north west
Pulse
JUN-JUL 2026
Business in focus
Your summer flex Avoid staff legal action
Regional news
From the heart of the business world
Latest updates
Inside this edition
Cumbria construction giant gives back to local communities
The cost of toxic leadership at work & how to avoid it Why prospects say "not now" in face-to-face sales Why workplaces should get on board with the value of care Why Brits can no longer bank on banks When your workplace doesn't match your ethical outlook: the 'moral injury' problem National Minimum Wage welcomed as positive for businesses and workers The four-day week won't happen overnight but it could transform life & work Insurance experts warn corporate events may carry hidden liabilities Thinking of joining a co-working space? Four ways to make the most of it
56
Click a headline to jump to an article
46
Feature
Fuelled Group relaunches as Really Honest UK engineering leaders likely overstating AI impact: report Innovate Tax launches data management platform to transform project delivery
Regional
Focus
68
49
32
21
News
Your summer flex: avoid staff legal action
16
4
28
37
12
by
66
42
18
Have you ever heard the word compoface? It’s a term that people on the internet coined to describe those news article photos of people glumly staring into the camera after suffering some sort of grievance or other – usually at the hands of an authority like the council or police. There they stand, frowning (the “face” part) with folded arms or clutching a fine like it’s a last-place school swimming certificate, secretly happy with the financial reward (the “compo”) they’ve received from the local rag for their story. And the best part is, whatever happened is usually the compoface-people’s fault anyway. With space to fill and advertisers to attract, one of the classic go-to tabloid compoface stories is when parents take their children out of school during term time to go on holiday. You see Steve, Stacey and little Saskia from Slough stare deep into your soul with a story about a £160 penalty for their spring sojourn to Sydney. And to be fair, if you’re spending upwards of £2,000, what’s £160? But unlike Steve and Stacey, most people aren’t so willing (or can’t afford) to take their children away from their valuable learning time – let alone appear in a dignity-draining press shot for a quick buck. It means that those parents need to use their leave during school holidays, which can become a problem. Not just for them, but also for their employers. No doubt you can relate to that – especially right now. Risk For small business owners, these long summer breaks often mean making some head-scratchingly difficult staffing decisions. You have a job to do, targets to hit and money to make, yet everyone has their various legal rights to leave of absences and personal obligations to fulfil. You and your management team have to navigate it all while staying compliant and keeping staff morale high. Not easy. And the smaller the business, the less likely there is to be a dedicated in-house HR expert – which increases risk. So, you’d think that huge organisations with thousands of staff – including legal experts – would be safe, right? Not if we look the case of Sylwia Gwiazda, a Royal Mail postal worker from the Nottingham area. Claim A few years ago, she asked her line manager if she could take two weeks’ unpaid parental leave so that she could extend a trip to Poland. The response was a firm “no.” The line manager protested that the team was far too busy to lose another head for a short time, and that it meant they’d have more than six people on leave at once, leaving them far more understaffed than usual. You may be thinking that so far, that sounds pretty reasonable. If there are clear policies in place and everyone knows that no more than six people can be off at once, then the manager was right to give that reply. But here’s where the slip-up happened. As Gwiazda had the right to take unpaid parental leave – and her employer had the right to deny it under such circumstances – the law states that Royal Mail needed to offer her alternative dates instead. That should have taken them no more than seven days. But instead? It came a staggering 38 days later. Under the Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations 1999, Royal Mail “lost the right” to postpone Gwiazda’s leave request, and the tribunal awarded her £3,700.77. If you’ve ever worked for a similar giant organisation before, you’ll know how slow and lumbering they can be to make such decisions and take action. But you can guarantee that they have experts in-house who know about the fine details like that seven-day turnaround. Meanwhile, at SMEs without an HR expert? That’s far less likely. Flex It’s just one example that shows how school holidays are a challenge and it’s easy to make a mistake. We also want to avoid causing misunderstandings and frustrations with staff. But what can we do about it? Readers of a certain vintage may remember a TV ad about “your flexible friend” (for the now-discontinued Access credit card, in case you’re racking your brains). Today, we can apply that phrase to flexible working. It’s 2026, so a lot of people now expect there to be some level of flexibility with work. It’s not possible everywhere, of course, but we have to accept that these are the times we live in. And it just might be the best way to overcome your holiday headaches. You could offer options that suit your organisation, like compressed hours, where staff work longer Monday to Thursday so that Friday becomes an official non-working day, for example. Less-strict start and finish times can help parents manage childcare easier, or you could offer remote work – especially useful for those not fortunate enough to have the funds for daycare or grandparents who could help out. In fact, flexible work doesn’t just help your people. It’s great for your business, too. The boost to morale and work-life balance tends to lead to both greater productivity and staff retention rates. And according to a 2025 survey by HR insights platform, New Possible, “flexible hours (75%), remote work (62%), and extra holiday (48%) top the list of benefits that employee’s value most.” So, if you’re one of those old-school-9-to-5-unpaid-extra-hours kind of bosses, think on. But remember, not everyone is the same. Some people might work better on site and need to escape the noise and drama that might be at home. That’s okay, just be flexible. Best Yet there’s being accommodating, and there’s being a doormat. So, we’ll wrap up with a reminder of some best practices to follow. Make sure your policies and procedures are up to date and watertight. Get everything in writing and be strict about it, like the maximum number of people who can be off at once, how much notice they need to give, which times of year have non-negotiable attendance, and so on. Use software or a shared calendar and be fair. Don’t always prioritise parents’ leave over those without children. Everyone is equal and your written processes should reflect that. Above all, encourage annual leave. Humans are not robots with an endless supply or energy. A happy, engaged and well-rested team (both physically and mentally) is worth more to a company than many employers realise. Then, if one of your staff does one day appear in a news story, they should be wearing a smile from ear to ear – and not the dreaded compoface.
By Advance Copy
01772 782925 07970 066559
You will probably recognise toxic leaders when you encounter them. They are the ones whose presence shifts the atmosphere, whose emails create unease, or whose behaviour limits the thinking of others. They often interrupt, frequently overlook contributions and hamper other people’s growth. While this behaviour is often seen as unfortunate but acceptable, the impact on employee wellbeing is corrosive. Leadership shapes not only what people do, but how they experience their work and how they see themselves. In other words, leaders are responsible for the psychological environments they create. Research has highlighted leadership as a central influence on employee wellbeing. Unfortunately, most employees report having experienced at least one toxic manager at some point. Even well-intentioned leaders may, at times, engage in toxic behaviour that diminishes others. Our new research shows consistent declines across all dimensions of the wellbeing of employees who report to toxic leaders. Results from 273 employees highlighted negative impacts on emotions, engagement, relationships, meaning and accomplishment. The most pronounced effects showed up in their mindset and physical health, and affected employees said they experienced less enjoyment in their work and less sense of purpose. From a psychological perspective, our findings are concerning. Positive emotions, engagement, healthy relationships, meaning and accomplishment are central to humans’ ability to thrive. Without these, work becomes something to endure rather than a context for growth. These experiences rarely remain confined to the workplace; they tend to influence broader aspects of life. The happiness of employees has been found to have an impact on an employer’s bottom line – employees who experienced joy at work achieved 25% higher sales per hour, according to one analysis. In fact, research has found that having emotional needs met, feeling valued and doing meaningful work could even be stronger predictors of performance than pay. How toxic energy spreads Leaders contribute to the energy of a workplace through their everyday interactions in what is known as “emotional contagion”. This is the process by which emotions and moods transfer between people through everyday interaction. When that energy is toxic, it can spread through teams and organisations, shaping how people feel and relate to one another. The good news is that emotional contagion works both ways. Our research also looked at something known as “positively energising leadership” (PEL). This offers a way of understanding leadership as a force that enhances the capacity of others. Positively energising leaders are capable of producing extraordinary results and can drive positive outcomes in the workplace. These leaders can be defined by two dimensions. The first is relational energy– the kind of energy that arises through interaction. For example, a manager who greets team members by asking about their weekend, listens to the answers and remembers them the next week can generate more relational energy in three minutes than a leader who sends dozens of emails over the course of a day. Unlike physical energy, relational energy can be created and shared through attention, connection and presence. The second is virtuous behaviour. This includes expressing gratitude, demonstrating integrity, offering support and treating others with respect. Taking time to listen to colleagues is a powerful way of building connection and strengthening relationships. For leaders, there are three key practical implications. The first is to approach interactions thinking about how you might help the other person feel capable and valued. The second is to attend to your own wellbeing. The third is to invite feedback on your impact, asking employees how you can be a better leader and enhance their wellbeing. This information allows you to refine and enhance your leadership skills. For employees working under a toxic leader, the situation is more difficult. However, there are a few things that you can do. Where possible, seek out positive relational energy from other sources: supportive peers or colleagues in other teams. This can buffer the negative effects of a toxic leader. It is also helpful to allocate time for recovery and small wellbeing practices outside the work context. Finally, consider raising your concerns through trusted people like coaches, mentors or HR colleagues. It is important to reflect honestly on whether you will be able to sustain your performance and wellbeing under a toxic leader. Leadership is expressed through everyday moments. In every interaction, leaders contribute to an environment in which people can thrive or one in which they feel diminished. These moments shape whether workplaces become spaces where people realise their potential or just places they must endure.
DRL Plant Hire Ltd Unit 5, Chapel Hill Industrial Estate Longridge Preston, PR3 3BU
Kristina Shea PhD Candidate, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences Christian van Nieuwerburgh Professor of Coaching and Positive Psychology, RCSI University of Medicine and Health SciencesKim Cameron Professor Emeritus of Management and Organisations, Ross School of Business, University of Michigan
The cost of toxic leadership at work & how to avoid it
PLANT HIRE Mobile Cranes Lorries Telehandlers
0151 521 1641
daisychaindaynursery.co.uk
0
Challenger insurance broker Fuelled Group has today relaunched as REALLY HONEST®, introducing what it believes to be the first formalised no claims discount for SMEs in UK business insurance, outside of motor trade and long-term agreement structures. The No Claims Discount rewards businesses with a reduction on their premium for every claim-free year. The principle is straightforward: loyalty should mean something, especially in business insurance, a market that has historically offered clients little incentive to stay beyond inertia. The launch coincides with a full re-brand, including a new identity and website at reallyhonest.co. The name reflects the company's founding conviction: that business insurance has long been complicated on purpose, slow by design, and written by people who have never had to make a claim themselves. Founded in 2018 by Steven Darrah under the name Fuelled, REALLY HONEST has since helped protect thousands of businesses and holds a 96% renewal retention rate and a loss ratio of approximately 1% in its core tech segment. Steven Darrah, CEO and founder, said: "The insurance industry has spent decades hiding behind jargon and small print. We built this business because we believed there was a better way. "The name REALLY HONEST isn't a marketing line. It's a standard we hold ourselves to every day." REALLY HONEST serves growth-stage SMEs across tech, professional services, specialist food and beverage, specialist retail, and creative sectors.
A Cumbria construction giant is launching a new fund to tackle poverty, provide skills and training, and promote wellbeing in local communities. Flimby-based Thomas Armstrong (Construction) Ltd, incorporating award winning Washington Homes, will support projects making a difference in the areas where it operates across Cumbria. Managed by Cumbria Community Foundation, the Thomas Armstrong Construction Community Fund will give grants of up to £2,000 to not-for-profit organisations in communities near their head office and sites where they and Washington Homes operate. These currently include Flimby, Workington, Maryport, Whitehaven, Cleator Moor, Gilcrux, Millom, Moor Row, Penrith and Wigton. Organisations should be working to create opportunities for people to escape poverty, providing skills, education, and training to help individuals achieve their full potential, or promoting better health. Philip Hoyles, Deputy Managing Director of Thomas Armstrong Construction, said: “At Thomas Armstrong Construction, we are keen to forge stronger links with our communities. “Establishing the Community Fund is our way of giving back to the areas where we live and work, supporting local projects that make a real difference to people’s lives. This initiative reflects our commitment to social responsibility and our desire to help create a positive, lasting impact across Cumbria.” Dr Jenny Benson, Director of Programmes & Partnerships, said: “We’re delighted that Thomas Armstrong (Construction) Ltd have chosen to create a fund with Cumbria Community Foundation. For more than 25 years, we’ve been the trusted philanthropic partner of businesses who want to give back to the communities they serve. “We have a deep understanding of the county’s needs and look forward to ensuring this money makes the biggest difference possible.” To find out whether your organisation or project might be eligible to apply for a grant, or to apply, go to the fund page. Priority will be given to projects that improve the lives of children and families in need of extra support; offer inclusive activities and reduce isolation; promote better mental health and wellbeing or build stronger, more resilient communities. For more information, contact Grants and Programmes Officer Lisa Blackwell on 01900 820828 or lisa@cumbriafoundation.org.
PLC SCADA Industrial Automation Control Systems Engineering
Control Every Process. Optimise Every Outcome.
Scottlewis2005@gmail.com 07793 842028
Providing ADR licensed chemical and powder transportation since 2012
Why prospects say “not now” in face-to-face sales
In face-to-face sales, that response quietly kills more conversions than outright rejection. Research referenced by Harvard Business Review suggests that 40–60% of deals are lost to “no decision”, and more than half of those happen because the customer hesitates rather than choosing a competitor. For campaigns supported through Credico UK, that moment matters because it rarely means the offer is wrong. More often, it means the decision didn’t feel safe enough to complete on the spot. They’re still trying to work out the bit underneath the offer: what exactly am I agreeing to, what happens next, what does this look like tomorrow, and how easy is it to change my mind if I need to? If those parts aren’t obvious, people don’t usually argue. They delay. It costs them nothing, it keeps things polite, and it buys them time. That’s the real leak in a lot of programmes. Not a dramatic failure. Quiet hesitation, repeated all day, until the numbers don’t stack up. Credico UK has already touched on some of the psychology behind why sales conversations land or don’t land, but here we’re offering something slightly more practical: the moments that make customers hesitate, and what strong teams do to remove them. Hesitation isn’t mysterious. It has tells. If you listen closely, hesitation has a sound. It’s “I just need to think about it.” It’s “I’m not sure.” It’s “Let me check with my partner.” It’s “Can I do it later?” Sometimes it’s a question that isn’t really a question, more like someone buying time: “So… how does it work again?” People aren’t being awkward; they’re trying to avoid regret. And let’s be honest, they’ve been trained to be cautious. Everyone’s heard stories about pushy selling. Everyone’s been burned by something that looked simple and turned into admin. Even confident people don’t like feeling rushed. Online, that caution shows up as bounce rates. In person, it shows up as “not now”. And face-to-face has a quirk that matters: it happens in the middle of life. Not in a quiet room with a laptop. People are on their way somewhere. They’ve got a message coming in. They’re thinking about dinner. They might be with friends. They might be in a hurry. So the margin for confusion is tiny. If your explanation leaves gaps, the gaps don’t sit quietly. They turn into delays. Where teams accidentally create hesitation Most of it comes down to the way the conversation feels to the customer. Reps should be warm and friendly, whilst also being clear, predictable, and easy to understand. A few common tripwires show up again and again. Sometimes the offer is genuinely good, but the explanation comes out long-winded. What should be a clear summary turns into a bit of a download. You can almost see the customer trying to hold the pieces in their head. That tends to happen when reps go heavy too early: extra detail, feature dumps, and language that sounds like sales language instead of normal language. Not because the rep is bad, often it’s because they’re trying to be thorough. But being thorough at the wrong time feels like effort. Then there’s the “okay… but what happens now?” problem. You’d be surprised how many customers are basically ready, but they’re still unsure about the next step. Not the big picture, the immediate mechanics. What happened today? What do I get as confirmation? Who contacts me? When? What if I need to change something? How easy is it to stop? If that isn’t clear, people don’t say “I’m worried you’ll be a hassle later.” They just step back from the decision. And sometimes it’s not even about the offer or the process. It’s the context. Public settings make decisions feel exposed. Some people don’t want to be seen deciding. Others feel awkward saying no, so “not now” becomes the socially easiest route out. If a customer senses even a hint of pressure, that awkwardness doubles. That’s why the best reps don’t “handle objections”. They remove the reason for the objection to exist in the first place. What great teams do (and why it works) High-performing teams make the decision feel safe to complete. Not by being soft but by being clear. They don’t try to win the moment with charisma. They make the moment easy. You’ll notice it in the way they speak. They don’t sound like they’re performing. They sound like they’re helping someone make sense of what’s in front of them. They also don’t force the customer to do mental gymnastics. A simple discipline that works in the field is keeping the early explanation tight: What it is, in plain English What happens next, in plain English Not ten benefits. Not a backstory. Not the entire product sheet. Just enough for the customer to get a clean handle on it. Then, instead of guessing what the customer needs, they give the customer control over the pace. That can be as simple as: “Do you want the quick version, or shall I explain it properly?” “Would it help if I told you exactly what happens after this bit, so you’re not guessing?” “We can keep it simple. What’s the one thing you’d want to be sure about before you decide?” Those lines work because they lower the social pressure. The customer feels respected. They feel like they can say yes or no without being judged for it. And here’s a key point: control is calming. When customers feel in control,they don’t need to delay to protect themselves. They can decide. Consistency beats brilliance A lot of organisations get caught in the “star rep” trap. One rep smashes it because they’re naturally good with people. Leadership then tries to bottle their style. But style doesn’t scale. You can’t build a programme around personality. What scales is a consistent way of making the decision feel straightforward. That’s especially important in outsourced-led models like Credico UK, where outcomes depend on aligning multiple partner teams around the same customer experience standards. That’s not the same as scripting everyone into robots. It’s standards. The same clear explanation. The same clean description of next steps. The same tone around customer choice. Because inconsistency creates doubt. If one rep explains it one way, and another rep explains it differently, customers feel it. Even if both explanations are technically correct, the customer senses uncertainty. And uncertainty triggers… delay. That’s why mature programmes coach the “what happens next” explanation like it’s part of service delivery, not an afterthought. Customers shouldn’t have to pull that information out of the rep with extra questions. It should be offered calmly, before the customer has to ask. Make “yes” feel easy to reverse This is one that teams often avoid because they think it will reduce conversion. In reality, it often does the opposite. Customers hesitate when they feel trapped. When you make it clear that the customer stays in control, that they can change their mind, adjust details, or step away without hassle, you lower the emotional risk of saying yes. You’re not encouraging cancellations. You’re removing fear. The tone matters a lot here. If it’s said defensively, it feels suspicious. If it’s said matter-of-factly, it feels professional. Something like: “If you decide it’s not for you later, that’s fine. I just want you to feel clear on what you’re choosing today.” That lands better than over-explaining policies or sounding like you’re trying to pre-empt a complaint. What leaders should measure (beyond conversion) If you’re leading a programme, “not now” is more useful than it looks. It’s a signal that something in the conversation is creating hesitation. And if you treat it as data, you can actually improve the system. A few practical things to pay attention to: Are customers asking the same “what happens next?” questions repeatedly? Do different reps explain the process in different ways? Are customers struggling to summarise the offer back to you? Are there certain parts of the pitch where people visibly switch off? Are people saying “I’ll do it later” right after a specific piece of information? Those patterns tell you where the friction lives, without needing big theory. When leaders only focus on “push harder”, they miss the fix. When leaders focus on clarity, conversion tends to rise and customer experience becomes more defensible. And that matters. Because the real goal isn’t just volume. It’s a volume you can stand behind. A simple test to use this week Ask your team to run this test in the field: After the explanation, can the customer say back what it is and what happens next in one sentence, without sounding unsure? If they can’t, that’s not the customer failing a test. That’s your message needing work. The opportunity is rarely “more persuasion”. It’s usually a tighter explanation, calmer next steps, and more control for the customer. Because customers don’t need to be pushed into decisions. They need to feel safe finishing them. The delivery system matters as much as the pitch. In outsourced-supported models like Credico UK, Credico isn’t the team standing in front of the customer day-to-day; they’re connecting brands with partner field marketing organisations. So performance depends on how well those partner teams are aligned around the same clarity, customer experience standards, and “what happens next” discipline. When that alignment is strong, customers feel the professionalism in the conversation and hesitation drops. When it’s inconsistent, uncertainty creeps in and “not now” becomes the default escape hatch. If you want fewer stalled conversations this week, don’t start by asking reps to be more convincing. Start by tightening the explanation, coaching the next-step clarity, and making customer control obvious. Because the real aim isn’t just more conversions. It’s volume you can defend, repeat, and scale without compromising trust. FAQs 1) Does “not now” mean the customer isn’t interested? Not always. In face-to-face sales it often means the customer is interested but doesn’t feel clear or safe enough to complete the decision in that moment. 2) What’s the main reason people delay instead of saying no?Uncertainty. If they’re unsure what they’re agreeing to, what happens next, or how easy it is to change their mind, delay feels like the safest option. 3) What should a rep make clear to reduce hesitation? Two things, in plain English: what it is, and exactly what happens next (confirmation, timing, who contacts them, and what control they keep). 4) Why does consistency matter so much across teams? Inconsistency creates doubt. If different reps explain the same process differently, customers sense uncertainty and are more likely to pause the decision. 5) What should leaders measure besides conversion rate? Track patterns behind “not now”: repeated “what happens next?” questions, where customers switch off, where they ask to do it later, and whether customers can summarise the offer and next steps confidently.
074332094394
Premchemltd@yahoo.co.uk
www.paramountmedia.co.uk
Sophia The Robot
By Nigel Driffield, Professor of International Business, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick
Samuel Farley Senior Lecturer in Work Psychology, University of Sheffield David Hughes Lecturer in Organisational Psychology, University of Manchester Karen Niven Professor of Organisational Psychology, University of Sheffield
The core premise of feminism is this: women can do anything. And yes, these days in developed economies, women without children earn about the same as men. The problem is not the opportunities available to them. It’s the opportunities that disappear as women become mothers. This disconnect between paidworkand care work is evident. In my research on work and motherhood, I have often found that organisations give little thought to the tensions that arise between women’s work and care identities. A2025 overview of how care is understood in feminist economic debates recognises the fundamental value of unpaid and underpaid care. But it doesn’t discuss ow to reconcile paid work and care. The unpaid work women do in the home alongside their paid work leads to reduced participation in the workforce, income inequality between the genders, time-poverty, and increased stress for women. The challenges and constraints that women encounter in the workplace have long been recognised.But caring is also often viewed in a negative way– something that interrupts and stymies their participation in paid work. Motherhood is frequently framed as something that curtails ambition and income. In contrast, paid work is valued because it generates financial resources. These perspectives speak to the outdated concept of the “ideal worker”, and the capitalist priorities of productivity and efficiency that underpin this idea. Across academic research, financial resources are often seen as a means to buy exemption from some aspects of motherhood.Other research concedes that caring for older relatives can be rewarding, but then cites all the problems that caregivers may experience. In short, it is almost impossible to findcaring for children framed in a positive way. One paper positions care work as “responsibilities” and “obligations” that fall on women. But this framing is directly at odds with how the women I have spoken to understood their role as mothers: they talked fondly of their children, attended their needs and enjoyed spending time with them. Rediscovering the value of care The problem for both feminism and capitalism is that mothers must routinely combine paid work and caring responsibilities in order to make a living. This reflects the tensions that the research identifies but does not resolve: women are navigating systems that position care as a disruption rather than an important and valued form of work and identity. Older women often recount their career success through a lens of sacrifice, while many younger parents resist long-hours cultures, experimenting with ways to share work and care. What this suggests is that there is a need for employers to have a more nuanced appreciation of parenting identities. However, work structures often still rely on outdated breadwinner/caregiver identities – dictating how parents juggle paid work and care, and limiting the space for more flexible hybrid roles. A model where the mother becomes the breadwinner and the father the caregiver is not ideal either. It may appear progressive, but in practice, care work continues to be pressed to the margins and the financial precarity it leads to is not acknowledged or fixed. It is simply transferred to the male caregiver. Breadwinner/caregiver norms are just not suited to society and family dynamics any more. But they can be dismantled and replaced by hybrid roles that allow people to combine work and care identities. While the tensions of work and motherhood have not disappeared, other groups have emerged and are developing momentum. For example, fathers who understand and value their parenting role are prompting a groundswell of change. In the UK, campaigns such as Parenting Out Loud, as well as demands for extended, government-funded paternity leave (for example, six weeks of leave paid at 90% of income), seek to enable fathers to care and bond with their children without worrying about work pressures. These movements imagine a future where care is equally valued and recognised for its importance to society. Governments, employers and trade unions have an opportunity to create work cultures that enable parents to do their jobs well at the same time as caring. Structures that value both work and care will allow everyone to contribute to the economy while actively participating in their caregiving roles. Acknowledging an employee’s care identity needs to extend far beyond workplaces begrudgingly accommodating a mother working from home to care for a sick toddler. It involves enabling and trusting parents to respond to routine parenting challenges in an appropriate way – without penalty or judgment. For example, a dad being able to take emergency leave to respond to his child’s sickness, or a mum arriving late to work after supporting a teenager who is stressed by exams. Funded, high-quality and reliable care infrastructure is essential, alongside flexible working. The persistent motherhood wage penalty is a good barometer to see how things are changing: interventions that normalise combining work and care will narrow this pay gap, and give a clear indication of what works.
Why workplaces should get on board with the value of care
Caroline Millar Visiting Scholar, Queen’s Business School (Organisation, Work and Leadership), Queen's University Belfast
3G ELECTRICAL SERVICES LTD
Mrileyorbital@outlook.com
Electrical Contractors All aspects of electrical work undertaken Specialists in the telecommunications industry
Individuals and SMEs cannot bank on High Street banks being there in the future, warns the home delivery expert Parcelhero. A total of 52 branch closures are slated for this month alone, meaning the Government’s newly launched ‘Access to Banking Services’ review is urgently needed. However, Parcelhero fears Britain’s town centre banks have become another High Street sector threatened with near-extinction because of the growth of internet services. Parcelhero’s Head of Consumer Research, David Jinks M.I.L.T., says: ‘The threat to in-person banking is escalating by the week. Lloyds, Halifax and Bank of Scotland – all part of the Lloyds Banking Group – are set to shut at least 168 bank branches by the end of next year. ‘Meanwhile, 52 bank branches across a variety of banking groups will close this month alone. Santander will shutter 27 locations (the most branches in May), while NatWest will close down 15, Lloyds Bank eight and Halifax two. ‘In the light of this rapid decline, the Government has pledged to look into the continuing reduction of in-person banking and its new “Access to Banking Services” review was launched last week. Shockingly, the review acknowledges that “there are currently no existing protections for the provision of access to in-person banking services.” ‘The review will look at the state of banking through what it calls a “customer needs lens”. It will primarily focus on individuals using retail banking services, but will also include organisations such as small businesses, non-profit and community groups. However, the review is not set to conclude until October, and that could be too late given the current haemorrhaging of local banking facilities. ‘Parcelhero has long been concerned about the impact of bank branch closures on small businesses and individuals. In 2016, we published our influential report “2030: The Death of the High Street”. It predicted the closure of 100,000 stores by 2030, a finding discussed in Parliament. The report warned that without adapting to an omnichannel approach, the rise of e-commerce would decimate traditional retail, turning town centres into “ghost towns”. ‘In that report we noted: “9,000 bank and building society branches have been closed between 1989 and 2016 – and more closures are on their way.” Unfortunately, we weren’t wrong. ‘Now our sequel report, “2030: The High Street Fights Back?” has been released. A decade on from the first report, it reveals around 6,660 bank branches closed between 2016 and 2025, creating 41 “banking deserts” – areas where at least one branch shut for every 10,000 residents. Barclays was the individual bank that reduced its network the most, with 1,236 branches closing. Of banking groups, NatWest Group, which comprises NatWest, Royal Bank of Scotland and Ulster Bank, topped the list, closing 1,536 branches. Following close behind, Lloyds Banking Group, made up of Lloyds Bank, Halifax and Bank of Scotland, has shut down 1,470 sites since our first report. ‘Our new study also warns that the carnage hasn’t ended. Entire banking chains are set to vanish from our town centres. TSB could be one of the first to go. Santander took over TSB from Sabadell at the beginning of this month and it’s likely Santander will integrate TSB into the Santander UK group, phasing out the TSB brand. ‘The Co-operative Bank is also set to disappear from our High Streets. The Coventry Building Society has acquired The Co-operative Bank. Although the Co-op brand will be retained “for the time being”, it is expected to be phased out in time. ‘Virgin Money is another major banking name set to quit the High Street. In 2024 it became part of the Nationwide group and this April, following court approval, Virgin Money’s business transferred to the Nationwide Building Society. The Virgin Money brand is expected to disappear as it is integrated into Nationwide. It’s also being reported that even the Halifax brand may be dropped by the Lloyds Banking Group under new plans, bringing to an end its 173-year presence on the High Street. ‘Some High Street bank branches have at least been granted a stay of execution, however. While Santander and Lloyds continue to close branches, the public and political backlash has now forced some banks to pause closures to maintain customer trust. Barclays has pledged not to close any more branches through 2026, while Nationwide has promised to keep all its locations open until at least 2030, including Virgin Money stores. ‘There are also moves by some local shops and even libraries to incorporate banking services of some kind. That’s on top of the financial services industry’s roll-out of 350 banking hubs by the end of this Parliament, discussed in the Government’s “Access to Banking Services” review. However, there is no denying the fact that, since our first report’s publication, the run on our banks has become a sprint. Of course, banks are just one of the sectors under severe threat from the ongoing demise of our town centres. The High Street may not have reached a dead end by 2030 but, in this new age of retail, it will have arrived at its biggest crossroads. Read the report here.
https://newsbywire.com/why-brits-can-no-longer-bank-on-the-banks/
Why Brits can no longer bank on banks
Close Protection Security Industrial & Commercial Security Mobile Patrols
07876508660
HI Technology & Innovation finds AI is delivering meaningful productivity gains in UK engineering teams, around 20% on average where measured, but that 83% of businesses are tracking no quantitative metrics at all, leaving most leaders unable to tell where AI is genuinely working and where it is not. CTOs and engineering managers across the UK are likely overstating the productivity gains being delivered by AI coding tools, according to a new report from technology advisory firm HI Technology & Innovation. The study, based on interviews with more than 100 CTOs, CISOs, VPs of Engineering and senior engineers, finds that AI is producing real and measurable improvements in engineering productivity. However, companies which actually track those improvements consistently report more conservative gains than those operating on impression alone, suggesting that leadership confidence in AI is, for many organisations, running ahead of the evidence. Measured productivity gains attributed to AI coding tools sit at around 20% on average across the firms that quantify them, with some teams reporting concrete wins such as project timelines halved and sprint output up 20% to 25% after adopting modern coding assistants. The report makes clear these are real gains worth pursuing. The challenge is that, in the absence of measurement, perceived gains tend to drift higher than the figures organisations would actually arrive at if they tracked them. This is likely because engineers feel much faster with AI than they truly are and may find that their mental burden is lower when using it. In reality, code rewrite rates can creep up and engineers can spend more time on reviews and rearchitecting poorly designed code, something which qualitative feedback and positive bias can obfuscate. That gap matters because investment is already large and accelerating. 91% of businesses are now investing in AI tools within engineering, yet only 22% have a formal documented AI strategy and 83% are not tracking any metrics to quantify AI’s impact. Without that data, leaders cannot reliably tell which parts of the software development lifecycle AI is genuinely accelerating, where it is quietly creating rework, or which teams and use cases deserve more (or less) investment. The result is one of the largest line items in engineering budgets being managed on anecdote rather than evidence. “AI is producing genuine productivity gains in UK engineering teams, the data on that is clear. But the gains people feel are often larger than the gains they would actually find if they measured them. The leaders who will get the most out of AI over the next 12 months are the ones who measure what is happening in their teams and then double down where the evidence is strongest, not the ones with the most tools or most extreme adoption.” Mike Daniel, HI Technology & Innovation Why this matters now AI is firmly established in UK software engineering. The question for technology leaders in 2026 is no longer whether to invest, but how to invest well. The report argues that strategy and measurement are what separate organisations that are already capturing AI’s gains from those that are spending without a clear picture of return. The companies which pair their AI investment with a written strategy and a small number of trustworthy productivity and quality metrics are best placed to direct AI where it delivers most, accelerate teams that are already winning with it, and avoid expanding it into areas where the evidence does not yet support it. Key findings AI is delivering real gains, around 20% when measured. Firms tracking AI’s effect on engineering productivity report meaningful improvements on average, with some seeing project timelines and sprint cycles materially reduced. Most leaders are flying blind. 83% of UK businesses are not tracking any metrics to measure AI’s impact on engineering productivity. Measured gains are smaller than perceived ones. Companies that measure AI effectiveness consistently report more conservative velocity gains than those that do not, suggesting that unmeasured estimates tend to overstate AI’s impact. Strategy is the missing ingredient. 91% of businesses are investing in AI tools, but only 22% have a formal documented AI strategy for engineering. Depth beats breadth. Teams that focus AI on coding and debugging report roughly twice the velocity gain of teams that spread AI across four or more stages of the software development lifecycle. Quality is the most cited concern. Only 57% of engineering leaders are pleased by AI output quality. However, 79% report no increase in time spent on code review, quality assurance or testing despite the surge in AI-generated code volume. Shadow AI fills the strategy gap. Around half of engineers (52%) use AI tools even when their employer has not formally invested in them, raising IP, security and compliance risk. The implication for technology leaders The report concludes that AI is producing real value in UK engineering teams, and that this value is likely to compound over the next 12 months for the organisations best set up to capture it. Practically, that means defining a written AI strategy, instrumenting a small number of trustworthy productivity and quality metrics, and using those metrics to decide where to expand AI use and where to refine it. The opportunity is not to dial AI back, but to find the parts of the engineering process where its impact is clearest and invest there with confidence. About the report AI in Software Engineering: Making Sense of the Noise synthesises insights from more than 100 interviews with CTOs, CISOs, VPs of Engineering and senior engineers, alongside published academic and industry research. It is intended as a guiding resource for technology leaders defining, deploying and measuring AI within their engineering organisations. Download the report free here.
info@prosecltd.co.uk
Event Security Door Supervisors Residential Property Security
www.prosecltd.co.uk
UK engineering leaders likely overstating AI impact: report
Site Security & Hotel Security
info@machmade.co.uk
Trust us with your business, we will guard you with ours.
www.machmadedyno.co.uk
www.cynergysecurity.co.uk
A skilled, nationwide plumbing and drains work force, on hand all day, every day.
Visit www.cynergysecurity.co.uk to find out more
OVER 20 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN THE SECURITY INDUSTRY
Merseyside, Cheshire and West Lancs. Your local team.
Chester Office: Regus House, Herons Way, Chester Business Park. Chester CH4 9QR Company Number: 6934600
For more information call 01244 536687 or email info@cynergysecurity.co.uk
Event Security - sports, concerts and festivals
0151 545 0913
Private/Corporate events
Follow us on
Door Security for licensed premises
When your workplace doesn't match your ethical outlook: the problem of "moral injury"
steritechengineering@gmail.com
When earthquakes struck Turkey and Syria in February 2023, more than 50,000 people were killed and thousands more were injured. One month after the disaster, a bank employee named Efe Demir died by suicide in Istanbul. Before his death, he had sent an email to colleagues questioning the actions and motivations of his employer, saying he felt that the organisation prioritised profit over caring for clients who were victims of the tragedy. The bank strongly denied the allegations, but Demir’s accusation highlights a broader, and often invisible, problem: how a corporate approach, especially in times of crisis, can cause employees to experience psychological harm. Sometimes referred to as “moral injury” or “ethical suffering”, it often involves feelings of distress that arise when workers are compelled to act solely in the interest of profit. The psychiatrist Christophe Dejours, who specialises in work and mental health, has argued that the complexities of work require employees to constantly expend emotional and cognitive energy navigating moral dilemmas. Those dilemmas could be to do with a company’s environmental record for example, or how it relates to a country engaged in a military conflict. Moral injury does not arise only from what workers are required to do. It can also take the form of intense feelings of isolation when an employee feels what a company is doing is wrong, but nobody is doing anything about it. Eventually, moral injury can become a deep crisis, with workplace suicide as its most tragic manifestation. Disasters amplify moral harm Moral injury is commonly used to describe the experiences of workers in care-giving professions such as medicine or nursing, where decisions can carry life or death consequences. But moral injury can appear in many occupations, especially during disasters, when individuals suddenly feel a heightened responsibility for others. For employees like Demir, the earthquake in Turkey was not only a national tragedy – it was a moment when the employer’s values were put to the test. For Demir, among other allegations was an accusation that the bank had not looked after customers who have been affected by the earthquake, in terms of their ability to repay loans or be given credit. The 2023 earthquake in Turkey and Syria was the worst to hit the region in decades and left more than 50,000 people dead. Such cases are rarely publicised. Employers often move quickly to protect their reputation, while colleagues fear retaliation and families hesitate to link suicide to work. The connection can be difficult or even impossible to prove. There research which suggests that employee suicide can serve as a final attempt to expose injustice. Modern work often involves tasks that are legal but morally questionable, whether it’s carefully manipulating clients, competing unfairly or remaining silent about harm. Employees may become unwilling participants in practices that violate ethical standards – and this is precisely what makes these experiences difficult for the employee to talk about. Even though physical dangers in the workplace are recognised, psychological dangers ,such as ethical conflict and feelings of loss of integrity, often remain unacknowledged. Long-term exposure to ethically ambiguous environments can reshape someone’s character, moral sensibilities and sense of self. Over time, Dejours argues, workers numb themselves to others’ suffering – and eventually, to their own. In countries such as France and Japan, work-related suicides are part of public debate, thanks to labour activists. In France, unions such as the CFE-CGC actively fight workplace bullying and at a global level, the International Trade Union Confederation Ituc named work-related suicide as a priority issue in a campaign on psychosocial hazards. To confront moral injury at work, especially in an era of overlapping crises, whether it’s environmental, geopolitical or natural, research suggests that many organisations need to pay more attention to the ethical integrity of their employees. Professional dignity is not just about the terms of work – the hours, the pay and conditions – but also what we produce at work. This also means expanding occupational safety to include not just physical risks but moral and psychological hazards – and talking more openly about the ethically questionable tasks that people may be asked to commit at work.
Page 22
Ebru Işıklı. Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Sociology, University College Dublin
07967 837 374
National Minimum Wage welcomed as positive for businesses and workers
The National Minimum Wage is a positive force for both employees and employers and sets the foundation for loyalty around recruitment and retention according to Ashlea Fisher, founder IRecruit4. April will see the National Minimum Wage rise by 4.1 per cent from £12.21 per hour to £12.71. For some employers that uplift, spread across many employees, is a big commitment. “The National Minimum Wage sets an important baseline that ensures people are paid fairly for the work they do,” said Ashlea Fisher, founder of IRecruit4. “When employees feel valued financially, it has a clear impact on their motivation and how they engage with their role on a day-to-day basis. For those looking to recruit permanent staff it sets the tone for loyalty and trust which can grow and develop over years.” Businesses are being encouraged to view the changes not as a challenge, but as an opportunity to improve staff retention, productivity and positive workplace culture. “Good employers pay a higher hourly rate anyway to get the best most committed candidates,” she said. “Some subscribe to the Living Wage which sits currently at £13.45 per hour which can make roles more attractive in a competitive labour market. Employers who align with or exceed wage expectations are often better positioned to attract high-quality candidates and reduce staff turnover, which in turn lowers recruitment and training costs.” Ashlea added that businesses who embrace the upcoming changes will see tangible benefits even when recruiting temporary staff. “We work with employers who might initially worry about rising wage costs, but many find that investing in their people leads to better retention and a more committed workforce. In the long term, that stability can be far more valuable than short-term savings.” The National Minimum Wage also contributes to wider economic stability by increasing spending power among workers, which supports local businesses and communities. For sectors that rely heavily on frontline and temporary staff, such as logistics, manufacturing and hospitality, this can have a positive ripple effect across supply chains. In addition, clear wage standards help to promote fairness and transparency within organisations, creating a more level playing field and improving employer reputation. “The conversation around pay is evolving,” said Ashlea. “Candidates today are not just looking for any job, they are looking for employers who respect their time, skills and contribution. A strong approach to fair pay is a clear signal of that recognition.”
info@paainteriorsltd.co.uk
Rita Fontinha Associate Professor of International Business and Strategy, Henley Business School, University of Reading
The four‑day week won’t happen overnight, but it could transform how we live and work
0207 096 1835
A century ago, the five-day working week helped reshape society. It was introduced at scale by industrial pioneers to address not only worker wellbeing but also economic pressures. US industrialist Henry Ford was among the first to give workers two full days off per week. Ford suspected that giving workers a “weekend” would increase overall productivity – and he was correct. Today, as advances in artificial intelligence accelerate and concerns about job security grow, a similar question is emerging. Could reducing working time again help societies adapt to these seismic changes? The evidence increasingly suggests it can, but not in the simplistic way that is often portrayed. The four-day week is not just a workplace benefit. It is a potential tool to improve wellbeing, support families and rethink how work is distributed in society. Research across multiple countries, including large-scale pilots in the UK and Portugal, shows that reducing working time can deliver meaningful benefits for both employees and organisations. In a 2025 study of four-day week adoption, my colleagues and I found improvements in sleep, exercise and quality of working life. There were positive implications for both the mental and physical health of employees. Our research showed productivity at work can also increase, alongside reductions in absenteeism and staff turnover. And it can be beneficial for an employer’s social image. However, the most important insight is not about productivity but what happens outside work. After all, time is a social resource, not just an economic one. When people move to a four-day week, they do not simply rest more. They reallocate time in ways that have broader implications for society. Across our research, participants said they spend more time with family and friends, engaging in community activities and investing in their physical and mental health by exercising and practising hobbies and self-care activities. These are not trivial changes. Over time, they contribute to stronger social ties, better mental health and more resilient communities. There are also important gender implications. Early findings suggest that reduced working time can lead to fathers being more involved in caring for their children and other domestic responsibilities. While this does not automatically solve gender inequality, it creates conditions that make more equal divisions of labour possible. In this sense, the four-day week is not just about work. It is about how societies organise care, relationships and everyday life. The challenge in service sectors Critics of a four-day week often point out that it is harder to implement in service sectors such as healthcare, childcare, manufacturing, hospitality or retail. This is true, but it is not a reason to dismiss the idea. In these sectors, work is tied to time, presence and staffing levels. Reducing working hours often requires more complex redesign, including changes to rotas, additional hiring or upfront investment. Colleagues and I have highlighted this when addressing the UK case of the NHS. But these challenges should be seen as design problems, not impossibilities. In fact, the potential benefits to society may be even greater in these sectors. Improved wellbeing and reduced burnout among healthcare staff and care workers can translate into better quality of service and fewer mistakes. A more important concern is inequality. If working time reductions are adopted unevenly, there is a risk that some workers will be excluded – often those in lower-paid or frontline roles. This is a valid concern, but not an argument against the four-day week. Rather, it is an argument for implementing it more thoughtfully. Instead of asking whether all jobs can adopt the same model, the focus should be on how different forms of reduced work time can be adapted across sectors. This could include shorter daily hours, staggered schedules or phased time reductions. The future of work The renewed interest in reducing the amount of time we spend working is not happening in isolation. It is closely linked to broader debates about automation, productivity and the future of work. If technological advances continue to increase productivity, a fundamental question arises: who benefits from these gains? Historically – during the Great Depression, for example – working time reductions have been one way of redistributing those benefits. Compared with more radical proposals such as universal basic income, the four-day week offers a more direct and socially embedded way of sharing gains in productivity. The four-day week is not a universal solution, and it will not look the same everywhere. But the evidence shows working less can go hand-in-hand with maintaining productivity. It can also support a shift towards a society where time is valued not only as an economic input, but as a foundation for wellbeing, relationships and participation in community life. A century after the five-day week helped define modern work, there may be another turning point on the horizon. This time, the real question is not whether we can afford to reduce working time, but whether we can afford not to.
www.paainteriors.co.uk
INTERIOR DESIGN, FIT OUT & DECORATING SPECIALISTS
Electrical & Instrumentation Quality Consultant
Offering a turnkey solutions for a wide scope of sectors, from initial consultancy & design through to specification, supply & project management.
Lighting & Controls Solution Provider
01925 444735
www.ai-lighting.co.uk
MARK DIMECK LIMITED
Heathcote Road, Walton, Liverpool, Merseyside, L4 6XB
Innovate Tax launches data management platform to transform project delivery
A natural approach to childcare where families become friends
Innovate Tax today announced the launch of Interrogate, a first-of-its-kind project data management platform designed to fundamentally change how complex projects are delivered, documented, and controlled. For decades, tax and project teams have relied on disconnected tools such as spreadsheets, documents, email, and shared drives to manage increasingly complex work. While these tools store information, they do not define how that information should be captured, structured, or used. This creates ambiguity across teams, inconsistent data, and a constant need to duplicate, rework, and validate information. As projects grow in scale and complexity, critical data becomes scattered across systems, making it difficult to maintain a single source of truth or ensure that information remains accurate, complete, and aligned. Interrogate replaces this fragmented approach with a structured data environment where information is captured in context, standardised at source, and linked across all areas of a project. Originally developed to handle the complexity of large-scale tax transformation projects, where tax touches every part of the business, Interrogate is designed to support the structured capture and management of data across any project, document, or knowledge environment. Interrogate also ensures that all project data is retained, not just final outputs. Research, meeting notes, and supporting information are captured and stored in context, allowing organisations to revisit, audit, and refine decisions at any point in the future. This creates a complete and traceable record of how outcomes were developed, rather than just the final result. By capturing, structuring, and standardising data across multiple teams, countries, and areas of the business, Interrogate enables organisations to create a centralised and highly structured knowledge base as a natural outcome of project delivery. This can then be made available to clients, allowing them to access, use, and build upon the full body of project data, not just the final outputs. As a result, organisations benefit from a continuously evolving knowledge base that extends beyond the life of the project. Interrogate also introduces a structured approach to consistency through centrally managed templates and predefined data frameworks. By defining how information should be captured from the outset, organisations eliminate ambiguity and ensure that all project data is aligned, complete, and standardised. This removes the risk of inconsistent outputs, outdated formats, or fragmented approaches across teams; challenges that are common in traditional project environments. As a result, organisations can operate with a level of consistency and control that fundamentally changes how projects are delivered at scale. The platform also introduces a new level of accountability within project delivery. By structuring how data is captured and defining clear expectations at every stage, Interrogate ensures that teams understand exactly what needs to be done. Interrogate embeds workflow management directly into the project data itself. Users can raise questions, risks, issues, and requirements from any part of a project and route them directly to the appropriate stakeholders. All responses are captured automatically within the platform, removing the need for external trackers or email chains (which can also be ingested). The system records when items are sent, viewed, and responded to, creating a complete and transparent audit trail. Responsibilities can be clearly assigned across teams, with automated reminders and escalation processes ensuring that nothing is overlooked. This enables stronger collaboration across functions while maintaining full accountability and control. Andrew Bohnet, Global Solutions Architect at Innovate Tax, said: “A key challenge for us was ensuring that we didn’t create additional work for our teams. Every step had to be seamless, integrated, and part of a natural workflow. “Many organisations are now using AI tools to record and summarise meetings, but the reality is that very little is actually done with that data. It is captured, shared, and then often left unused, or requires additional effort to process before it becomes outdated or forgotten. “By automatically identifying questions, risks, and issues directly from transcripts, Interrogate converts them into structured data within the platform, logging them in the correct context, linking them to the relevant areas of the project using AI, and routing them to the appropriate stakeholders within seconds. “Each question is not only captured, but enhanced with additional context, ensuring it can stand on its own and remain meaningful over time. This is critical, as the more context captured alongside each interaction, the more effective it becomes for future AI use as part of a growing knowledge base. “This ensures that information is not just captured, but actively used. It also allows any authorised member of the project team to process and act on that data at any time, ensuring that nothing is lost and that knowledge is continuously built and retained. “This allows teams to significantly increase the amount of data they capture without adding administrative overhead, while removing the need to manually track, follow up, or manage information across spreadsheets or separate tools. “As this process builds over time, organisations create a structured knowledge base of validated responses, reducing the need to repeatedly ask the same questions and enabling AI to support future interactions with greater accuracy and efficiency.” Interrogate has been designed with innovation and scalability in mind. Its modular architecture enables integration with other systems, including Innovate Tax’s task and ticket management solution, Cura. This allows teams to raise and track tasks directly from within the project data itself, linking actions to the exact area they relate to and automatically pre-populating tasks with the relevant context. This not only speeds up the escalation of key items, but also ensures a complete and traceable audit trail. As a result, project data and operational execution remain fully aligned without the need for separate tools or disconnected processes. A core principle in the design of Interrogate was to avoid replicating functionality that can be delivered more effectively by other specialist applications. Instead, its modular approach allows it to integrate with best-of-breed tools, ensuring flexibility and enabling organisations to adapt as their technology landscape evolves without disrupting the overall solution. Interrogate enables organisations to significantly reduce project data capture and document creation effort, often by over 50%, by eliminating duplication, automating the capture and processing of information, and enabling updates to be made once and reflected across all outputs. Interrogate has also been designed to support the effective use of artificial intelligence by addressing one of the most critical challenges in AI adoption: data quality and control. By ensuring that all information is captured in a structured and standardised way, with clear context and classification, the platform creates a reliable foundation for AI-driven insights. Built-in controls allow organisations to define exactly which data can be used for AI purposes, while ensuring that sensitive or client-specific information remains secure and restricted. This approach enables organisations to apply AI with confidence, using consistent, high-quality data without the need to continually reconfigure models as new data sources are introduced. This positions Interrogate as a platform built for the AI era, where the value of technology is defined by the quality and structure of the data it operates on. Andrew added: “Most organisations are trying to teach AI to understand their inconsistent data. We’ve taken a different approach. We’ve standardised the data itself, so AI doesn’t have to adapt. “By creating a consistent data language from the outset, we provide a far more reliable and scalable foundation for AI. In effect, we’ve translated everything into a single language, rather than expecting AI to learn multiple ones.” By creating an efficient and scalable platform built on structured data, Interrogate represents a fundamental shift in how projects are delivered, enabling organisations to operate seamlessly alongside AI.
Click to contact us and discuss your next project
Shopfitting & Office Fitout Specialists Shopfitting, project management and a range of building works throughout the UK as an integral part in the development of your estates.
Guilherme Klein Martins Lecturer in Economics, University of Leeds
01925 594120
info@litemygroup.co.uk
www.litemyride.co.uk
Vehicle Leasing Specialists www.v4b.co.uk 0800 096 6488
Equestrian Lighting Specialists
Insurance experts warn that corporate events may carry hidden liabilities
https://newsbywire.com/insurance-experts-warn-that-corporate-events-may-carry-hidden-liabilities/
Businesses planning summer socials, client events and awards nights could be overlooking significant hidden risks, according to insurance specialists Everywhen, who are warning that hosting an event involves more than booking a space in a venue that has insurance. It extends to attendees, activities, equipment and how the event is run. While venues often appear to take responsibility, when problems occur, the liability can frequently lie with the organiser. A spokesperson for Everywhen said: “It’s crucial to understand where a venue’s responsibility ends and the organiser’s begins. If something goes wrong, the hirer may still be liable, even if the venue is fully insured.” Injuries, damage or incidents linked to event’s setup or its activities are often the organiser’s responsibility. Many businesses wrongly assume the venue’s insurance covers everything. Common corporate event claims Slips, trips and falls – caused by hazards such as cables, spills or uneven surfaces Property damage – to venues or third-party property during setup or at the event Vehicle incidents – involving hired transport for guests Food-related illness – linked to catering at the event Businesses have a legal duty to keep attendees safe, whether the events are held on-site, at hired venues or outdoors. If something goes wrong, organisers must show they took reasonable precautions. Using third-party suppliers, such as caterers or entertainers, doesn’t remove responsibility. Employers can still be held accountable if proper checks weren’t made. Work events also count as part of employment, meaning employers remain responsible for the behaviour of their staff and for their wellbeing. Alcohol and entertainment can increase the risk if they are not carefully managed. Reducing the risk Having a proper risk assessment carried out helps to identify hazards and put sensible precautions in place. It should be specific to the event and consider numbers attending, accessibility, activities and emergency arrangements. Everywhen’s spokesperson added: “Having the right insurance in place is essential. By understanding risks early and arranging suitable cover, businesses can focus on delivering successful and enjoyable events with confidence.”
Co-working spaces have become a familiar part of the working landscape. A convenient alternative to working from home or an employer’s office, they have become the favoured option of millions of the world’s freelancers, entrepreneurs and remote workers. In the UK, there are over 4,000 co-working venues to choose from. Prices vary, depending on location and facilities, but with a dedicated desk costing around £200 per month, it’s worth knowing how to make the most of what these spaces offer. So how do you choose the right co-working space for you? And how do you get the maximum benefit? Here are four practical tips to consider: 1. Identify your needs Not all co-working spaces serve the same purpose. Some people are simply looking for a quiet desk outside the home, while others want a social environment where they can meet people, exchange ideas and build connections. Being clear about what you want, whether it’s productivity, networking opportunities or skill development, is the first step. Smaller, independently run spaces often place greater emphasis on community building, with managers who organise regular informal events such as “lunch and learn” sessions or workshops. These environments can create more opportunities for social interaction and learning. By contrast, larger corporate-style spaces may offer more polished facilities and business services, but with fewer opportunities for facilitated interaction. Choosing the right co-working environment means considering the type of space and how you plan to use it. 2. Give it a try Co-working spaces are often advertised as being open and inclusive. But research I worked on with colleagues shows that experiences can vary depending on factors such as age, gender or professional background. Some spaces will probably feel more welcoming than others, particularly ones where equality, diversity and inclusion are a deliberate part of their design and ethos. Many spaces are now also set up with specific groups in mind. For example, some cater to female entrepreneurs, while others offer tailored support for neurodivergent workers. Before committing, it’s worth visiting a space, attending an event, or trying a short term pass (for a couple of days or a week) to see whether it feels like a good fit. 3. It’s more than a desk It’s easy to treat co-working spaces as simply a place to work. But research suggests much of its value lies in the connections, community and everyday interactions it makes possible. Casual conversations in the kitchen or spontaneous exchanges over lunch can help build communication skills, expand professional networks, and spark new collaborations. Evidence suggests that these benefits tend to be particularly strong for those who are newer to a city, earlier in their careers, or working independently. They may have have less established local networks or fewer everyday opportunities for office-based interaction, making them more likely to seek out social connections within co-working spaces. If you only show up, put your headphones while you work and then leave, you may miss out on some of the main advantages of co-working – the opportunity to connect with others and become part of a community. Making the most of these spaces often means being willing to take that first step, engage with others and gradually find your own circle. 4. Take advantage If your work involves specialised tools, digital technology or continuous skill development, you may need more than just WiFi and coffee from a co-working space. Many now offer access to specialist software and cutting-edge equipment, such as 3D printers or virtual reality devices, which can be costly or difficult to access by yourself. Some go a step further and organise workshops and training sessions, or even events that reflect the latest developments in a particular field. These resources can be particularly valuable for independent workers, including freelancers and the self-employed, who may not have access to structured on-the-job training through an employer. Using them can help you build practical, up-to-date technical and digital skills, especially as new technologies and AI continue to reshape the skills demanded in many industries. So, don’t overlook what’s on offer. Making use of these opportunities can help you stay adaptable, keep learning and be better prepared for what comes next. Overall, co-working spaces can offer valuable opportunities to learn new skills, build networks and adapt to changing ways of working. But these benefits are neither automatic or the same for everyone. Getting the most out of co-working often depends on how you use the space and whether it matches your needs. At its best, co-working is not just about renting a desk, but about finding an environment where you can connect, learn and grow.
Zihan Wang Research Fellow in Geography and Innovation, University of Sussex
Thinking of joining a co‑working space? Here are four ways to make the most of it