Category: Features

Professor Suzanne Rab on how AI is changing justice and the workplace – and why it threatens humanity

Advances in technology, brought to the fore during and in the wake of COVID-19, have reignited the debate about how such developments may remove barriers connected with access to justice. The rise of artificial intelligence or “AI” promises significant advances for humankind. As both a barrister specialising in human rights and an educator I see the opportunities and the challenges. One area as yet underexplored is whether our humanity is being lost in this process.

The technological advances I observe build on the field of artificial intelligence or “AI” as a discrete phenomenon which has its origins in a workshop organised by John McCarthy held at Dartmouth College in 1956. The aim of the workshop was to explore how machines could be used to simulate human intelligence. Various disciplines contribute to AI including computer science, economics, linguistics, mathematics, statistics, evolutionary biology, neuroscience and psychology. A useful starting point is a definition offered by Russel and Norvig in 2010 where AI is defined as computers or machines that seek to act rationally, think rationally, act like a human, or think like a human (see Box A below).

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is characterised by four features

Acting rationally: AI is designed to achieve goals via perception and taking action as a result

Thinking rationally: AI is designed to logically solve problems, make inferences and optimise outcomes

Acting like a human: This form of intelligence was later popularised as the ‘Turing Test’, which involves a test of natural language processing, knowledge representation, automated reasoning and learning

Thinking like a human: Inspired by cognitive science, Nilsson defined AI as “that activity devoted to making machines intelligent, and intelligence is that quality that enables an entity to function appropriately and with foresight in its environment”

Box A. What exactly is Artificial Intelligence?

So how does the above apply to the law? An effective civil justice system supports and upholds the rule of law where the law must be fair, accessible and enforceable. Yet, as things stand, there are well-documented barriers to accessing justice. In England and Wales the Legal Services Research Centre (LSRC) commissioned a series of surveys between 2001 and 2011 inviting more than 5000 participants to explore whether they had experienced problems in accessing justice. Cost is a major barrier where the LSRC found that less than 30 per cent of individuals who recognised that they had a legal problem sought formal advice (LSRC, 2011). There are other non-financial barriers including mental health problems, immigration status and discrimination.

Technological Breakthroughs

AI and other advances in technology have been used extensively in legal practice and provide opportunities to deliver and access legal services in ways previously unimaginable and represent the nearest that the legal world has come to sci-fi.

Predictive analysis draws on big data to forecast the outcome of a case and advises clients whether to proceed, effectively substituting an individual lawyer’s experience, assessment and intuition. The term ‘Big data’ has been coined for the aggregation, analysis and increasing value of vast exploitable datasets of unstructured and structured digital information. Decisions founded on such tools could result in outcomes which are much cheaper than pursuing cases with limited prospects of success.

However, this is likely not a silver bullet. The use of predictive analysis to access whether an outcome is likely to be successful may be inaccurate because of a number of factors. One problem is that the number of cases decided out of court means that predictive analysis based on reported cases will cover a small subset of actual disputes. The accuracy and value of AI relies on how software is programmed and machines learn bias based on past experience. These examples can distort the data collected. Relying on predictive analysis to advise clients whether to proceed (potentially, saving time and money if a case is unlikely to be successful) may be flawed due to lack of a statistically significant dataset. Secondly, inconsistencies in algorithms could mean that critical data is not being collected. Thirdly, the software may not be able to work out the finer subtleties and variations involved in some cases. In such cases, relying on predictive analysis to advise clients may be flawed because it misses the ‘human factor’.

Virtual solutions do allow cheaper access to ADR and a number of innovations can be observed where online solutions (whether mediations, arbitrations or hybrid early neutral evaluations) are involved. Advances in technology have unleashed automated document generation or information provided via chatbots in order to provide free or cheaper access to legal information.

New means of searching for law are emerging. ROSS intelligence was developed to free up lawyers’ time so they could devote this to other tasks, potentially pro bono. DoNotPay represents another channel for delivery of free legal advice. This chatbot was invented in the UK by Joshua Browder. By March 2017, assisted users had overturned 200,000 parking fines in London and New York. There are however practical limitations of chatbots regarding more complex areas of law. Lawyers may be unable to audit the accuracy of forms submitted online (and update them when required).

New Opportunities

While it may be difficult to contemplate at least at the current times that machines will replace lawyers, developments in technology have the potential of reshaping some parts of legal practice. While this raises a number of legal, moral and ethical issues this phenomenon opens up new vistas and opportunities. For consumers of legal services, these innovations allow greater and more diverse access to legal services.

Given the need to be well versed with technology to engage in effective outcomes, it may be asked whether and to what extent it would be useful in technology-led dispute resolution for members of the judiciary to have legal technology programmes. Related to this is the question of how the judiciary leverages support of law schools to develop such executive learning programmes.

COVID-19 has shown the legal sector lags in terms of digitisation despite its ambition to bring the sector into the digital age. Law schools which have developed online learning will be able to transfer their head-start to support the judiciary but there also needs to be an investment in systems. While that is happening, support can be given in the area of legal technology skills training. This will support at the skills level but also assist with overcoming any technology phobia or reticence. On the whole, in the author’s view, the experience in England and Wales has been positive in terms of the alacrity of the judiciary to embrace technology.

A related issue in terms of capacity-building and skills adoption concerns access to the underlying technology and infrastructure. The ideal of high-speed internet access within and across the jurisdiction is not universal. COVID-19 has revealed the disparities in access to affordable, consistent and reliable internet within and between nations. As the daughter of a diaspora, I do not forget my roots in the Indian sub-continent. Not only the judiciary but most lawyers and clients in India do not have access to high speed internet. Where courts do not have the infrastructure for online hearings this simply means that trials do not take place, adding to backlogs. There are anecdotal examples of cases being filed using WhatsApp. The judiciary and practitioners can perhaps work not just with law schools but engineering and software departments to initiate online filing software pilots and then have relevant executive programmes around this.

Humanising Legal Education and Practice in a World of Hi-Tech

Information and access to information are critical to knowledge acquisition and human education development. Lockdown and social distancing during and in the wake of COVID-19 have meant that information technology devices have taken on a new or increased significance. Computers have kept the wheels of business and social discourse turning, and for many they have been the main or only source of information on everything from the weather to the availability and safety of vaccines.

This umbilical attachment to technology in the quest for knowledge and connection raises questions about the need for a new equilibrium between protecting individual freedoms and wider national interests in the context of the global digital information society. AI is being used in almost every area of life from fintech, to robotics and telecoms (see Box B on AI and Fintech, AI and Box C on Robotics and AI and Telecoms).

AI and Fintech

AI and Robotics

AI and Telecoms

A balance has to be struck with sensitivity to respect for human rights including private and family life, home and correspondence, the peaceful enjoyment of possessions, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom of expression among other rights. Freedom of expression includes the right to receive and impart information and freedom from discrimination in the exercise of such rights, while recognising that the exercise of these rights carries duties and responsibilities.

The European Convention on Human Rights and other international instruments sets out minimum conditions for the legitimacy of any interference with individual rights. Broadly speaking, any interference with fundamental rights must be prescribed by law and necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety, the economic wellbeing of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

It is hard to dispute that there has been a seismic shift in the development of technology prior to and ongoing through COVID-19. This shift has in some respects allowed for mitigation of some of the worst shocks of dealing with the immediate emergency, yet it raises a question as to how, if at all, this has affected our humanity.

December 2018 heralded The transHuman Code in Shenzhen, China. This was described as: “informing and engaging all citizens of the world about the dynamic influences of technology in our personal, communal and professional lives, The TransHuman Code was formed to redefine the hierarchy of our needs and how we will meet them in the future”. Further endorsement followed with the “The TransHuman Code Davos Gathering of Minds” at the World Economic Forum in January 2019. This event introduced the world’s first digital “person” and first digital book signing”. In May 2019, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) published the first, internationally agreed principles on human-centred, trustworthy AI reflected the democratic values of the OECD members.

Information and knowledge (whether it is formal education or ‘fake news’) built on minimal or cheap labour, where it does not reflect the cherished values of the rule of law and fundamental rights and where it its used for oppression or excessive profit, is a threat to our humanity. While the internet knows no geographic boundaries, human rights protection in this borderless hi-tech world remains largely a matter for individual states and is perhaps the next existential threat beyond COVID-19.

If you want to know more about these summary findings, and further research projects in the area, as well as upcoming publications, contact Suzanne Rab (E. srab@serlecourt.co.uk; M. +44(0) 7557 046522).

Professor Suzanne Rabis a barrister at Serle Court Chambers specialising in regulatory and education law. She is Professor of Commercial Law at Brunel University London, a law lecturer at the University of Oxford, and Visiting Professor at Imperial College London. She is an expert panel member of the UK Regulators Network, a member of Council of the Regulatory Policy Institute and a non-executive director of the Legal Aid Agency.

August 18, 2021

Finito Course Director Derek Walker on how to ace a job interview

Despite developments in technology over the last two decades, interviews remain a critical part of almost all selection processes for graduate-level jobs. The pandemic has accelerated the trend away from in-person interviewing with the result that in some cases all stages of the selection process are held virtually.

Since 2008, I’ve provided guidance to hundreds of students on preparing for interviews with leading graduate employers. In this article, I wish to share insights and conclusions from this experience, which I hope will help students prepare for any interview, whether in-person or virtual.

There are many different types of interview, but essentially all selection processes will combine three elements, which combine like the three legs of a stool. In the first place, employers want to know whether the candidate has the required level of technical experience, knowledge or aptitude required to do the job. Secondly, employers need to be sure candidates have the right level of motivation. They need to understand why the candidate wants to do this job and why they wish to work for this particular employer. Finally there’s the question of whether the candidate will be a good “fit”. Will the candidate be able to work effectively within the organisation, and be an amenable colleague who existing employees enjoy working with?

In my experience, if the employer has any doubts about any of the three legs of this stool, then it can’t stand and a job offer won’t be made.

So how can candidates prepare?  In my view, the easiest way to structure any interview preparation is the same way as for a major exam.  That said, students generally have far more time to prepare for exams – frequently they receive less than a week’s notice for some interviews.

So, even before a candidate submits an application, they need to think about what the interview process involves in order to ensure they have time to prepare. In my opinion, many candidates fail because they leave the preparation too late, meaning they don’t perform to their potential, even though they might have been a great candidate with sufficient preparation.  The irony is that most students put in weeks of work for an exam, which, if they fail, they can usually resit.  For an interview, which has a binary outcome (and no resit!), many candidates prepare for a few hours at most, often leading to under-performance and failure, which has arguably a much greater impact on the student’s future career.

So early preparation is key.  When preparing for an exam, students frequently seek out previous exam papers to ensure they can answer sufficient questions to the required standard.  They spend weeks revising their course material and refining their exam responses.  The same approach to interviews is also likely to lead to success. Students cannot assume that they know their CV better than anyone and that they can blag their way through an interview without preparation.

So, how to prepare?  Think of 10-15 questions you’re likely to be asked.  Why this job/firm?  How are you qualified?  What are the likely developments in our industry in the next five years?  Etc etc.  Use websites such as Glassdoor and Wikijob, as well as classmates and university careers services to build up an understanding of the typical interview questions and other parts of the selection process.  Begin by jotting down the key points you’d wish to make to respond in the interview.  Ensure you read quality relevant business press – The Financial Times, The Economist, Marketing Week, any relevant trade journals, and websites.

After this, practice delivering your responses out loud. Record yourself on your phone and watch it back – you will find this excruciating at first but you will get a great impression of how you look and sound. Don’t try to memorise long responses – you will sound stilted and mechanical.  Work with friends to help each other – you will gain confidence as well as tips that you can use. Most importantly, find seasoned professionals to provide mock interview practice – these can be university careers professionals, or practitioners from your target industry.  Above all, make sure the first time you try to answer an interview question isn’t in the real interview – it’s almost inevitable that you’ll fail.  However, if you’ve practiced responding to 15-20 different questions confidently, you’re more likely to be able to produce a good response if an interviewer asks you something you haven’t specifically prepared for.

Virtuoso musicians and elite sportsmen practice daily for several hours for something at which they are already a world leader.  They wouldn’t dream of walking onto the stage at the Royal Albert Hall or Centre Court at Wimbledon without hours of preparation, including some on the day.  The same approach usually pays dividends for most interview candidates.

August 17, 2021
Opinion: Covid-19 has exposed ‘systemic failings’ in university system

By Garrett Withington

Throughout the pandemic most university students have had no need to go and see their educational stomping ground let alone occupy the buildings for educational purposes. What’s interesting is that many have graduated and passed their studies regardless. This begs the question: “Are the current practices of universities antiquated and only kept to provide a veneer of prestige?”

Education has remained a hot topic throughout the pandemic. There have been questions throughout as to whether it is right for pupils to return to school and how to carry out assessment. But from the perspective of university students there’s really been one question. Should we pay full tuition? The answer more often than not is: Why should we?

Actually, it isn’t just a pandemic-specific question. The fact that we’re asking this speaks to fundamental concerns about our current educational structures.

As a recent graduate in the humanities from a ‘Russell Group’ university, an epithet itself which is meant to garner prestige, my experience may vary greatly from others who studied in engineering or medicine, and may obscure interpretations of what is considered ‘value’ for a degree.

Regardless, for those in the humanities like myself, there has been little value to justify the cost. There have been inaccessible facilities. Lectures have e=been reduced to the equivalence of a YouTube video or podcast. Meanwhile, in-person seminars have been replaced by Zoom meetings where you are greeted with a panel of awkward stares of disinterested students who want nothing more than to go for a beer.

None of that’s to the good, but is it really that much worse than what we had before the pandemic? Then we had sprawling lecture theatres in which you listened to the drowned sounds of a person reading off a powerpoint (though for full disclosure, I did benefit from a few inspiring lecturers). Crammed seminar rooms discussing theories whose application to the real world was always questionable. Most students waited nervously to be picked from the line-up to answer a question, and hoped for it all to end – again, so that they could go for a beer.

Try to think of another industry in which people would be willing to pay so much for so little. Half of the depressingly low ‘contact hours’ are made up of lectures, an inherently non-interactive exercise. So why shouldn’t there be an option to just view a pre-recorded video so as to provide students a greater flexibility in the structure of their learning and pursue more extracurriculars or internships? The Open University has already demonstrated that more resources can be moved online, yet established campus universities remain reluctant to do so outside of their libraries.

The internet’s endless number of resources has democratised learning, further chipping away at the validity of a closed university learning experience. Their red brick buildings instead act as monuments to times gone by. What’s more, the main value of universities are their clubs, which are more often than not run and financed by students themselves. Value at university then, is to be found in the opportunities provided by third parties who use universities as a platform to network.

Unsurprisingly, a report by the House of Commons Petitions Committee argued against the need to reimburse students for their tuition during Covid: it felt like an attempt to quell future arguments of tuition. What we really need is to ask a more existential question about university as a whole, and why there are such low expectations all round. Students often complained about the re-use of lecture slides during the pandemic -though in truth this was commonplace well before Covid.

It might be that I am an outlier. For instance, over 80 per cent of students are said to be happy with the quality of their course according to the National Student Survey 2020. If these statistics are accurate, then I would ask many students to reflect on their time at university and ask themselves what true ‘skills’ they developed in three years that are applicable to the real world. Social life has become a common argument as to why many go to university, but FOMO – Fear of Missing Out – shouldn’t be a reason for pursuing higher education. Many universities do not even include first year grades to the overall degree award.

There are now 1.8 million undergraduates in the UK, and with the Blair era’s insistence on 50 per cent of secondary students going to university – a policy kept by the Conservatives – the degree itself has been devalued. Soon it will be the Masters that becomes the standard-bearer with universities effectively bribing students to sign up to Master courses in return for slashing third year tuition fees – all before receiving their final grade.

Education is vital to individuals and society, making it all the more important that it be regularly scrutinized. Covid has not proved to be a unique year in ‘value’ of education but instead exposed the systemic failings of universities. The reality has dawned on many that they are able to recreate the learning experiences from the comfort of their own bedroom. Covid provided the perfect opportunity to widen the debate surrounding universities beyond tuition fees but it appears that this will not happen. Instead students will continue to be used as cash cows and placated by endless supplies of alcohol. Will they ever ask the question: “Was it all worth it?” To paraphrase, Boris Johnson when he announced lifting Covid restrictions: “If not now, when?”

August 16, 2021
Culture Essay: What we can all learn from cricket

by Robert Golding

In the post-war period, my grandfather used to go to Lord’s and the Oval every year without fail. In his later years – he died in 2013 – he’d tell me about the time he watched the last innings of the great Australian batsman Don Bradman.

As the story goes, Bradman needed to score four runs to finish his Test match career with an average of over 100. He received a guard of honour and the most sentimental version of the story claims that he was still wiping the tears from his eyes when his second delivery by Eric Hollies bowled him. He would finish with the famous average 99.94.

The story is well-known. But what I particularly remember is the civility of cricket as my grandfather recalled it. In those days, if you suspected you had trapped a batsman leg before wicket, you would witness the delivery, mull the possibility of an appeal, and then, on the way back to bowl, politely enquire of the umpire: “How was that?”

In little details like this, we realise how fast the world is changing. Today, a typical appeal will involve frenetic shouting of Howzat!, and an utterly theatrical despair if the appeal is turned down. The way the sport is played today reflects a society which wants it all – and, to paraphrase, that well known cricket fan Queen guitarist Brian May – wants it now.

Our cricket, then, speaks to the society we’ve become. Alongside these developments, cricket has grown exponentially as a professional sport – as every other sport has also done. Many of these activities – including billion-dollar industries like football, tennis and golf – were invented to supply activity to the Victorian gentleman liberated from drudgery by the Industrial Revolution.

Suddenly everyone had a weekend to fill. The growth of village cricket and other pastimes might also be put down to something more mundane: the invention by Edwin Budding of the lawnmower in 1832. This, the year that Goethe and Sir Walter Scott died, feels like one of those hinge years when a whole way of life cedes to another. Without Budding’s invention, the English summer with its sound of leather on willow, its players in cricket whites moving towards the batsman ‘like ghosts’ as the poet Douglas Dunn observed, and its sense of the day unfolding with relaxed culinary predictability – sandwiches for lunch and cake for tea – would have been impossible.

WG Grace is usually credited with being the first professional cricketer.

2020 feels like just such another year, and it finds cricket also at a crossroads. Today, if you type the phrase ‘cricket jobs’ into Google, you’ll discover a bewildering array of options – although applying for many them appears to contain the implicit stipulation that the applicant be extraordinarily good at cricket. At time of writing, jobs are already being advertised for player coaches and coaching and talent specialists for the coming season in Australia. Although many of the ads require the applicant to have played at a high level of cricket, most also require significant administrative ability.

Expansion and growth in the sport has been driven in recent years by the Indian obsession with the sport. Photo credit: By Jms1241 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=42650055

In addition, as cricket has become more complex, the number of roles of a purely administrative nature has also increased: ads for operations officers, and brand managers abound. In addition, there’s even an ad for an umpire manager posted by Queensland cricket. The job description explains to applicants that they will need to ‘develop and implement strategies designed to attract and recruit potential umpires across the state’ while also ‘building and overseeing a network of appropriately skilled people who can provide umpire training and assessment.”

The ads in Australia are a reminder of the international nature of cricket, but they also point to the great hinterland of people who are talented at cricket, but no longer able to consider playing professionally. Or perhaps they never were never in the running.

As cricket has resumed, I’ve had a sense that this is a sport peculiarly suited to post-pandemic life. Yes, it’s always been international which rather goes against the grain of our travel-restricted lives this past year. But it’s also one of the remaining sports which are really to do with stasis and patience – qualities which we have been forced to learn during the pandemic.

That’s not all. It was John Arlott who in his great book on Jack Hobbs asked himself what made Hobbs great and decided it was his “infallible sympathy with the bowled ball”. When I mentioned this to Jonathan Agnew recently, he looked delighted at the remark, and nodded vigorously: “Yes, yes, I like that. That’s what cricket’s all about – and it’s also why I don’t like football.”

Jonathan Agnew is a reminder that many careers exist today beyond the traditional playing routes. Picture credit: By Blnguyen – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1376670

This opens up onto the essential civility of cricket. It is what makes it, beyond other sports, relevant to our wider lives – including our careers. We wouldn’t speak of the spirit of football, or tennis, or golf: but we can and do talk of the spirit of cricket.

It is, in fact, an essentially democratic sport. For instance, the phrase ‘good cricket’ refers to a passage of play where typically, a good delivery has been bowled, a fine shot made, engendering in return a skilled piece of fielding and wicket-keeping. Usually in such moments, the actual score hasn’t been advanced but something has been achieved by both teams together.

It’s this civility, and undercurrent of decency, which creates a sense of hiatus from the stress of the world, and therefore makes the sport an ideal way to switch off. Sir David Lidington recalls how the sport sustained John Major in his time in office. “To John, cricket remains a great solace, a place where he can switch off, and cares fall aside for a time,” he tells us. Most famously, Major, having lost the 1997 General Election to Tony Blair, declared he was off to watch the cricket: one could feel his delight.

Former prime minister John Major enjoying his retirement at a cricket match

For many of us therefore, cricket has been a dimension almost beyond capitalism, and certainly beyond the cut and thrust of politics. It is this notion of cricket as a protected zone of our lives which accounts for the indignation at the rapid commercialization of the sport, especially by the IPL and The Hundred.

But perhaps we should be careful about saddling cricket with a Victorian flavour forever. Major himself was no classist as Lidington points out: “What was true about John was his absolute commitment to social mobility and loathing of snobbery.” One cannot imagine Major ever minding, say, Ben Stokes’ tattoos; one can only imagine him delighting in his talent.

So now cricket enters a new phase, where an international test championship hopefully heralds the beginning of a new purpose for cricket. It may also be that we’ve been reminded of the importance of the slow. I’ve no doubt my grandfather would have heartily approved.

August 13, 2021
Zavfit founder Anna Freeman on why we need a new approach to spending

By Patrick Crowder

Zavfit is a new tool that is designed to help you spend your money in more productive ways. Unlike other money-saving apps, Zavfit is designed not only to discourage excess spending, but to encourage you to reinvest that money in other more beneficial areas.

The full version of the app securely connects to your bank with view-only permission in order to monitor spending. Then, the app will ask you to rate your happiness with each purchase on a sliding scale of satisfaction. This data is used to track your wellbeing as well as to set spending and saving targets based on areas which need improvement.

It’s all the brainchild of founder and CEO Anna Freeman. Through her background in finance, tech, and sport, Freeman found strong links between financial stability and mental and physical wellbeing.

“I grew up competing in sport, so I’ve always had a passion for health, wellbeing, and fitness which has only grown over the years,” Freeman says. “What I hadn’t realised when I was in the tech and finance industry was that worrying about money is the global leading cause of mental health issues.”

As mental health awareness increases, largely due to the pandemic, the finance industry has begun to take financial wellbeing into consideration. While this is an improvement, Anna believes that it needs to go a step further.

“Most of the solutions in place are focused on the wellbeing of your finances, as opposed to actually addressing that stress and anxiety that people feel with their money,” Freeman continues. “I knew that we needed to create a health tool.”

Zavfit offers a free “MoneyFitness” quiz, which asks the user how happy they are with various aspects of their day-to-day spending. This includes questions about post-purchase regret, satisfaction in work, social spending, charity, and physical fitness. I took the quiz myself and despite my mediocre score, the questions got me thinking about how I prioritise different aspects of my spending and how to reinvest that money on better things.

“The stereotype of being good with money is ‘saving is good and spending is bad’, but ‘save, save, save’ doesn’t really recognise the present and taking care of yourself,” Freeman adds.

In my case, I found that I am probably spending a bit too much on nights out and not paying good enough attention to my physical health. Rather than simply staying in and saving cash, the philosophy behind Zavfit would suggest that I invest the money saved on a fitness class.

Freeman believes that focusing spending on healthy, fulfilling hobbies and interests can have a big impact on both financial and mental wellbeing. Freeman’s outlets are singing and sport, so she decided to put her resources into those areas.

“I remember walking down the road in the sunshine one day and thinking, ‘I have stopped spending on anything else’,” Anna said, “and that’s because I had found those things which really took me out of my head and lifted me up.”

The pandemic has given many people a chance to think about their wellbeing and break the cycle of habit. Freeman sees this as an opportunity to step back and make important changes moving forward. “There’s been a massive reset on everything, particularly on spending. There’s an opportunity here to think about things differently and to think ‘Okay, I’ve set out what’s important to me, I’m aware of my mental health and that it needs looking after’.”

As the link between health and finance continues to be explored, new ideas like ZavFit can help push the conversation forward to find fresh approaches to the age-old problems of money stress and non-beneficial spending. Breaking bad habits is never easy, but ZavFit proves that this is both achievable and essential to personal wellbeing.

August 12, 2021
Johanna Mitchell on the US families relocating to the UK

The global pandemic has sparked an increase in our cousins from over the pond relocating to London. Why?  To access in-person schooling for their children. In the US, in both 2020 and to date in 2021, education provision has been in flux.  When UK schools were re-opening in September of 2020, US schools remained firmly closed, with most operating some form of online learning.

With the advent of Covid-19, it dawned on every parent and employer how much their livelihood and sanity depended on institutions placed too often in the background:  the nation’s schools.

For parents with flexible workplaces, deep pockets, or those able to open an arm of their existing US-based company in the UK, relocation to London for their offspring’s schooling was a no-brainer. For some families, this will be amount to a sojourn of a year or so, until their US schools are fully open again.  Others will stay longer.  As in the UK, US parents found it tough to juggle home-schooling with the demands of work and career. Families buckled under the strain that online learning had placed on the mental health of their children, and themselves, and a move to London schools was a welcome relief.

US families value London’s broad offering of schools and curricula.  Although the American School in London (ASL) in St John’s Wood is the holy grail for many US families, many are opting for British schools or English/ French bilingual schools.  This is particularly true of families with younger children, who are less concerned about changing curriculum and whose children are not close to exam years.  International schools offering the International Baccalaureate (IB) are sought after, not least because the IB has become the go-to curriculum for students on the scholarship route to US universities. All US colleges, including Ivy League, value the IB’s emphasis on research and its multidisciplinary focus. Some US colleges are offering top IB students a fast-track option to skip a year of their course, a huge draw for parents hoping to save a year of prohibitive college fees.

As we have a shared language, it is often assumed that the UK and US education systems are similar. This is not the case. The UK has more nationally-assessed exams and the early years approaches are different.  For children from aged four upwards, the US system is more play-based, whereas the mainstream UK system is focused on learning to read and write at a young age. To guard against culture shock, we recently placed the five-year old daughter of a family relocating from Los Angeles in a Montessori school in Hampstead.  The gentler Montessori approach was more aligned with her early years’ US education experience.

As I write, the expectation is that all US schools will be opened for the Autumn of 2021.  This current academic year has been inconsistent. Some schools opened, others operated a hybrid model (part in-person teaching, part online), some only offered remote learning. Generally speaking, the more “conservative” states, such as Texas, have been focused on maintaining, or even mandating, in-person instruction, while the more “progressive” states have offered hybrid options and made in-person learning optional. For example, on Long Island, most schools returned to some form of in-person instruction, but it was rarely mandatory and often hybrid with some online component.

A year later, the Covid-19 pandemic has changed education in America in lasting ways. Although most US families expect a return to the uniform, in-person teaching model for the coming academic year 2021/2022, some US school districts are developing permanent virtual options in the expectation that, post-pandemic, families will plump for remote-learning – even for their younger elementary/primary school offspring.

Relocation to London to access British schools has been the preserve of an élite, well-heeled tranche of US society. But we cannot ignore the reality that Covid-19 has been a tragedy for many students, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds. Stories of kids who have melted away from education, dropped out of college, or gone hungry abound equally in the UK and US. We have been forced to question the efficacy and relevance of our existing education systems.  The pandemic has unleashed a wave of accelerated change in education. This wave will continue to ripple out and to have a permanent and transformative effect on education systems in both the US and the UK.

The writer is the Director of Lumos Education in London.

August 11, 2021
Opinion – Work-from-home must be an option going forward

By Patrick Crowder

Now that restrictions are lifting, hopefully for the last time, there are mixed feelings about returning to work. Some are looking forward to it, some are concerned about catching Covid, and others simply don’t see the point. For those who crave the structure that a traditional office provides, that should always remain an option. But for those who dread the idea of getting back to their morning commutes, increased flexibility in the workplace is essential.

Research from the global workplace specialists at Instant Offices shows that 90 per cent of office workers “want more flexibility in where and when they do their jobs”. That doesn’t come as much of a surprise – who wouldn’t want to choose their own hours and work from anywhere? Now that people have seen that their jobs can be done effectively from home, it will be difficult to return to rigid office hours without good reason.

According to Instant Offices, 44 per cent of people looking for work are refusing positions that do not offer sufficient flexibility. This means that some workplaces may need to shift to at least a mixed home/office approach in order to employ enough qualified professionals to operate.

Not everyone is going to want to work from home. It can be particularly difficult for parents of young children to have a distraction-free home office. Space is always an issue, especially in big cities such as London where young professionals often live in smaller accommodation.

Others enjoy the structure and feeling of community an office provides and feel that they work better in an environment of like-minded people. Some even enjoy their commutes as the back-and-forth bookends the work day allowing them time to leave their work life at work and home life at home.

We know that working from home is a more comfortable solution for some people, and happy employees are generally more motivated and productive than one unhappy with their working situation. On top of that, Instant Offices’ research shows that 41 per cent of office workers believe that they are not only as productive, but more productive from home than they are in an office.

People will always work to their full potential in different ways, and that’s a good thing. Giving employees the option to work from home if they choose does not mean that nobody will come into the office to run the ship. Instead, companies will be able to reduce the size of their offices saving their employees time and themselves lease money.

Companies must realise that people are unique in the ways that they get things done, and when everyone is forced to follow the same format, there will be a dip in productivity. Now that working from home has become normalised to a degree, a rigid return to the ways of old will only anger current employees and drive away potential new ones. There will always be a place for the traditional office, but it is time to allow the people who enjoy the WFH life to work to their full potentials.

For more on the Instant Offices research go to: https://www.instantoffices.com/en/gb

August 10, 2021
Stuart Thomson: Covid-19 will hit the young hardest – especially in the world of work

There is no doubt that young people have been hit hard by Covid-19.  Unless businesses and government take immediate and decisive action then the long-term consequences will be enormous.

The All Party Parliamentary Group on Youth Affairs recently held an inquiry into the economic impact that Covid-19 has had on young people.  It found that young people have felt the impact on their financial, emotional, and vocational wellbeing. The report highlighted the educational disruption and financial pressures alongside an impact on mental health.  Alongside this pretty bleak picture, they provided seven key recommendations including:

“Provide additional support and opportunities for young people and employers to ensure that they are “work ready” on leaving full time education, and equipped with the skills to manage, training and support new workers”.

The emphasis may often be placed on schools, colleges and ‘the government’ to help equip people but it should also apply to all types of roles across the public and private sectors. In other words, the problems are being encountered by everyone.  There are no exclusions.

Some employers may have support systems and mechanisms in place, but they are not always designed with the needs of young people or the types of damage inflicted by Covid-19. Maybe the emphasis on support for younger employers is new.  Financial support is, for instance, often more about pensions and savings and not always totally relevant to new entrants.

The APPG report noted that some employers are delivering ‘upskilling’ so there are good examples out there.  It also says:

“The Government should pay particular attention on how both educators and businesses can be active partners in providing opportunities for young people.”

But there is nothing to stop this sort of link-up happening at a local level as well and it may better reflect the needs of the local labour market. Too much emphasis on central government may deflect attention from more effective action.

‘Educators’ should also include universities as well.  The higher education sector is not always viewed favourably by this government.  The 2019 Conservative Manifesto proposed plenty of changes.  If universities are looking for ways to better support their students and improve their reputation with government then the post Covid-19 environment could be ideal.

There are organisations out there providing support to employers to help rectify the impact on the young of Covid-19.  None has to go it alone which would be completely daunting especially for small businesses. Big businesses often have the teams in place but the wide range of advice and help available will be especially needed by small businesses.  And maybe they are better placed to help post Covid-19 because of the speed at which they can move?

Government has put schemes in place – traineeships, apprenticeships, and the Kickstart programme – but membership and representative bodies, recruitment consultants, and other groups have come together to help deliver and prepare for work.

But young people themselves can see where they need help and support as well.  It is not just about getting people into work, although that is critically important, but also about helping them in the workplace.

Younger employees are going to make sure they don’t lose out as organisations work out what their own new working arrangements are.  On one level it is understandable why organisations will focus on the vast majority of their more established team members.  But they are potentially undermining their futures if they ignore this key group. It would also be counter to the types of support many proclaim loudly so there is a reputation aspect they need to be aware of as well.

The competition for the best talent could become even more fierce after Covid-19, those best prepared and with the experience that will be even more sought after.  But we also need to ensure that the crisis does not allow some employers to fall back on old discredited behaviours, those of ‘who you know’ or the tendency to exploit when firms themselves are under significant cost pressures.

We all have a role in helping the young to recover from the impact of Covid-19.

August 9, 2021
Food and drink: The post-pandemic return of the literary lunch

The words ‘literary lunch’ have a certain allure which may not be entirely due to alliteration. As the pandemic continues to retire itself from view, Costeau has seen the invites begin to trickle back – not with the traditional thud on the doormat, but with the ping in the inbox.

First up was Sir Alan Duncan, whose gossipy diaries have made a stir of late – particularly on account of his late night venting against colleagues when a minister.

Costeau turned up at the function at the University Arms, Cambridge to find something like the pre-Covid literary world restored. In fact it was somewhat of a hybrid event: books were on sale, and there was an air of excitement about ‘meeting the author’.

Costeau recalled all those lunches, pre-pandemic. One such occasion involved those nominated for the TS Eliot Prize, who had been dutifully lined up signing their books, trying not to register queue envy if a fellow author had attracted more fandom. Costeau saw that the line for the late Dannie Abse was a bit shorter than the others and duly deposited himself in front of him. Our conversation was underwhelmingly emblematic of these occasions: “How do you know my work?” Abse said, wearily. “I read some of your poems in the London magazine.” “Oh.” Abse shrugged his shoulders with palpable exhaustion. The poet died soon after, and Costeau has ever afterwards hoped that the event wasn’t the last straw.

Duncan went at the occasion with considerably more vim – his manner throughout positively thespian. That’s the thing about the literary lunch: it actually best suits a certain kind of Conservative politician. At a similar recent occasion Costeau saw Lord Ed Vaizey, though promoting no book, speak without notes for an hour. He gave the impression which Michael Gove also gives on such occasions, that there is no topic on earth for which he doesn’t have a 20,000 word speech readily to mind.

The paradox is that the collision of real writers with the public can sometimes be a stilted affair. Costeau recalls the late Christopher Hitchens speaking at a lunch in Oxford University. Having stayed overnight, the polemicist moaned about the quality of the beds: ‘They can’t stop you doing it, but they can certainly make it less fun.” Throughout his talk, he smoked the cigarettes and drank the whiskey which together would kill him, as if they were a lifeline from the tedium of the occasion.

On the other hand, mere readings – as opposed to lunches – plainly have their limitations. Attending such occasions can be dispiriting, and the experience is brilliantly satirised by Sam Riviere in his recent debut novel Dead Souls. In that book, everyone in the room offers up dutiful ‘words of praise’ – and this absence of risk kills the occasion without anyone even knowing it.

Duncan wasn’t exactly on edge at his lunch. He spoke to the assembled literati with a cheerful eloquence, even taking a moment to lambast a reviewer in The Guardian who had picked the book apart the weekend before. But he knew his audience would be favourable – it’s in the nature of the literary lunch.

In literary circles there’s a lot of talk about how readings don’t sell books, because they keep reader and writer at too much of a distance. In Costeau’s experience, literary lunches with their more intimate arrangements, do sell books as there’s a sense of greater connection, and therefore obligation between the relevant parties. Duncan himself wisely circulated the room offering to sign copies, thus engendering a minor guilt among those who hadn’t taken the plunge.

The literary lunch shall return, if only because there’s a perennial fascination about writers among people who don’t write. It is, after all, a very unusual and counterintuitive thing to set aside years of one’s life – really one’s whole life – to making marks on paper. The desire to meet and observe these unfortunate creatures is understandable.

The phrase itself retains a certain allure, conjuring associations of a Wildean and witty lunch where because other people sparkle, we sparkle as well. It’s essentially an aspirational thing – to do with bettering ourselves. That’s why the comeback, if it happens, shall be welcomed by Costeau: if ever there was a time to sparkle and really enjoy the possibilities of life, it’s now.

August 6, 2021
Gina Miller: “There’s a new kind of presenteeism in the workplace”

The fact is that after Brexit, we’d been living in lockdown for about three or four years anyway because we’d stopped going out. The attention generated by Miller I and Miller II had meant that life had become pretty restricted. Anyway, we carried on as normal and what changed is that the not so pleasant people we were busy dealing with had their own life and so they let us alone.

However, it all popped up again with the anniversary of Brexit, and I had forgotten actually how horrible it is to be on the receiving end of this kind of abuse. It doesn’t really get to me – but I had forgotten how nasty it can be.

But we’ve had a time of reflection, and society is now coming to a point where everybody’s wondering what they’re supposed to do with these supposed new freedoms. Family life has changed. Everybody had got to a place where home was almost an afterthought – even though it costs so much money. The challenge is going to be finding the balance as we move forwards.

What I find very interesting is that the UK is in a dilemma over remote working, whereas other countries have already decided their approach. For example, in New York, the authorities have that said if you can eat out, you can work out, and so they’re encouraging people to go back to the office. That’s happening across Europe and in Asia as well. It all comes down to productivity, and how you get that up and working from home works better in some sectors than in others.

I work in wealth management, and I think for professional settings – and I include lawyers, accountants, and bankers in this – there’s so much that you learn by watching people and seeing how they make decisions. It’s also a question of mentoring and asking ourselves how we bring on the juniors. Business-owners will realise that you can’t do that remotely.

But the reality is that each profession – and each business – is going to have to make up their own minds and I don’t think we’ll see a holistic view of how we work for the future. But it also raises other issues, many of which people aren’t thinking enough about. One of those is pay. For instance, if people are using more of their own energy and electricity and they’re going to be at home, do we need compensation structures for that? Many companies had travel allowances before. Will we now have a home allowance? That needs to be resolved.

Then there’s the question of human resources. How do you actually assess progress? The problem is that if progress is going to carry on being measured by outcomes then that could actually create all sorts of other discriminations, as you’ll find output varying a lot according to home circumstances.

That opens up onto a topic I’ve become especially concerned about, which is presenteeism at work – that’s to say, people showing up at work and being unable to be productive. For parents – and for women, in particular – it was fantastic during Covid-19 that you could be at home so much. But for professional women we’re beginning to see data that they’re already thinking of going part-time or giving up work. That’s because at home, they’re still the mum and the wife, and they’re having to do an awful lot more. Middle management women, or women in senior management roles, are working late into the night once they finish their domestic day. They’re working until two or three o’clock in the morning, and we shouldn’t be surprised if such people experience burnout.

So you have a concerning situation whereby presenteeism at the workplace is being replaced by presenteeism at home. It’s disturbing to me that we’ve fought so long to get into the workplace, and to push the diversity agenda, to consider the unintended consequences here: if we’re not careful, we might undo all that work very quickly.

We’ve got to look at this business of virtual mansplaining. Do we want a world where women are being left out of team meetings and pitches, and we have male workers go: “Well, we know she’s really busy in the day, they’ll pick it up in the evening?” Of course, not, and we’ve got to be mindful that that’s happening in order to prevent it.

August 5, 2021