Common Industry Challenges

Over the past 3 years, I’ve coached over 4000 professionals, from first-year college students to CXOs at Fortune 500 companies And here’s a statement that still breaks my heart to hear: “I know my work. But I feel small the moment I have to speak in English.” You know, it’s one of the top 3 limiting beliefs I see across clients, regardless of age, industry, or experience. And the worst part is that most people genuinely believe that fluency in English is the main sign of confidence. Let’s bust this myth once and for all: 👉 English is just a language It is not a measurement of intelligence, capability, or leadership 👉 Confidence is contextual You can be deeply confident in your ideas, Yet hesitant in expressing them if the language isn’t native to you 👉 The brain doesn’t freeze because of a lack of knowledge It freezes because of fear of judgment, of being misinterpreted, Or worse: being underestimated A recent study by LinkedIn and the Soft Skills Council showed that 71% of Indian professionals feel nervous speaking English in meetings, even when they are experts on the topic. That’s not a communication issue. That’s a conditioning issue. 👉 We’ve equated English with professionalism 👉 We’ve mistaken an accent for authority 👉 We’ve let amazing talent go unheard (Simply because they paused to find the right word) Let me be honest here: Even I, as a communication coach, have felt the pressure of “sounding fluent” or “using better words.” But with time, I’ve realized that, The most powerful communicators don’t use big words. They use true words with empathy, clarity, and conviction. 📌So here’s what I tell every client who says, “I can’t speak well because my English isn’t good enough”: “Fluency is a skill. Confidence is a choice. Build both, but don’t mistake one for the other.” And if you’re reading this and still feel nervous about speaking up Remember, Your voice matters. Your story matters. And I promise, you don’t need flawless English to make an unforgettable impact. Let’s raise a generation that listens to meaning, not just language. P.S. What’s one thing you believed about confidence that turned out to be false? #SoftSkillsCoach #LeadershipGrowth #CommunicationMatters #LanguageBias #SpeakWithImpact #ConfidenceCoach #FluencyVsConfidence #HumanSkillsMatter

In finance, bridging the gap between numbers and understanding is an art. We, as finance professionals all have to interact with numerous folks who are not from a finance background. Where we have to explain the concepts to get the work done. Just think about the life of a guy who works in a bank and explains the complex loan structure to a farmer or a person who doesn't understand terms like foreclosure, prepayment penalty, processing fees, and EMI. How much difficult it would have been for that guy if they didn't explain the concept in a story? As finance professionals, our role often involves translating complex financial jargon into a language that resonates with our non-finance colleagues. Below are some tips that can help in these conversations. ✅ Clarity: The cornerstone of financial communication is clarity. It's not about drowning our audience in numbers and confusing them with some jargon and theory but making those numbers tell a story. ✅ Simplicity & Precision: Think of it as a recipe: a pinch of simplicity and precision. Avoid jargon and acronyms that could leave our audience scratching their heads. ✅ Empathy Matters: Understand our audience. What keeps our colleagues from marketing, HR, or operations up at night? Tailor our communication to address their concerns and show them how finance impacts our world. ✅ Engage, Don't Lecture: Make it a conversation, not a lecture. Encourage questions and discussions. Engaging our audience fosters a deeper understanding. ✅ Continuous Learning: Financial communication is an evolving landscape. Stay updated, adapt, and refine our skills to remain a top-notch communicator. Being an effective financial communicator isn't just about numbers; it's about connecting with people and explaining the concepts in plain vanilla language. What's your key to success in financial communication? Share our thoughts below! 👇💬 LinkedIn LinkedIn for Creators #FinancialCommunication #FinancePro #Clarity #Simplicity #Empathy #Engagement #ContinuousLearning #linkedinforcreators #linkedin

Mercury eats up gold when they touch, making a soft mix called amalgam. It wrecks jewelry, amazes scientists, and is banned in lots of places because it’s toxic. Because of this unique property, mercury is unfortunately still used in artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM), primarily due to its low cost and ease of use. Miners mix liquid mercury with gold-containing ore, forming an amalgam that allows them to separate the gold from other materials. To recover the pure gold, this amalgam is then heated, causing the mercury to vaporize, leaving the gold behind. This simple yet dangerous method is prevalent in many developing countries where miners lack access to safer, more advanced technologies. The use of mercury in mining carries severe environmental and health consequences. When the mercury vaporizes during the heating process, it pollutes the air and can travel long distances before settling into water and soil. Once in aquatic environments, microorganisms can transform elemental mercury into methylmercury, a highly toxic organic compound that bioaccumulates up the food chain, contaminating fish consumed by humans and wildlife. Miners and their communities face direct exposure through inhalation of mercury vapor, leading to devastating neurological damage, kidney failure, and developmental issues, particularly in children. Recognizing these severe impacts, international efforts are underway to curb mercury pollution from ASGM. The Minamata Convention on Mercury is a global treaty aimed at reducing mercury use and emissions. Programs like UNEP's planetGOLD are actively working to introduce and implement mercury-free mining techniques, such as gravity concentration and direct smelting, providing training and support to help artisanal mining communities transition away from this harmful practice and protect both human health and the environment.

AI Adoption: Reality Bites After speaking with customers across various industries yesterday, one thing became crystal clear: there's a significant gap between AI hype and implementation reality. While pundits on X buzz about autonomous agents and sweeping automation, business leaders I spoke with are struggling with fundamentals: getting legal approval, navigating procurement processes, and addressing privacy, security, and governance concerns. What's more revealing is the counterintuitive truth emerging: organizations with the most robust digital transformation experience are often facing greater AI adoption friction. Their established governance structures—originally designed to protect—now create labyrinthine approval processes that nimbler competitors can sidestep. For product leaders, the opportunity lies not in selling technical capability, but in designing for organizational adoption pathways. Consider: - Prioritize modular implementations that can pass through governance checkpoints incrementally rather than requiring all-or-nothing approvals - Create "governance-as-code" frameworks that embed compliance requirements directly into product architecture - Develop value metrics that measure time-to-implementation, not just end-state ROI - Lean into understanability and transparency as part of your value prop - Build solutions that address the career risk stakeholders face when championing AI initiatives For business leaders, it's critical to internalize that the most successful AI implementations will come not from the organizations with the most advanced technology, but those who reinvent adoption processes themselves. Those who recognize AI requires governance innovation—not just technical innovation—will unlock sustainable value while others remain trapped in endless proof-of-concept cycles. What unexpected adoption hurdles are you encountering in your organization? I'd love to hear perspectives beyond the usual technical challenges.

For most women of color, finding your perfect foundation shade in a drugstore is an extreme sport. Even on the rare occasions when they actually carry darker shades, you often are stuck looking orange or gray. Similar to tech, this is what happens when industries are not truly diverse. Without giving everyone a seat at the table, how can your industry accurately reflect our community? Today, on #NationalLipstickDay, I want to shine a light on the racial gap in cosmetic science. In 2022, Black women spent more than $7.4 billion on cosmetics and personal care products. However, less than 10% of cosmetic chemists in the United States are Black, according to Zippia. The lack of diverse scientists results in a lack of diverse products, making the CVS aisle look more like 50 shades of beige. Yes, the beauty industry has evolved over the years in terms of expanding its shade ranges and having brands that challenge the status quo like Rare Beauty and Fenty Beauty. It's exciting to see the rise of Black-owned beauty brands entering mainstream markets. Yet there's still work to be done. Industry leaders need to analyze the barriers that are keeping Black and brown people out of the lab. Without inclusivity, diverse representation, equal access to resources, mentorship, and equitable policies, our students are prevented from reaching their full potential in the science field. Anyone who knows me knows just how much I love my signature red lip. I know just how much the right shade of lipstick can make you feel powerful and confident. At Girls Who Code we hope to give our students the resources and the confidence they need to thrive in STEM, including cosmetic science. #BeautyForAll #ShadeInclusivity #RepresentationMatters #NationalLipstickDay #DiversityInSTEM #BreakTheBias Read the full article here: https://bit.ly/4dlOisz

Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals in Beauty: What Black Consumers Need to Know Recently, #DrYvonneBurkart spoke on The Diary of a CEO podcast with Steven Bartlett about the hidden dangers of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) in everyday products—including those disproportionately marketed to Black women. This conversation is long overdue. The Black Pound Report has already uncovered serious inequalities in the beauty industry, and the data is clear: ⚠️Black and Multi-Ethnic consumers spend 49% more on health and beauty products than other demographics, yet they are often left with limited and harmful product choices. ⚠️36% of Black women must go to specialist stores to find suitable products, limiting their access to clean beauty brands. ⚠️Many mainstream beauty products contain endocrine disruptors like parabens, phthalates, and benzophenone-3—chemicals linked to hormonal imbalances, fibroids, early puberty, and increased cancer risks. ⚠️ Multi-ethnic consumers are highly values-driven, with 65% preferring brands that align with their ethics. Yet outdated regulations still allow harmful chemicals to be used in products marketed to them. So, what does this mean for brands and retailers? With initiatives like Sav£ways, founded by Krept and Konan, it’s clear that Black entrepreneurs are stepping up where the mainstream market needs to. Inclusive retailers and brands have a huge opportunity to stock and promote safer, non-toxic products for Black and Multi-Ethnic consumers. At BACKLIGHT Inc., we drive the conversation with data and insights highlighting consumer spending power's real impact. It’s time for policymakers, businesses, and retailers to demand better product transparency, stricter ingredient regulations, and retail spaces that truly serve our communities. Let's talk if you’re in beauty, retail, or policymaking. Let’s build a marketplace that serves, not harms, the very consumers driving its growth. #BlackPoundReport #EndocrineDisruptors #CleanBeauty #BlackConsumers #Inclusive

Last month, I talked to 40+ finance professionals working across the climate capital stack. Here are the most pressing challenges, opportunities, and insights that emerged: ⚙️ Hard Problems - Even proven tech struggles to scale: EV chargers and energy storage are mature technologies, but their merchant risk makes traditional project finance models break down. - First-of-kind (FOAK) projects remain fundamentally hard: LPO funding is likely ending, and few alternatives exist. The good news? Several new funds are targeting this gap - worth watching closely. 💬 Communication Challenges - The climate finance ecosystem speaks multiple languages: VCs talk TAM and dreams, project finance talks DSCR, insurers talk actuarial risk. Getting deals done requires translating between all of them. - Risk/reward misalignment plagues deals: Startups and VCs chase upside, but deployment partners bear downside risk. This fundamental tension delays scaling. - Climate still fights for credibility: "Senior stakeholders don't even understand Scope 1, 2, and 3," one banker shared. "Anything labeled climate gets immediately written off as concessionary." 📚 Knowledge Gaps - Deal structures remain bespoke: While startups have SAFEs and mature sectors have established project finance precedents, new climate technologies lack standardized financing models. Knowledge sharing between successful deals is almost non-existent. - The "finance-ready" paradox: Capital exists, but most projects aren't structured to receive it. Companies often start thinking about project finance years too late. 🌡️ Climate Risk - Insurance is the canary: Companies are pulling out of high-risk regions and wildly hiking rates. - Markets haven't caught up: This risk repricing isn't reflected in broader valuations...yet. - This disconnect is both terrifying and the biggest opportunity in the space. 🔥 Hot Topics - Nature & Biodiversity: Hard to quantify but drawing serious LP interest - Resilience & Adaptation: Finding new momentum as climate impacts accelerate and we prepare for a "don't-say-climate" presidency - Data Centers: Energy use + AI boom = unavoidable focus - Geothermal: Rising star for baseload power, especially post-Fervo - Global Standards: EU's CSRD and Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism will reshape supply chains regardless of US policy, with real ramifications for manufacturers in Asia and beyond. These conversations revealed just how hard—but also how essential—it is to align incentives, build trust, and bridge knowledge gaps across the climate finance ecosystem. As Eugene Kirpichov just wrote—we need systems thinking if we're going to tackle these wider problems. Anything missing here? What's on the top of your mind for 2025?

The Strait of Hormuz and Danish use of biomass Denmark’s reliance on 200 PJ of biomass - nearly 30% of national energy use -is not a model to follow. It should be 30–40% lower. If the Strait of Hormuz were to close, oil and gas prices could spike dramatically. While biomass is often viewed as a regional and stable energy source, such a shock would quickly change that. Many countries would seek alternatives, and biomass - wood pellets, biogas, and others - would become a globally contested commodity in regional markets. We saw the early signs of this during the 2022 energy crisis: - Biomass prices surged - Import volumes increased - Supply chains came under pressure - Environmental standards were weakened Denmark's heavy dependence on biomass makes the system vulnerable in future energy crises. While biomass plays a role in heat supply and transition planning, its availability is not guaranteed under global stress. Over-reliance brings both market and sustainability risks. Denmark and Europe needs to build structural energy resilience through: - Reduced demand and energy efficiency - Increasing renewable energy shares (as small demands in e.g. transport and large flexible demands increase) - Electrification of heating and industry, district heating can be a massive flexible player - Large-scale heat pumps and storage - Smarter integration of renewables and sector coupling Biomass should remain a transitional and supplementary source. not phased out. But not a core pillar of long-term energy security. In Denmark the short term electricity demand can increase in GWs taking into account smart electrification of district heating. #EnergySecurity #Biomass #Denmark #DistrictHeating #HeatTransition #SmartEnergySystems #Resilience #StraitOfHormuz #Geopolitics #EnergyPlanning

Finance presentations fail because they forget 1 thing: The audience changes everything You wouldn’t explain EBITDA to a board member the same way you would to a marketing team And yet… most FP&A teams present the same content to everyone That’s where things go wrong If you want your message to land, you need to tailor: → What you highlight → How you structure the slides → What questions you’re ready to answer Here’s a quick summary to help you adjust: 📊 Internal Staff → Focus: Team performance, KPIs, next steps → Style: Operational, collaborative, practical 🏛 ExCo → Focus: Trade-offs, priorities, strategic bets → Style: Fast-paced, business-driven, decision-oriented 👥 Board → Focus: Risk framing, long-term value, governance → Style: Structured, concise, confidence-inspiring 🌐 All-Hands → Focus: Progress, direction, collective impact → Style: Clear, visual, motivational Caring about your audience is caring about what they care Because if they care, they're willing to act ------ ♻️ Share this with your team before your next reporting round 💬 Follow me for more tips on financial storytelling and FP&A communication

The battery manufacturing landscape is facing some significant turbulence right now, with many manufacturers cancelling, pausing, or postponing the development of new battery factories for the EV market. What’s driving this upheaval? One of the major factors is a stark imbalance between innovation and manufacturing expertise. Western countries excel in innovation and R&D—we see groundbreaking advancements regularly. However, when it comes to the nuts and bolts of large-scale manufacturing, especially in battery production, they lag significantly behind their Asian counterparts. Countries like China, South Korea, and Japan have a well-honed manufacturing infrastructure, coupled with decades of experience in battery production, giving them a massive competitive edge. But that’s not the only issue. The market is also experiencing a seismic shift from NMC (Nickel Manganese Cobalt) batteries to LFP (Lithium Iron Phosphate) batteries. LFPs are cheaper, safer, and more abundant in supply, which makes them highly attractive, especially in an economic climate where cost control is critical. However, this shift is causing disruption in supply chains and creating uncertainty among manufacturers who have invested heavily in NMC technology. On top of these factors, the economic pressures of rising raw material costs, regulatory challenges, and the race to secure supply chains in an increasingly competitive global market are causing many companies to hit the brakes on new projects. It’s a complicated and, yes, frustrating landscape. But here’s the controversial take: Maybe it’s time for the big players in the West to admit that we need to do more than just innovate—we need to seriously ramp up our manufacturing capabilities. Without bridging that gap, we risk falling further behind, watching as the future of energy storage is built elsewhere. Is it time for a manufacturing renaissance in the West, or are we destined to be perpetual innovators, letting others reap the rewards of our R&D efforts? What do you think—can the big players in the West catch up in manufacturing, or is the gap too wide?