Too many mavericks are barely enough

Our Lead Analyst, Alex Hillman contributed to the Finding Nature newsletter considering the role of being a "Maverick".

I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about the role of big oil and liquified natural gas (LNG) in the energy transition. In fact, I used to say that the best part about my job as Woodside’s Climate Advisor was getting to learn about the energy transition and then using my role to try and convince Australia’s largest oil and gas company to reduce its emissions. This was an interesting time ‘inside the tent’ of Australia’s largest fossil fuel company.

But I left Woodside and I don’t have any regrets about that. I left for two main reasons. Firstly, in 2021, the International Energy Agency concluded that we no longer had any room for new oil or gas projects if we wanted to halt runaway climate change. My earlier belief that helping decarbonise the gas supply chain no longer felt like a useful contribution - we need less gas, not cleaner gas. Secondly, as Woodside started to realise the existential threat climate change posed to its business model, it became harder for me to advocate for change from within. If I wanted to drive meaningful change, I had to leave the tent.

So I left Woodside in 2021 and became an analyst at the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) - a non-profit shareholder research and advocacy group. We review the climate and business plans of companies and then work with investors who want to encourage better climate strategies from these companies. I’m only half-joking when I describe my job as debunking the reports I used to write. As part of this transition, I’m sure I’ve lost a few of my old Woodside friends.

So I’ve had plenty of opportunity to reflect on the drivers and barriers to change from inside and outside a large company. Whilst they’re informed by my time at Woodside, I expect they’re broadly applicable to other companies and sectors as well.

Do we need more Mavericks?

Corporations can be hot-beds for group think. Large organisations normally become large over multiple decades, so no matter how much they talk about being agile and innovative - they thrived in the world as it was, but may not thrive if the world changes. So they resist change and at times outright ignore reality. Taboo topics are often ignored.

To give one example, ACCR research (slide 9) has shown that Woodside underperformed the oil and gas sector over the last 3, 5, 10 and 15 years; whilst the oil and gas sector has itself underperformed the broader share market over the last 5, 10 and 15 years. This crucial insight suggests oil and gas production growth hasn’t been an effective way to create value, yet I never knew this as a Woodside staff member and my old colleagues often don’t believe me when I tell them.

But change is critically important. Scientists are telling us we’re breaching the planet’s boundaries and risking irreversible changes to our climate systems whilst our engineers and economists also tell us that it’s technically and commercially viable to mitigate this. And while amazing progress is being made on issues like electric vehicles and solar power, our companies and institutions are rarely the force for change that they could be.

I think it’s critically important that people speak up and challenge the status quo. One way to think about Mavericks is that these are the people who buck group trends. They speak their minds and make their own decisions. In a corporate setting, this can make a Maverick’s peers feel uncomfortable.

The Mavericks that I’ve respected in my career

I have deep respect for a lot of the people I’ve worked with and followed over the years - especially those that effectively drive change. I’ve seen lots of different ways this can be done. Some present a positive view of a different future, most have an intuitive understanding of who the key decision makers are, what motivates them and how hard they can be pushed. Others create the intellectual space for a different future by boldly criticising incumbents.

I don’t think any one of these approaches can single handedly create broad scale change. But all of them have a place and can reinforce each other. A company, for example, is more likely to change if it faces sustained criticism from civil society, is losing its political influence, and its staff have identified a way to profitably transition the business.

Do we need more Mavericks?

Most people agree that society faces some serious challenges. Almost by definition, the big problems we face, including my personal focus on mitigating climate change, are wicked problems resistant to simple solutions. The status quo has typically created these problems and we need to change things in order to fix them.

It’s institutions and individuals where these changes need to happen.

At the individual level, there’s a huge opportunity for people to take bolder stances in their careers. I’ve dealt with thousands of clever people in influential positions. It would be amazing to see more of them speaking up in their workplaces, criticising superficial and self-serving justifications for business as usual, promoting issues they care about, quitting jobs that they don’t believe in, and taking the risk of moving into different sectors or organisations that are genuinely helping.

I’d love to see more institutions being bolder. Institutions, including companies and institutional investors, are hugely powerful in our society and without their support, making change is cumbersome, if not infeasible. So we need organisations to support and drive change too.

Tips for budding Mavericks

Your career is probably the most powerful tool you have to make the world a better place. Be deliberate about your values and how these inform your career goals. Develop the skills that allow you to get there. This could mean formal education, or within a large organisation you can probably move between roles to develop transferable skills.

There’s a huge information asymmetry between the corporate sector and those that are meant to hold it to account, such as government regulators and civil society organisations. So the skills you developed within a large organisation may be most effectively used to hold that organisation to account from the outside. This is certainly true in my move from big oil to ACCR.

Don’t become financially dependent on a large salary. If you want to be free to buck the trend and make your own decisions, it will be a lot easier if you have the flexibility to move to another job. Even if you don’t make major career changes, having financial freedom provides an additional layer of confidence to take risks, stand your ground and speak up where you think it matters. This comes down to really practical things - do you really need that boat, can you postpone a new car?

So am I a Maverick?

I don’t think I’m the best-placed person to judge this, but I can comfortably say I’ve made up my own mind about what’s important and I’ve tried to stick with it. I speak my mind if I don’t agree with or understand what’s happening. I can be impatient with insincere people or those who bluff their way through issues they don’t understand.

These characteristics probably haven’t helped me get promoted, but I certainly don’t regret them. I see them as a key part of my personal integrity.

While people responded to me leaving Woodside with a range of different reactions, probably the bit of feedback I was most proud of was that I’d normalised staff questioning the status quo.