or services they didn’t authorize, inappropriately high interest charges for late payment and other billing charges.

Memory is better with paper

Consumers also worry about their ability to understand complex financial information in digital form. Research studies done by financial and consumer lobby groups show that comprehension and memory are better when reading information on paper than digitally.

The levels of bankruptcy, household debt and outstanding credit card balances have never been higher in Canada.

The increase of online and mobile banking adoption by Canadians, and the pressure by billing organizations and banks to discontinue paper bills and statements, seems to me an important element of increasingly poor financial management by Canadians. In 2015, the Canadian government was so concerned that they introduced a financial literacy strategy.

Finally, and regardless of whether they are pro-paper bills or not, my research indicates that 57 per cent of Canadians who pay their bills online worry about their increasing dependence on large organizations if their information is only in digital form.

The Cambridge Analytica scandal, along with the increasing number of hacks, digital fraud and ransomware events, has taught consumers that no one is entirely safe online.

No proof?

Could one of the reasons be that banks and billing organizations don’t want external proof of transactions so they can reduce the ability of their customers to demand action from them?

Some of their service agreements make clear that customer information produced by the bank is the only authentic evidence of a transaction. Unlike the paper bill, which is produced by the bank, a digital bill on a consumer’s computer or phone, or printed from a PDF file, is not considered proof unless the bank or billing organization decides it is.

Paper bills and statements can also be shared openly and easily. Those who share a household and have responsibility for its financial well-being, and who receive paper bills and statements, can all share access to the information.

The information isn’t hidden away in the digital account of one person; it’s not restricted to the account holder. Sharing access by using paper also helps avoid the risk of being accused of participating in a fraudulent transaction that could ensue if someone shares the password to an online account.

Paper bill shamers say that it is easy to review financial information online, but they overlook the time and effort it takes to access online accounts, in part because consumers must remember various usernames and passwords. Two-factor authentication that some organizations are beginning to push offers another level of security against fraud, but also, more complexity for those accessing online accounts.

Trees at risk?

The virtual digital world is firmly planted in the real world of servers that require a tremendous amount of energy consumed in terms of running and cooling these machines. Paper producers plant more trees than they harvest. If the end game is no more paper documents, then the land used to grow trees could conceivably be sold off for use to create more and more server farms. In a time when solving the climate crisis is critical, this is not a satisfactory trade-off for me.

The war on paper bills and statements could be thought of as a war on personal financial identity.

Just as Facebook disrupted social interactions, consumers are realizing that their financial identity is at risk. Their identity is being subsumed in a world of software and algorithms.

If governments wish to protect their citizens financially, they should enshrine in law a requirement for companies and banks to send paper bills and statements. I encourage the CRTC to stop listening to the big voices of telecoms and starting listening to Canadians.

Written by Deborah de Lange & Dave Valliere, Ryerson University. Photo credit Shutterstock. Originally published in The Conversation.

Sustainable ventures can markedly contribute to Canada’s economy and employment with the right investor strategies to help them grow to medium and large size.

Urgent issues like the climate crisis, environmental degradation threatening millions of species, social inequality and other challenges mean that the global economy needs to immediately transform itself to become sustainable.

Sustainable start-ups are showing us the way with smart business models having economic, social and environmental value.

Toronto’s Ripple Farms is an example demonstrating the power of aquaponics to sustainably produce organic greens and seafood throughout the year. To connect urbanites with the land, the company’s business model combines product offerings with education on urban agriculture.

Similarly, Waterloo Energy Products sells a full range of residential and commercial renewable energy designs including geothermal, solar, LED lighting equipment, water treatment solutions and much more. By offering a one-stop shop at its Sustainable Living Centre, they have made renewable energy choices much easier for consumers.

Both firms bundle products and services in different ways with a potential to expand internationally.

Many companies in Canada’s sustainable sector have similar potential to export Canadian products and expertise around the world.

Finding the right investor

But Canada needs these firms to grow rapidly and substantially so they can create jobs that other unsustainable businesses are shedding as they become obsolete. Investors are key to accelerating this urgently needed start-up growth in Canada’s sustainable sector.

According to the United Nations’ seminal Brundtland Report, sustainable development should meet the needs of current generations without compromising the capacity of future generations, ensuring a balance between economic growth, care for the environment and social well-being.

These three main components of sustainable development are considered together, not as separate goals. Good governance is required to ensure and oversee all three of them.

In this complex business environment, finding investors to scale up new companies and, even more importantly, finding the right investors, is challenging. Start-up ventures burn through cash rapidly as they aim for a sale of the company — usually to other larger firms or on the stock market through an initial public offering.

Raising funds to grow start-up companies is an ongoing challenge that pulls management away from running the business. By finding knowledgeable, committed investors who understand the business, a firm can ease the constant stress of raising capital while legitimizing the company to consumers, clients and stock markets.

Unfortunately, sustainable ventures face additional challenges when it comes to investors compared to purely for-profit firms because they appear to have multiple competing goals.

Stiff competition

Sustainable firms often face powerful well-established competitors — renewable energy firms, for example, must overcome obstacles in a world entrenched in oil and gas.

People are hesitant about new technology even if it improves their lives. The choice between fossil fuels and renewables is not unlike trading a typewriter in for a laptop. This fear of uncertainty gives traditional firms market advantages that new companies must overcome.

Many sustainable industries still in technological development stages are also capital-intensive, meaning that they need a lot of capital upfront before they can demonstrate viability.

In addition to their unfamiliarity to potential stakeholders, some have experienced highly publicized failures, such as Solyndra, along the way to technological maturity. This can scare off investors.

Advice for sustainable companies

My colleague Dave Valliere and I recently tested a quantitative model using data on 184 entrepreneurial ventures. The analysis found that sustainable start-ups are better off choosing a different type of investor, one with aligned interests who can lend it legitimacy so that others will have confidence in it.

Perhaps surprisingly, it’s not so much angel investors as corporate venture capital that can help these firms grow. In this model, the corporation usually sets up a separate division that looks for investments of interest to it.

The problem for most investors is that the quality of a new venture is uncertain until after it has grown to a point where it is steadily increasing revenues and generating healthy profits.

A new venture needs to be novel enough to have a competitive advantage while familiar enough to be understood and accepted. As a result, many investors look for signs of the hidden potential of a venture. An example could be the quality of existing stakeholders in the venture, such as successful, high-profile members on the board of directors or the presence of professional investors.

Our study indicates that angel investors, venture capitalists and investment banks do not create confidence in sustainable ventures. It found that investment banks can even have adverse consequences for businesses in the sustainable sector that are seeking legitimacy.

Try a different strategy

A lack of confidence in bankers since the 2008 financial crisis could be playing a part. Usually, new ventures begin with angel investors and move on to venture capital and other types of more sophisticated financiers who can further develop and market the firm. Instead, we advise sustainable firms to use a different strategy and seek out corporate venture capital as it is uniquely more helpful to sustainable ventures.

The usual investment life cycle progression of a new venture — moving from angels to venture capital and then to more sophisticated types of investors — may not always hold.

A venture attracts additional capital by meeting an investor’s screening criteria, but the most recent investors matter too. Current investors can lend legitimacy to attract other investors. According to our findings, the sustainable sector gains that legitimacy with corporate venture capital over other types of investors.

This result suggests that the credibility of corporate venture capital plays an important role in the development of sustainable businesses.

A corporate venture capital firm may choose to invest in a venture with promising technology, even if the company has weak management or an unlikely strategy; sometimes, they just want to learn from another’s technology to help them make strategic choices about future technological options.

Positive reputation

If they’re interested in the venture as a whole, a corporate venture capital firm can replace the management and/or the strategy of the new venture after acquisition. While the corporation offers its target more resources and strategic guidance, it also gains due to the positive reputation of the new venture.

Overall, a corporate venture capital endorsement of a new venture and its potential acquisition suggests to the market that the company is poised to be a disruptive winner in the industry. Corporate venture capital cuts through the noise that often accompanies sustainability goals. Change is in the wind for an industry, and others want to jump on the upward trajectory.

Sustainable ventures can markedly contribute to Canada’s economy and employment with the right investor strategies to help them grow to medium and large size. Some of these startups are exciting in many ways. Most significantly, they will improve Canadians’ lives and ensure we have a healthier environment.

Written by Dr. Steven N. Liss, Vice-President Research and Innovation, Ryerson University. Originally published in Research Infosource Inc.

Knowledge creation and the headwaters of innovation are deeply embedded in the tradition of university research, scholarship and creative activities. Our students, research trainees and faculty increasingly bring new knowledge, ideas and innovations to the forefront of the most pressing issues facing our planet and our communities – creating opportunities to advance economic prosperity and quality of life.

In an innovation economy, the ability to collaborate, to compete, and to address complex challenges is key. By their nature, complex challenges transcend borders and require a willingness to work differently, to establish new combinations and types of relationships. This includes coopetition, breaking down silos to look horizontally, intensifying international partnerships in the face of geopolitical challenges, and recognizing the value of the intersections where innovation occurs.

Tackling challenging issues, such as climate change, immigration, advancing sustainable and innovative cities, and industry 4.0, requires us to look ahead while keeping in mind the fundamentals of knowledge upon which sound decision- and policy-making is created. Research provides the critical insights that can be leveraged to shape future directions and encourage aspirational and visionary thinking. We need the space to ask fundamental questions that address the grand challenges, formulate and test hypotheses, and determine who is in the best position to act on the outcomes of this work to advance ideas that can have impact. In many instances, there will be a time lag between efforts in deep technology and their results, which could conceivably have profound impacts on our lives.

Ryerson’s place at the centre of one of the world’s most diverse cities provides a unique lens through which to view and address societal challenges Ryerson is a leader in the transdisciplinary exploration of international migration, integration, and diaspora and refugee studies through the Ryerson Centre for Immigration and Settlement (RCIS). Ryerson also has Canada’s only graduate program devoted to the advanced study of immigration policy. Building on this foundation, in August 2019, we welcomed Dr. Anna Triandafyllidou as the Canada Excellence Research Chair in Migration and Integration where she leads a multi-faceted program to fundamentally transform approaches in migration studies, foster global collaborations, and impact policy and practice.

Our strategic partnerships are at the core of leading hubs for research and innovation. This has been key to the success of the Institute for Biomedical Engineering, Science and Technology (iBEST) and the Biomedical Zone (BMZ), in partnership with St. Michael’s Hospital.

The MedTech Talent Accelerator is an innovative training program co-designed with industry and supported by a Collaborative Research and Training Experience (CREATE) grant. The accelerator is led by Dr. Stephen Waldman of both Ryerson’s Department of Chemical Engineering and iBEST.

Dr. Kathryn Underwood’s partnerships, and support from SSHRC and CIHR, are addressing human rights and education practice, particularly with regard to disability rights and inclusive education. Her research in the School of Early Childhood Studies examines how constructions of disability in education and early childhood program contexts are used to organize children.

Dr. Ebrahim Bagheri is building technology that enables machines to understand social content the way humans do. As the NSERC/Warranty Life Industrial Research Chair (IRC) in Social Media Analytics and as a Tier II Canada Research Chair (CRC) in Software and Semantic Computing, his laboratory works in collaboration with partners to analyze large-scale digital “breadcrumbs” from user-generated data.

We are at the precipice looking beyond the horizon to chart pathways and directions for the future in a digital world at the Rogers Cybersecure Catalyst, pivoting in an innovation economy at the Brookfield Institute, and preparing for disruptions in the nature of work at the Future Skills Centre.

By encouraging brain circulation, setting a bold course and focusing on connections, collaborations and excellence, we can create evidence-based solutions and activate real-world transformation that will enhance Canada’s competitiveness and prosperity.

Written by Asmaa Malik & Sonya Fatah, Ryerson University. Photo credit Bank Phrom/Unsplash. Originally published in The Conversation.

Canadian newsrooms seem reluctant to share data on the diversity of their newsrooms but doing so would help hold accountable the fifth estate.

Over the past two decades, as Canada’s demographics have shifted, news organizations have failed to reflect the country’s increasing diversity in both content and staffing.

Research on media coverage of race-related stories on politics from scholars like University of Toronto professor Erin Tolley has highlighted how far newsrooms have still to go.

But in Canada, most print and digital news organizations have resisted processes to examine their staffing. The conversation on the impact of industry job losses on newsroom diversity cannot advance until fundamental questions about staffing numbers are answered.

Our new study aims to fill in important information about newsroom staffing by showing how the demographics of national newspaper columnists compare to the increasing diversity of the Canadian population.

When it comes to news, who makes the decisions behind the scenes is just as important as whose byline is on the front page.

While Canadian broadcasters are federally mandated to report on their workforce demographics, newspapers and digital publications have no such requirement. In the United States, several national news organizations, including the New York Times and BuzzFeed, have begun self-reporting the race and gender make-up of their newsrooms.

The American Society of News Editors (ASNE) has been conducting annual diversity studies of major newsrooms since 1978, allowing for the mapping of meaningful trends in how newsrooms hire, retain and promote journalists from diverse backgrounds.

“Counting gives us a starting point,” said Linda Shockley of the Dow Jones News Fund, which uses such demographic data to design training for U.S. journalists, in a recent interview with Poynter.

Racialized journalists drive diversity conversations

Recent conversations around diversity in media have been largely driven by racialized journalists, including the Toronto Star’s Shree Paradkar. Former Globe and Mail reporter Sunny Dhillon wrote about his decision to leave the paper after 10 years, frustrated by a continued editorial pattern of approaching complex stories through a “colour-blind lens.”

Columnist Desmond Cole stopped writing his twice-monthly freelance column for the Toronto Star after the paper’s editorial board editor barred him from his civic activism.

“If I must choose between a newspaper column and the actions I must take to liberate myself and my community, I choose activism in the service of Black liberation,” Cole wrote in a blog post.

There is little data on the breakdown of Black, Indigenous and people of colour (BIPOC) journalists in Canadian newsrooms. In 2004, Ryerson School of Journalism professor emeritus and former Toronto Star editor John Miller relied on voluntary participation for a survey on the demographic makeup of Canadian news organizations.

Some editors returned the survey empty; one scribbled across the page, “I find these questions insulting.” A few years later, Miller and Wendy Cukier, a professor at Ryerson University’s Ted Rogers School of Management, examined visible minority leadership at Toronto media organizations by using publicly available information and having it reviewed by researchers trained in employment equity.

Publications such as Canadaland (in 2016) and J-Source (in 2014 and 2017) have also sought voluntary co-operation from news organizations and individual journalists with limited results.

‘Self-reporting’ offers window into staffing

To address the failure to engage in self-reporting by many Canadian news organizations, our study looks at the section of the newspaper where journalists often self-identify: the op-ed pages. In the process of expressing their perspectives on the issues of our time, columnists often disclose their identities.

We focused on news, city, opinion page and political columnists as they are most likely to shape social and political discussions.

For our 21-year study, we looked at Canada’s three largest publications, the Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star and the National Post, narrowing the scope of our research to include only those who wrote weekly columns or a minimum of 40 columns a year. In the end, we analyzed the work of 89 columnists, beginning in 1998 with the birth of the Post and ending in 2018.

Using terms of self-identification found in the columnists’ own words, in their published work and on their social media posts, we categorized their race and gender by census category.

Examples of self-identification that we found include phrases from columns such as “I, for one (old WASP),” “I, middle-class white lady” and “(as an) affluent white woman.” We then compared the numbers with corresponding census blocks over the 21-year period to chart how closely, along the lines of race and gender, columnists at Canadian newsrooms reflect Canada’s demographics.

In the 1996-2000 census period, white people comprised 88.8 per cent of all Canadians, with two per cent Black, 2.8 per cent Indigenous, 2.4 per cent South Asian and 3.5 per cent East Asian. By 2016, the numbers changed significantly: white, 77.7 per cent; Black 3.5 per cent; Indigenous 4.9 per cent; South Asian 5.6 per cent; and East Asian 5.4 per cent.

Our preliminary research shows that this demographic shift was not reflected in the makeup of Canadian columnists. Over the 21 years, as the proportion of white people in Canada’s population declined, the representation of white columnists increased.

Between 1998 and 2000, 92.8 per cent of columnists at the Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star and the National Post were white, over-representing corresponding census statistics by four per cent. And during the 2016-18 comparative period, while overall representation of white columnists dropped to 88.7 per cent of the columns pool, those numbers over-represented against the census numbers by 11 per cent.

Over the period of our study, not one of the publications had an Indigenous columnist who appeared regularly. Only three Black men and no Black women met our criteria for columnists.

Upholding trust and accountability

Our preliminary findings are concerning. For more than two decades, the voices that these publications chose to give prominence to did not reflect the perspectives and interests of a large segment of Canada’s population.

Self-reporting on newsroom diversity would encourage a culture of trust and accountability, one that the journalism profession upholds in its role as a watchdog of public institutions.

We are working on the development of a self-reporting tool for Canadian newsrooms, with the hope that such a strategy will be seen by media outlets as an invitation for redress.

After all, it’s impossible for Canada’s newsrooms to address a problem they can’t see. We are concerned that for the many who refuse to co-operate, that just may be the point.

Written by Patrick Neumann & Cory Searcy, Ryerson University. Photo credit AP Photo/A.M Ahad. Originally published in The Conversation.

Bangladeshi child labourers work at a balloon factory in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Consumers must demand products made under favourable working conditions.

Halloween has just passed and your kids are probably still polishing off this year’s candy haul. As recently reported in the Washington Post, there’s a good chance that some of those chocolate treats were made using child labour. Would knowing that change your mind about purchasing that product?

What about reports of beatings and abuse of Bangladeshi textile workers sewing clothes destined for our closets? Should companies that produce goods responsibly be identified? How can consumers make the right choices?

Work causes more than 2.1 million deaths globally every year, whether it’s due to the child labour used in the production of cacao or electronics, or contract food preparation workers dying on the job in Canada. The costs of work-related injuries account for about four per cent of the total world GDP.

In fact, studies have shown that the costs of workplace injuries are on par with those of all cancers combined. A survey of more than 5,000 workers in Québec has found that one in five are suffering from work-related musculoskeletal pain, particularly shoulder and back pain, with women being affected in greater numbers than men.

Workplace injuries also erode companies’ profits. And this doesn’t begin to address the cost of mental health issues associated with work. Working environments should not cause pain and injury in employees — it’s bad for business.

Consumers also to blame

Bad work environments, and their associated burnout, injury, pain and fatalities, plague workplaces around the world. While it’s tempting to blame companies for egregious working situations, consumers should also look in the mirror.

Companies will provide you with goods according to your demands. If you don’t demand products made under good working conditions, then the all-too-common status quo — dangerous, dirty and demeaning conditions — is what you are supporting with your purchases.

Our research has shown that consumers, when asked, would prefer goods made in favourable working environments. When we interviewed millennials, they expressed a willingness to pay 17.5 per cent more on a $100 product for goods made under healthy conditions than those that are not. The main barrier noted in this research is access to trustworthy information about the working environments in production.

When we examined how 100 companies listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange are currently reporting on their working environments, we find almost 900 different indicators reported, with almost no organizations using the same indicators in their reports. This makes it virtually impossible for a responsible consumer, or a company seeking a responsible supplier, to compare practices and make informed choices. A standard for reporting is needed.

Recently the Canadian Standards Association has begun to lay the groundwork needed to create a standard providing advice and guidance to help companies report on their working environments in a consistent and comparable manner.

When you consider the complexity of characterizing all of the physical, mental, environmental and social dimensions of a workplace, it’s clear that creating a consistent reporting approach remains a challenge. Further work is needed.

Demonizing not enough

Demonizing companies with poor working conditions and operational practices is not enough. We also need to support companies with good track records and work to foster favourable environments in our own workplaces. For companies trying to communicate the quality of their workplaces, there is a need for clear guidance of what and how to report.

Without good reporting, consumers won’t trust companies, and the potential for consumers to become socially responsible disappears. Furthermore, a reporting standard would give companies with stellar workplaces a credible means to demonstrate their leadership to clients and customers.

There is a growing awareness that we, as consumers, can influence broad issues like climate change just by making smarter choices about where we spend our money. This is equally true for the working conditions of the people who produce our food and manufacture our products.

But we have not yet reached the tipping point of public opinion — and employees around the world are still literally dying for a paycheque.

Work shouldn’t hurt. The food we eat and the products we use should not be made in pain or contribute to human misery. While companies hold some blame, so do consumers who wilfully avoid dealing with the consequences of their purchasing decisions.

Access to reliable information on working conditions needs standardized reporting, and Canada is well-positioned to show leadership on this issue.

Without clear reporting, how are we to know about the conditions our food and goods are made in? Let’s make sure the chocolate we buy leaves no bitter aftertaste.

Written by Katie Lebel, Ryerson University and Ann Pegoraro, Laurentian University. Photo credit AP Photo/Eduardo Munoz Alvarez. Originally published in The Conversation.

Bianca Andreescu serves to Serena Williams during the women’s singles final of the U.S. Open tennis championships, on her way to making Canadian history.

Sometimes the stars align and allow for an unexpected, seemingly impossible feat to occur. But more often, a series of little things are done well over a length of time that put people in a position to succeed.

Bianca Andreescu has become a superstar. While it would be easy to attribute her two-week ride into Canadian sport history to divine intervention, there is evidence to suggest it’s the culmination of many years of hard work and dedication combined with countless little things done right.

From this lens, there is much to be learned from the recipe that produced Canada’s first grand slam tennis champion and insights that can help to guide us all moving forward.

What happens when word gets out

News stories about Andreescu increased 286 per cent after her Rogers Cup victory in August and were up another 214 per cent after her U.S. Open win. Her success undoubtedly created a moment of national celebration, but it’s also an example of how the media can and should cover women’s sport and promote the athletic achievement of female athletes with hype and enthusiasm.

Congratulations @Bandreescu_! 🇨🇦 You’ve made history and made a whole country very proud. #SheTheNorth https://t.co/W98v1lUN9o

— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) September 7, 2019

Viewing parties were held across the country. Celebrities voiced their support in droves, both before and after her victory.

SHE THE CHAMP!

Congrats, @Bandreescu_ 👏🏽#WeTheNorth x #SheTheNorth pic.twitter.com/QEugBwH24W

— Toronto Raptors (@Raptors) September 7, 2019

After record-breaking ratings came in for Andreescu’s semi-final match, Canada’s TSN sports network pre-empted a live Canadian Football League game to rebroadcast the semi-final performance in the lead-up to the championship match. Special pre-game coverage was broadcast to highlight the significance of the moment.

When @TSN_Sports broadcast priorities start shifting in favour of women’s sport ! 👏 #usopen semi-final re-air trumps live @CFL game 🙌 #wellplayed #SheTheNorth @WTA @TennisCanada @espnW pic.twitter.com/7pXQv25PUg

— Katrina Galas 🇨🇦 (@katrinagalas) September 7, 2019

These are uncommon occurrences when it comes to the coverage of women’s sport, yet they make an incredible difference in familiarizing audiences with an athlete. All the attention serves as a signal that they’re witnessing something important.

It’s An-dress-ku

While the initial arch of the Andreescu storyline left some media flat-footed, commentators quickly sorted out the pronunciation of Andreescu’s last name and were able to shape an intriguing narrative around the young Canadian phenom.

Bianca Andreescu’s appearance on Jimmy Fallon starts with Fallon pronouncing her last name wrong.

— Faizal Khamisa (@SNFaizalKhamisa) September 10, 2019

Commentators picked up on the success story of Andreescu’s parents immigration to Canada and the family’s adorable dog.

Bianca is sweating as much as Marc Gasol* in a playoff game right now

*NBA champion Marc Gasol

— Lior (@LiorKozai) September 5, 2019

The semi-final match featured a somewhat painful back and forth around differences in sweat production between the two athletes (and a baseless link to perceived fitness levels), but by the final, the discourse was more squarely focused around Andreescu’s mental toughness and her incredible athletic talent.

🎾🇨🇦💪 Remarkable athleticism and mental toughness by teen Bianca Andreescu to become a grand slam finalist. So many young girls are going to be inspired by @Bandreescu_ and #SheTheNorth, to chase their own dreams. #USOpen #gobiancago pic.twitter.com/YVe1Mwfc0W

— Susan King (@suki50) September 6, 2019

Language matters. Commentary centred around athletic performance provides credibility to women athletes more so than who they’re dating.

Coverage breeds interest

TSN reported more than 7.4 million Canadian viewers tuned in to watch Andreescu’s championship match against Serena Williams. On ESPN, the match boasted its highest-ever ratings for the event, up 13 per cent from the previous record. Audiences ate this story up.

According to Zoomph, a leading digital intelligence company, Andreescu’s victory generated 3.6 billion — yes, billion —impressions on social media, contributing to an impression value of US$19.8 million. That’s proof women’s sport can be both exciting and lucrative.

The numbers were OFF. THE. CHARTS. With over 25.3 million engagements and $253.2 million in impression value, this event was booming! https://t.co/aaVKXLUmxf

— Zoomph (@Zoomph) September 12, 2019

Seeing is believing

Professional athletes are often seen as role models, and mass media attention can be a catalyst for the promotion of sport participation at the community level. Andreescu has noted the influence of Williams on her career —one can only imagine the legions of youth who were inspired by watching her incredible achievement and the poise with which she carried out the accomplishment.

Just had an email from the Principal of my children's school, stating that Friday Sept 13 will be designated Bianca Andreescu Spirit Day and that the kids should come dressed in tennis gear.

The impact the @Bandreescu_ victory is making here in Toronto is colossal 🇨🇦❤️ #usopen

— Katie Spellman (@Spellman_Katie) September 8, 2019

To be sure, there’s no shortage of female role models in sport, but it’s rare that we have the opportunity to get to know them as fans. Brooke Henderson has taken the LPGA by storm and there will be an impressive collection of Olympians touring North America for the Dream Gap Tour over the next few weeks.

They’re among many women in sport who have incredible talent and remarkably inspirational stories to tell. It is an untapped market brimming with possibilities.

If you build it, they will come

On the heels of Andreescu’s win, Roger Martin, the former chairman of Tennis Canada, astutely pointed out the “bold strategy” the organization adopted in 2005 to overcome what he termed a “long track record of mediocrity.”

Martin described the evolution of an organizational philosophy based upon “higher aspirations and more distinctive strategies.”

This initiative was spearheaded by innovative approaches to infrastructure and lead by a patient team that had the wisdom to understand long-term investments take time to flourish.

It’s in this atmosphere that Andreescu’s talent was nurtured. It’s this purposeful strategy that has seen only one other country in the world produce more Grand Slam finalists over the past six years. (Genie Bouchard and Milos Raonic have made it to Grand Slam semi-final matches, and several junior players have won Junior Grand Slam finals in recent years.)

As women’s sports all over the world work to develop infrastructure, tennis’s example is worth noting. It’s not hard to envision grassroots tennis participation skyrocketing over the next few years and tennis events have become a branding juggernaut.

Andreescu proves that the combination of strategic infrastructure (including training facilities, coaching and support staff) and investment in women’s sport can produce big wins. The language we use to describe her success and the media’s continued coverage of her rise are lessons we should also keep in mind in the continued push for gender equity in sport.

Here's Tuesday's #BiancaAndreescu cartoon in @TorontoStar pic.twitter.com/SAN1QY6Uso

— Theo Moudakis (@TheoMoudakis) September 9, 2019