Red Flag 21. Rapid digitalization that leaves workers little chance to adapt

Rapid digitalization that leaves workers little chance to adapt /

Rapid digitalization of processes and key functions such that planning or support for upskilling or redeployment of displaced workers is challenging to achieve.

For Example /

Businesses that employ workers in routine physical roles that can be substituted with AI and robots, or in roles where AI and robots can work alongside people across sectors such as:

  • Manufacturing
  • Transport and logistics
  • Agriculture
  • Extractives

Businesses across multiple sectors where generative AI can perform key functions or where digitalization makes certain white-collar jobs redundant, thus replacing a significant part of the workforce, such as:

  • Retail and e-commerce
  • Marketing and advertising
  • Entertainment and content creation
  • Education and e-learning
  • Healthcare
  • Financial services
  • Information Communication and Technology services
  • Power generation and distribution
Higher-Risk Sectors /
Digitalization is happening across more or less all industries, in different forms. The potential displacement of workers is currently most prevalent/expected in:
  • Manufacturing: predominantly in the automotive, apparel and electronic industries, but increasingly in the manufacturing of fast-moving consumer goods and garments. Whilst already highly automated, AI is increasingly used to optimize production processes and improve quality control
  • Transport and logistics: picking, stowing, moving stock in warehouses
  • Agriculture: to replace repetitive tasks in operations that employ a steady year-round workforce, or to perform detailed tasks such as improving crop yields, monitoring soil conditions, and optimizing irrigation
  • Extractives: to remove people from underground environments or using unmanned vehicles for transporting materials to reduce costs, achieve longer operating hours and improve health & safety
  • Oil and gas: moves towards a more automated renewables sector and greater automation in oil and gas exploration, extraction and processing
  • Energy: using AI for predictive maintenance, to enhance energy systems, establish smart grids etc.
  • Professional and financial services: increased use of AI and block-chain that replaces routine legal and financial services
  • Entertainment and content creation: AI is used to generate music, videos and other creative content.
  • Education and e-learning: AI is used to personalize learning experiences, provide automated tutoring, and generate educational content
  • ICT services: AI is used for troubleshooting and maintenance, cyber security, solution optimization and efficiency etc.
Download Red Flag 21

Questions for Leaders /

  • Does the company foresee automating roles? How does the company plan for digitalization?
  • Have we identified employees who are especially vulnerable to the effects of increased automation and use of AI?
  • Have we considered scenarios in which we digitalize at a pace and scale that will be less disruptive to the lives and livelihoods of our workforce?
  • Are we providing employees training to build their skills to take on new types of work as we increasingly digitalize?
  • Do we engage with workers whose jobs may be affected by digitalization to understand their concerns and needs?
  • Do we give due consideration to the possibilities for retraining or re-skilling workers, including in our climate transition plan?
  • Does our offering to customers drive digitalization of other industries and have we considered the impacts on workers in the operations and value chains of the customers we support?

Understanding Risks
and Opportunities /

Digitalization – understood as the process of leveraging digital technologies to transform business models – includes increased use of generative AI and other forms of automations, such as replacing people with robots. Digitalization is driven by technological advancements and reduced technology costs, competitive pressure and efficiency gains, increased need for data-driven decision making, increased labor costs and changing workforce demographics (aging and labor scarcity).

Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic forced many companies and industries to embrace digital solutions and remote capabilities, further accelerating the digitalization of business.

Technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT) and cloud computing, are all key enablers in digitalization of businesses.

Technological change is currently predicted to be the most divergent labor market change, with broadening digital access expected to both create and displace more jobs than any other macrotrend (19 million and 9 million, respectively). Meanwhile, trends in AI and information processing technology are expected to create 11 million jobs, while simultaneously displacing 9 million others, more than any other technology trend. Robotics and autonomous systems are expected to be the largest net job displacer, with a net decline of 5 million jobs.

Research shows that at most 2.3% of jobs across the world have the potential to be fully automated. Many jobs, however, have a significant percentage of automatable activities. Automation’s greatest impact is forecast to be on jobs that consist of routine activities in predictable environments.

Digitalization of processes through automation and the use of AI can have a number of positive impacts.

In the short term, it can:

  • Remove unsafe jobs: in mining, robots can help remove people from dangerous underground jobs, for instance, in Resolute’s Syama mine in Mali.

  • Help people with restricted physical ability work.

  • Make jobs more accessible for local workers: in mining, robots can provide a simpler visual interface which makes it easier for companies to train local workers, rather than rely on highly skilled workers from outside the area.

  • Help manage labor shortages: for example, labor shortages exacerbated by Covid-19 incentivized investment in agricultural robots.

  • Increase access to e.g. healthcare, education and financial services through the use of AI solutions.

In the long term, AI and automation can create new jobs and increase the need for higher-skilled workers.

Estimates of the number of automatable jobs vary quite widely. For example, a study by McKinsey estimates that 50% of current work activities are automatable, and that by 2030, 400 million workers could be displaced by automation and 75 million will need to change occupational category. This shift will put enormous pressure on workers around the world.

Automation and the use of AI can more negatively affect people who are already vulnerable: low paid and precarious workers, workers in least developed countries, women and minorities that are over-represented in automatable jobs or under-represented in sectors that are likely to experience job growth. For example:

  • In the US, African American workers are projected to be disproportionately affected by automation because they are over-represented in sectors such as transportation, food service and office clerks. According to research of 2022 data, some 24 percent of all Black workers are in occupations with greater than 75 percent automation potential, compared with just 20 percent of White workers.

  • In Bangladesh, automation in the ready-made garment (RMG) industry has resulted in a 31% decline in the workforce and disproportionately affects women, who comprise 80% of the workforce in the sector.

  • The fact that many jobs can be replaced by AI also potentially disrupts the role of trade unions and strike actions, as demonstrated by a case related to the New York Times, where an AI company offered to replace the striking workers with AI solutions, effectively undermining the strike action.

The negative impacts of digitalization on people are in large part a result of the way in which companies introduce and use robots and AI solutions. The common denominator in cases of digitalization going wrong (where workers are dehumanized and seen as another input or cost in the production process) is lack of empathy: the ability to put oneself in someone else’s shoes.

When companies introduce digitalization without empathy with workers, the risks to people can be:

  • Loss of Livelihood: Workers who lose their job because they are unable to relocate, retrain or redeploy. ILO research shows that the potential impact on women is roughly 2.5 times greater than on men. Estimating that 1.4% of men’s jobs globally have the potential to be automated, compared with 3.7% of women’s employment. In high-income countries, where clerical jobs (typically held by women) make up a greater proportion of occupations, the effects are more striking: 2.9% of men’s jobs compared with 7.8% of women’s jobs.

  • Lower Wages: Studies have found that workers directly affected by robot adoption—particularly those in routine blue-collar roles—experienced wage decreases of approximately 6%. Other studies indicate that displaced low-wage workers may suffer a 13% reduction in income six years after job loss. Research also shows that technology which replaces workers without increasing productivity tends to depress wages of low-skilled workers. Other research indicates that growth in the wage gap in the U.S. could come from automation displacing low-skilled workers. In terms of young workers, a 2019 study focused on the U.S. Midwest indicated that an increase of one robot per 1,000 workers correlated with a 4% to 5% wage decline for young, less-educated men and women in manufacturing sectors. It found that minority young workers in the sample – less-educated Black men and women – faced the most significant negative impacts from robot adoption, exacerbating existing wage disparities.

  • Workplace Accidents: While automation of hazardous tasks leads to a decrease in work-related injuries, an investigation into Amazon warehouses where robot use has increased, showed that injuries were 50% higher, due to increased productivity targets for workers rolled out as a result of the productivity gains of automation.

  • Mental Health Problems: Research shows that automatable work has a detrimental impact on the mental health and life satisfaction of workers within some industries, particularly those with higher levels of job automation risk, such as manufacturing. Other studies show robot penetration was associated with sizable increases in drug and alcohol-related deaths and mental health problems among current and former workers. The OECD notes that AI-driven tools can lead to a decline in social contact and negatively affect workers’ well-being and productivity. A study analyzing data from 20 European countries found that increased robot adoption led to significant declines in workers’ sense of autonomy and job meaningfulness. The integration of AI tools for monitoring productivity has led to increased surveillance, causing stress and anxiety among workers. For instance, UPS drivers reported that sensors in delivery vehicles tracked every aspect of their workday, leading to feelings of constant scrutiny and reduced autonomy.

  • Rising income and wealth inequality: While automation and robots have already displaced low- and middle-skill jobs involving routine tasks, generative AI’s capabilities extend to more intelligent automation, potentially replacing more advanced tasks and occupations. Studies show that this could lead to an increase in income and wealth inequality, which in turn and over time can impact the enjoyment of a wide range of human rights, such as access to basic goods and services as a result of increased costs of living.

In the context of the low carbon transition, digitalization can enable and accelerate decarbonization, for example through the use of automation, robots and AI to optimize efficiency, reduce energy consumption, enhance worker productivity, as well as help to address labor and skills gaps. However, there may also be negative impacts for people, such as employers bypassing workforce training and upskilling by deploying digital and AI solutions in response to “green skills” shortages.

Further, if not managed appropriately, the simultaneous economic transformations of decarbonization and digitalization have the potential to exacerbate impacts on people within sectors. For example, in the oil and gas sector, skilled labor for roles such as oil and gas exploration may become increasingly automated, while overall demand for fossil fuel exploration is declining in response to the low carbon transition, amplifying the impact on jobs.

Finally, whilst AI can be used to improve efficiencies, AI & blockchain solutions are very high energy consumers and significant contributors to global GHG emissions, which, left unaddressed, will contribute to worsening physical climate impacts. (See Red Flag 25)

Operational Disruption and Reputation Risk due to Worker Concerns and Insecurity: Where companies automate – and this is done in ways that leave workers uncertain or insecure about their livelihoods – those companies can face public protests, union action, strikes and calls for boycotts. Examples of this include: Australian retailer Coles announcing the automation of warehouses (2020); Hollywood strikes over the use of generative AI in the movie industry (2023), and dockworkers in the U.S. protesting against automation (2024).

Potential Loss of Social License and “Local Content” Incentives: In cases where governments have offered incentives for businesses to set up operations and employ local people, (e.g. in the extractive industry), it may be that large-scale layoffs due to rapid automation will undermine the support of the local government and the population. Research is looking at a so called “social license to automate” in the mining industry and how local communities and workers are impacted by the increased automation.

Financial Risk:

  • Retailers implementing self-checkout systems to reduce labor costs have encountered increased theft rates. For instance, Walmart reported losses due to theft as high as $3 billion, with self-checkout systems contributing significantly to this figure. These losses have, in some cases, offset the savings from reduced staffing. Similarly, fast-food chains like Jack in the Box and Red Robin have explored replacing staff with automation to counter rising labor costs. However, the substantial investments required for automation technology, such as kiosks, have sometimes outweighed the anticipated savings, leading to financial strain.

Legal and Regulatory Risk:

  • Companies that lay off workers as part of a restructuring, while simultaneously integrating more artificial intelligence into their operations, face potential exposure to age bias lawsuits if older workers are among the first to be laid off. IBM faced a lawsuit alleging that it disproportionately laid off older HR employees to make way for AI-driven systems. The complaint claimed that the company assessed employees’ “runway”—the number of years before retirement—and favored younger workers with “new skills” and “new energy.”

  • Replacing certain roles with AI solutions can also lead to legal consequences for companies. Workday, a provider of AI-based hiring tools, is involved in a class action lawsuit alleging that its algorithms discriminated against job applicants based on race, age, and disability. The plaintiff claims he was rejected over 100 times by companies using Workday’s AI tools. While this examples primarily relates to AI bias, it also demonstrates the need for companies to consider risks associated with replacing HR personnel with AI solutions.

Financial Stability Implications of AI: The increased use of AI in the financial sector brings with it challenges from a financial stability point of view, which can impact companies financially in the short- and long-term. Research by the Financial Stability Board identifies that the widespread use of common AI models could lead to increased correlations in trading, lending, and pricing, as well as potential third-party dependencies. This could in turn amplify market stress, exacerbate liquidity crunches, and increase asset price vulnerabilities. The market for these products and services is also highly concentrated, which could expose financial institutions to operational vulnerabilities and systemic risk from disruptions affecting key service providers.

A company may contribute to negative human rights impacts when it lays off workers as a result of rapid digitalization without first trying to offer re-skilling or upskilling opportunities.

For example, in contexts where there is a weak social safety net or where workers lack alternative employment options or sources of income, rapid digitalization can result in job losses that leave workers without ways to secure an adequate standard of living. Compounded by the socio-economic context, this can negatively affect workers’ right to health, adequate housing and nutrition.

Buyers and investors may also contribute to negative human rights impacts if they require, respectively, their suppliers or investee companies to digitalize with no time to support workers in contexts where there are weak social safety nets.

A company that enables the digitalization of other industries, e.g. by developing AI and automation solutions, may contribute to negative human rights impacts by providing such solutions to customers without considering mitigation measures such as supporting affected workers in the transformation.

Technological progress is crucial to the fulfilment of all the SDGs, including with respect to SDG 7 Affordable and Clean Energy, SDG 12 Responsible Consumption and Production, and SDG 13 Climate Action. However, to be true to the purpose of the SDGs, the use of technology needs to be underpinned by an understanding of how the loss of jobs due to digitalization can affect people’s basic dignity and rights.

Digitalization with empathy and with support for workers to re-train or upskill can help companies fulfil the following SDGs:

  • SDG 8.5: Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities

  • SDG 9.2: Promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization

Taking Action /

While the scale of digitalization’s impacts on people is undeniable, the nature and gravity of those impacts will depend on the way in which companies apply technology. This includes the due diligence companies carry out to identify and address negative impacts on people. Important questions to consider are:

  • Does the company have a culture of empathy that looks not just at the benefits but also the human impacts of digitalization?

    • Do we seek to understand what workers expect from their jobs in terms of progression and development?

    • Do we ask how workers feel about the technology that surrounds them at work?

    • Do workers have alternative employment options? (Are we the only significant employer in the local area?)

    • How robust is the social safety net for workers who are displaced from their jobs?

  • Does the business have in place processes to minimize the harm to workers of introducing and using robots and AI solutions?

    • Do we have a process to assess impacts on people of new technology or automation in our operations?

    • Do we look for unintended negative consequences from technology meant to make work “faster and easier”?

    • Do we provide workers with opportunities for continuous learning? Do we recognize and reward that learning?

    • Are our governance and internal processes and controls able to manage the additional complexity that comes with automation and technology?

    • How do we engage with other stakeholders – including governments and trade unions – to identify ways to prepare workers for a changing landscape of work?

    • Have we considered what part of our workforce (specific job roles, geographies etc.) may be especially vulnerable to impacts as a result of digitalization?

    • Does the company support workers in the transformation to the need for new skills as a result of digitalization?

    • How does the company propose to fill any skills gaps resulting from digitalization? Are there plans for retraining/upskilling staff?

    • Has the company considered the energy consumption involved with digitalization, e.g. use of AI, automation etc. and associated impacts on people?

* Mitigation examples are current or historical examples for reference, but do not offer insight into their relative maturity or effectiveness.

Companies that introduce rapid digitalization should take steps to identify and mitigate the potential negative impacts on workers who lose their jobs as a result.

Mitigation examples fall into four categories:

  • Engaging with Workers: Giving workers early notice that their jobs will be affected and engaging with them to understand their needs and expectations. Examples are:

    • Research and forecasting: The European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training provides skills forecasts showing changes in the labor force and types of job openings, which enable workers, employers and governments to prepare in advance.

    • Engaging workers in the transformation: IBM has adopted a policy of open dialogue regarding workforce transformations involving AI. In which the company updates impacted team members through employee forums and dialogues.

    • Moderna merged its technology and human resources departments to address the evolving landscape shaped by AI advancements. It reports that this move aimed to redefine work responsibilities, distinguishing between tasks best suited for humans and those that can be automated.

    • Accenture involved its employees in designing and testing a custom version of OpenAI’s ChatGPT to assist in crafting sales proposals, engaging staff in the development process and providing training.

  • Supporting Redeployment or Relocation of Existing Workers: Companies can redeploy workers through upskilling or retraining. Examples are:

    • Companies such as Amazon, IKEA and Pwc have announced programs to upskill their workforce to help them move from positions vulnerable to automation to other jobs.

    • Pilot projects in Bangladesh aim to increase workers’ digital literacy and use of computer-based design to adapt to the increased use of automation in garment factories, at the same time addressing gender imbalances by focusing the training on women.

    • The Georgia Artificial Intelligence in Manufacturing (AIM) program, launched by Georgia Tech, aims to reskill manufacturing workers by providing training in AI and emerging technologies. This initiative supports small and mid-sized manufacturers in adopting smart technology and establishes a pipeline of skilled workers to sustain employment in the manufacturing sector.

  • Supporting Future Workers to Access the Labor Market: Examples of companies helping future workers develop skills abound, including:

    • Collaborating to help unemployed youth enter the labor market: in the UK, companies such as Centrica, Tesco and Starbucks have partnered with Movement to Work to implement programs to tackle youth unemployment.

    • IBM’s SkillsBuild is a free education program aimed at underrepresented communities, including adult learners, high school and university students, and faculty. It offers over 1,000 courses in 20 languages covering topics like artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, data analysis, and cloud computing. Participants can earn IBM-branded digital credentials recognized in the industry.

  • Using Leverage to Advocate for Public Policies: e.g. wage insurance, universal basic income, smart taxation, closing the gender gap in STEM degrees (only 27% are women).

    • Businesses can use their leverage to signal to governments changes needed in education curricula: for example, the Confederation of British Industry has commissioned research to better understand the curriculum changes needed to prepare young people to access the labor market.

    • The Future Skills Centre in Canada emphasizes the pivotal role of employers in upskilling initiatives. However, employers face barriers such as time, cost, and information constraints. The Centre is piloting approaches to enhance employer engagement, especially among SMEs, to ensure training efforts are targeted and effective.

    • The Social and Economic Council of the Netherlands is a multi-stakeholder body composed of trade unions and employers’ organizations which makes recommendations to the government on how to mitigate the negative impacts of robotization in the labor market. This type of dialogue can help governments drive education and social policy to better prepare future workers and to prevent the dislocation associated with an increase in automation.

    • France, Italy and Singapore have created personal training accounts, which allow workers to accrue credit which they can use towards training and upskilling and is transferable between employers. This provides workers with training opportunities that are not tied to their current employer.

    • Countries are also creating “skills ecosystems” that enable workers to chart their career path and access lifelong learning, such as Singapore’s Skills Future Movement.

Alternative models are examples of companies that retain workers instead of replacing them with robots and/or AI solutions. This does not mean the companies are not automating. It means they are integrating robots and/or AI solutions with their existing workforce in ways that benefit both workers and the business.

  • One emerging trend is to have robots and workers collaborating side-by-side. Research in the automotive sector shows that assembly lines where workers and robots (“co-bots”) worked together were more efficient than lines where workers or robots worked alone.

  • Another trend is using automation as an opportunity to provide workers with new skills, particularly to workers who are generally disempowered such as women or ethnic minorities.

  • Other examples include companies that retain their workforce in different capacities. For example, instead of cutting jobs after introducing a customer-service chatbot, IKEA retrained 8,500 customer-service workers to handle tasks such as advising customers on interior design and managing complex inquiries. This proactive approach ensured that employees were not displaced but rather transitioned into roles that complemented the new technology.

  • Shimmy Technologies, a fashion tech firm, developed a software platform to train garment workers in digital skills such as 3D modeling and digital patternmaking. This initiative is designed to enable workers to move from manual sewing tasks to more technical roles within the fashion industry, thereby reducing their vulnerability to automation.

  • Schneider Electric has initiated organization-wide AI training programs in India, extending beyond specific departments to include all employees. The goal is to create a more AI-literate workforce capable of leveraging advanced technologies in daily operations.

General

Sector specific

Regional

Citation of research papers and other resources does not constitute an endorsement by Shift of their conclusions.

Dr. Christine Chow /

Board Member

She/Her

Linkedin-in
Dr. Christine Chow has more than 25 years’ experience in investment management spanning sustainable investment, corporate governance, technology and AI.

She has held senior leadership roles at UBS Asset Management, HSBC Asset Management and Federated Hermes, where she led global stewardship, thematic research, responsible investment and engagement with companies on sustainability and governance issues. She was the human rights engagement lead at Federated Hermes, where she pioneered its approach to global value chain engagement with electronics companies, and advocated for provenance and traceability of critical minerals.

Christine served as Managing Director at UBS Asset Management, leading on global stewardship, thematic research and impact engagement. Previously, she was Global Head of Stewardship and a board member of HSBC Asset Management UK Limited, and Head of Asia and Global Technology at Federated Hermes EOS. From 2019 to 2025, she served as a board member and then Chair of the International Corporate Governance Network (ICGN), a global investor-led organisation representing around US$100 trillion in assets under management across more than 40 countries.

Christine is recognised internationally for her work on responsible investment, AI governance and corporate stewardship. She has published influential work on responsible AI and data governance and was a member of the UK Parliament’s All-Party Parliamentary Group on Artificial Intelligence, serving on its Data Governance Task Force. She is the Appointed Advisor of AFRC in Hong Kong, the independent regulator of the accounting profession, and Emeritus Governor of the London School of Economics. Her PhD research on responsible investment was shortlisted for a United Nations award recognising industry relevance and academic excellence.

David Vermijs /

Director

He/Him Amsterdam

Linkedin-in

As Director, David engages with business partners to better identify, prioritize and act on salient human rights issues, embedding the UN Guiding Principles in companies’ decision-making processes.

Specializes in Business Enterprises

As Director, David engages with business partners to better identify, prioritize and act on salient human rights issues, embedding the UN Guiding Principles in companies’ decision-making processes.

David has over a decade of experience advising multinational corporations, governments, NGOs and others on business and human rights. Prior to joining Shift, David provided research assistance to the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for business and human rights John Ruggie. As part of his contributions, David field-tested human rights due diligence with a group of Dutch companies and their stakeholders, and he supported research on company-led grievance mechanisms.

From 2008 to 2010, David was the lead consultant on an 18-month project, the Business and Human Rights Initiative, under the umbrella of the Global Compact Network Netherlands. The initiative was a collaboration between 10 Dutch multinationals – ABN AMRO, AkzoNobel, Essent, KLM, Philips, Rabobank, Randstad, Shell, TNT and Unilever – and led to the publication of a ground-breaking business guidance tool, How to Do Business with Respect for Human Rights, in 2010. Through his work at Shift, David led the update of this publication from 2014 to 2016 with the support of the Dutch government under their National Action Plan on implementing the Guiding Principles.

Another major guidance tool David has helped develop addresses due diligence on child labor, published by the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) in 2015. The guidance was the result of a multi-year, multi-stakeholder, multi-country project led by David involving the ILO, IOE, companies, unions, NGOs and other stakeholders.

David was previously a Research Fellow at the Corporate Responsibility Initiative at the Harvard Kennedy School, including assisting in teaching on business and human rights, global governance, corporate governance and leadership. David sits in a personal capacity on the board of the Dutch Social and Economic Council International Corporate Social Responsibility Committee. He has a Masters in Public Policy from the Harvard Kennedy School and a Bachelor of Arts in Business from Radboud University Nijmegen in the Netherlands. David is a Dutch national, speaks English and Dutch and is proficient in Spanish and German.

Anna Triponel /

Senior Associate

She/Her London

Linkedin-in

As a Senior Associate with Shift, Anna advises companies, lawyers, investors and business associations on how to put the Guiding Principles into practice.

As a Senior Associate with Shift, Anna advises companies, investors and business associations on how to put the Guiding Principles into practice. Trained as a lawyer, Anna focuses particularly on working with legal professionals on their role in implementing the Guiding Principles and has led work on analyzing regulations in various jurisdictions and how they align to the Guiding Principles. She also has particular expertise on the UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework. 

Prior to joining Shift, Anna provided input to the work of the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for business and human rights John Ruggie as a legal consultant. During this period, Anna also opened the New York office of the Public International Law & Policy Group, where she advised government officials, opposition leaders, human rights victims and civil society organizations on human rights, constitutional reform and transitional justice in Burma, Côte d’Ivoire, Egypt, Kenya, Libya, Somaliland, Tunisia, Uganda and Zimbabwe.

Anna was previously a mergers and acquisitions associate at the law firm of Jones Day in New York, where she advised a broad range of multinational companies on cross-border mergers and acquisitions, joint venture, private equity and venture capital transactions. She founded and led the law firm’s International Law Pro Bono Group. She began her career as an advisor to the World Bank, advising on development governance structures to better meet the Millennium Development Goal of achieving universal primary education.

Anna is a (non-practicing) lawyer qualified in New York, England & Wales and France. She is a frequent expert speaker and writer on business and human rights and is the recipient of various professional awards, including the Empire State Counsel Award for changing the lives of those unable to afford counsel and the Seymour-Reuben Award for shaping international law. Anna has a Masters in International Law from American University Washington College of Law and a degree in common and civil law from the University of Paris X. She has been awarded the Business Sustainability Management certificate from the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership (CISL) and the MBA Essentials certificate from London School of Economics (LSE). Anna is a British and French national and speaks English and French.

Martyn Platt /

Head of Human Resources

He/Him

As Head of Human Resources, Martyn leads Shift’s global people strategy and oversees all aspects of HR across the organization.

As Head of Human Resources, Martyn leads Shift’s global people strategy and oversees all aspects of HR across the organization. He ensures that Shift’s systems, policies and practices foster a thriving, inclusive and values-driven culture that supports our mission to embed respect for people’s dignity at the core of business practice.

Martyn brings over a decade of HR leadership experience across mission-driven and international organizations working at the intersection of business and society. Prior to joining Shift, he was Director of People Development & Culture at the PRI and earlier worked with Business in the Community. In these roles, he developed and embedded HR business partnering models, guided the organizations through significant growth and transformation, and partnered with senior leaders to design and implement people strategies that supported the delivery of their mission. Most recently, he served as a consultant with the WeProtect Global Alliance, where he supported the establishment of their HR function.

He is a Chartered Member of the CIPD and holds a Level 7 Diploma in Human Resource Management, as well as an ILM Level 7 Certificate in Executive Coaching and Mentoring, reflecting his strong focus on leadership development and coaching. Martyn studied German and International Relations at the University of Exeter, including a year at the University of Würzburg in Germany. He later worked on education projects in Nicaragua, strengthening his global outlook and commitment to people-centred change.

Martyn is based in the United Kingdom.

Brianna Peterson /

Senior Advisor

She/Her Rome

Linkedin-in

As a Senior Advisor at Shift, Brianna advises financial institutions and companies on how to put the UNGPs into practice, with a particular focus on the nexus between human rights and climate change.

Specializes in Financial Institutions

As a Senior Advisor at Shift, Brianna advises financial institutions and companies on how to put the UNGPs into practice, with a particular focus on the nexus between human rights and climate change. Brianna combines environment and climate change expertise with experience developing and implementing human rights policies, due diligence approaches and sustainability reporting.

Before Shift, Brianna spearheaded innovative sustainability initiatives at Sustainable Development Technology Canada and Export Development Canada (EDC). At EDC she led the development and implementation of exciting new portfolio approaches for climate change and human rights risk management, as well as aligning EDC’s corporate reporting with international reporting frameworks, such as the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures and the UNGPs Reporting Framework.  She also led EDC’s international sustainability negotiations and engagements, including as co-Chair of the Equator Principles Climate Change Working Group.

Prior to joining EDC, Brianna worked for nine years as a diplomat with Canada’s foreign ministry, including four years at the United Nations General Assembly where she led environment and development negotiations, advocacy and outreach on behalf of the Government of Canada, including for the creation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Brianna has also advised international financial institutions including the World Bank Group, institutional investors, bilateral development agencies, and small- and medium-sized enterprises on the practical application of environment, climate change, human rights standards.

Brianna has an undergraduate degree in Chemical Engineering from Queen’s University and a Master’s degree in Environmental Change & Management from the University of Oxford.

Ashleigh Owens /

Director | Financial Institutions Lead

She/Her New York City

Linkedin-in

As Shift’s Director / Financial Institutions Lead, Ashleigh leads our work with financial institutions and supports other partners across industries, leveraging her breadth of experience to tackle cutting-edge issues and entrenched challenges on the road to implementation of the UN Guiding Principles.

Specializes in Financial Institutions | Valuing Respect

As Director / Financial Institutions Lead, Ashleigh engages directly with financial institutions, companies and investors as they embed respect for human rights into their operations and business relationships. She also leads on pieces of research under our Valuing Respect Project, which is focused on developing better ways to evaluate business respect for human rights. Ashleigh has a breadth of experience approaching the Guiding Principles from business, legal and academic perspectives and brings a holistic view to Guiding Principles implementation.

Ashleigh was previously Executive Director at Ernst & Young’s Climate Change and Sustainability Services. At EY Japan, she led a team of consultants supporting policy-making, educational program and governance design, stakeholder dialogue and due diligence strategies for multinational and domestic companies across a variety of industries.  As founder of the EY Human Rights Network, she led the enhancement of EY’s human rights capabilities across EY’s global network. In her role she was a frequent speaker and moderator of dialogues at multi-stakeholder fora and functioned as a connector between civil society, government and corporate actors with a common goal of empowering business to respect rights.

From 2012 to 2014 she conducted research at the United Nations University in the field of Sustainability Science, specializing in business and human rights. She prepared research for the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights and spent time at the UN Global Compact New York and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Ashleigh later sat on the UN Global Compact’s Human Rights and Labour Working Group and drafted the Global Compact’s 2015 Guide on How to Develop a Human Rights Policy.

Ashleigh is a lawyer qualified in Australia and England & Wales and specialized in intellectual property law, labor law and public international law. She has advised governments and companies on state human rights obligations, companies on the nexus between bilateral investment treaties and human rights and fellow lawyers on integrating the Guiding Principles into legal advice. In 2007 she won the Intellectual Property Society of Australia & NZ prize.

Ashleigh has authored or contributed to a number of publications including: Business and Human Rights: Corporate Japan Rises to the Challenge (joint publication between EY Japan and Global Compact Network Japan), Corporate Social Responsibility Can Save Japan (Op-ed in Japan Times), Cumulative Human Rights Impacts (in UN Global Compact/ Maplecroft Business Dilemmas Forum) as well as several legal publications on intellectual property law in Australia and English translations of Japanese High Court judgments. She is also a member of the Advisory Board for the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR)’s Division for Prosperity.

Ashleigh has degrees in Law and Asian Studies from the University of Western Australia, with studies also conducted at the University of Vienna and Sophia University in Japan. She has a Masters of Science in Sustainability from the United Nations University and has undertaken the institution’s Leadership for Sustainability program. Ashleigh is an Australian national, and is fluent in Japanese.

Rachel Davis /

Vice President and Co-Founder

She/Her Sydney

Linkedin-in

As the Vice President and Co-Founder of Shift, Rachel helps shape our strategy and oversees a range of our collaborations with companies, governments, investors, civil society and other partners. Rachel is also responsible for driving our work on standards advocacy and with sports associations.

Specializes in Standard Setters | Sports and Human Rights

Rachel is one of Shift’s co-founders and has led work at Shift over the last decade on standard-setting, human rights and sports, financial institutions, conflict and international law.

As Vice President, Rachel shapes our strategy and oversees a range of our collaborations with companies, governments, investors, civil society and other partners. Rachel leads Shift’s work to influence standard-setters of all kinds to integrate the UN Guiding Principles into the rules that govern business, including engaging with governments and the European Union on mandatory human rights due diligence.

Rachel also has unique experience advising and leading efforts to drive respect for human rights into the operations of global sports governing bodies. Rachel was the Chair of FIFA’s independent Human Rights Advisory Board while it operated, between 2017 and 2021. She has advised the International Olympic Committee on human rights since 2018, including co-authoring recommendations for the IOC on a comprehensive human rights strategy with former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al-Hussein.

Rachel has more than a decade of experience in implementing the Guiding Principles with a wide range of organizations, including public and private financial institutions and companies from diverse business sectors and geographies, and she frequently leads and facilitates engagements with senior audiences around the world. She is the co-author of the leading study of the costs of company-community conflict in the extractive sector.

Prior to co-founding Shift, Rachel was a senior legal advisor from 2006-2011 to the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General on business and human rights, Harvard Professor John Ruggie. She played a pivotal role in the development of the Guiding Principles, advising on all aspects of the relationship between the Guiding Principles and national and international law.

Rachel is also a Senior Program Fellow with the Corporate Responsibility Initiative at Harvard Kennedy School and has experience at the highest levels of the Australian legal system and internationally, having clerked at the High Court of Australia and at the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague. She has a particular interest in Indigenous peoples’ rights, having advised the Australian Federal Attorney-General’s Department on Indigenous affairs and acted as Ruggie’s liaison with the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues during his UN mandate.

Rachel has a Master of Laws degree from Harvard Law School and Bachelors degrees in Law and Politics from the University of New South Wales in Sydney, where she also lectured and published in law. She is a (non-practicing) lawyer qualified in New South Wales.

Federico Burlon /

Director

He/Him London

As Director at Shift, Federico engages with business partners to better identify, prioritize and act on salient human rights issues, embedding the UN Guiding Principles in companies’ decision-making processes.

Specializes in Business Enterprises

As Director at Shift, Federico engages with business partners to better identify, prioritize and act on salient human rights issues, embedding the UN Guiding Principles in companies’ decision-making processes.

Prior to joining Shift, Federico was Head of Delivery at Impactt. Federico managed a portfolio of clients, supported by a team of consultants. He led human rights assessment and remediation projects in the construction, energy, food and shipbuilding industries. This resulted in positive outcomes such as the return of passports and reimbursement of recruitment fees to workers and the strengthening of companies’ employment practices. Federico led Impactt’s engagement with the Supreme Committee for Delivery & Legacy in Qatar as external monitor of worker welfare in the construction of venues for the 2022 FIFA World Cup. He also developed Impactt’s Diagnostics community of practice, delivering for clients as well as building internal capacity to execute human rights assessments around the world, with a focus on worker voice.

Prior to Impactt, Federico was a Sustainability Manager at Tesco plc. He contributed to the roll out of Tesco’s ethical trading programme to the goods-not-for-resale value chain. Federico engaged with hundreds of product and services suppliers and internal purchasing and sourcing teams to raise awareness of human rights issues and to prioritise and address the findings from third-party social audits. He also worked on climate change to develop a roadmap to achieve Tesco’s carbon reduction commitments related to direct and supply chain emissions.

In prior roles, Federico worked with a variety of human rights organisations in the United Kingdom and United States.

Federico holds a MSc in Human Rights from the London School of Economics and a BA in Political Science and International Studies from Macalester College, with a focus on human rights law and international migration. He is a United World College Adriatic alumnus and is from Argentina.

Erika George /

Board Member

She/Her

Linkedin-in X-twitter

Erika George is Director of the Tanner Humanities Center and Samuel D. Thurman Professor of Law at the University of Utah. She has conducted leading research and is a passionate advocate for women’s rights, children’s rights, gender equality and environmental justice. 

Professor Erika R. George is the Associate Dean for Equity, Justice, & Engagement, Professor of Law, and Ernest Haddad Faculty Scholar at Boston University School of Law and a leading expert in business and human rights.

Professor George is the author of “Incorporating Rights: Strategies to Advance Corporate Accountability” (Oxford University Press, 2021), which examines the evolution of demands for corporate responsibility to respect international human rights. She was a founding member of the editorial board of the Business and Human Rights Journal (Cambridge University Press) and since 2022  has served on the board of Shift. 

Before joining BU Law in 2024, Professor George spent over two decades at the University of Utah as the Samuel D. Thurman Professor of Law. She directed the Tanner Humanities Center for four years and worked to enhance engagement and expand and diversify audiences for public humanities programs during her tenure. She also advocated for academic freedom and the right to read. Along with the former poet laureate of Utah, she co-founded the PEN America Utah Chapter to protect access to information and prevent censorship. 

Professor George is an elected member of the American Law Institute, an American Bar Foundation fellow, a trustee of Earthjustice, and serves on the Executive Board of the American Bar Association Center for Human Rights.

She is the recipient of numerous awards including the Society of American Law Teachers’ M. Shanara Gilbert Human Rights Award and the Salt Lake City Human Rights Commission Human Rights Award.

Professor George earned her BA with honors from the University of Chicago, a MA in International Relations from the University of Chicago, and a JD from Harvard Law School. She also clerked for Judge William T. Hart of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. She was a litigation associate at the law firm of Jenner & Block in Chicago before joining Human Rights Watch as a research fellow.

We recorded an interview with Professor George when she joined Shift’s Board in February of 2022. It is available here.

Erika George is Director of the Tanner Humanities Center and Samuel D. Thurman Professor of Law at the University of Utah. Prior to joining the University of Utah, Professor George served as a law clerk and litigation associate at prominent firms in both Illinois and New York. She also worked as a fellow and later consultant at Human Rights Watch, where she conducted investigations in South Africa on women’s rights, children’s rights, violence, the right to education and abuses related to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. She wrote a book-length report, Scared at School: Sexual Violence Against Girls in South African Schools, which received widespread media coverage in South Africa and internationally. She currently serves as special counsel to the Women’s Rights Division of Human Rights Watch.

Her scholarship has appeared in the California Law Review, the Michigan Journal of International Law, the New York University Journal of International Law and Policy, and the annual proceedings of the American Society of International Law.

Professor George has served on the Executive Committee of the U.S. Department of State Public-Private Partnership for Justice Reform in Afghanistan and as a member of the board of the American Civil Liberties Union of Utah. She is an Editor for the blog globaljusticeblog.com.

We recorded an interview with Professor George when she joined Shift’s Board in February of 2022. It is available here.

John Ruggie /

Founding Chair / In Memoriam

John Ruggie is the author of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

In Memory of John Ruggie

John served as the founding Chair of Shift from 2011 to 2021. He was the Berthold Beitz Research Professor in Human Rights and International Affairs at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. He also taught at the Berkeley and San Diego campuses of the University of California, and at Columbia University where he became Dean of the School of International and Public Affairs. From 1997-2001 John served as UN Assistant Secretary-General for Strategic Planning in the cabinet of Kofi Annan; from 2002-2005 as Special Advisor to the Secretary-General for the Global Compact; and from 2005-2011 as Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Business and Human Rights.

A Fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, he received numerous awards from academic and professional societies for his contributions to social science, public policy and the development of international law. In addition to serving as Shift’s Board Chairman, John was also on the Board of Arabesque Asset Management Holding Company as well as Unilever’s Sustainability Advisory Council. His book, Just Business: Multinational Corporations and Human Rights, has been translated into Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese and Spanish.

Caroline Rees /

President and Co-Founder

She/Her New York City

Linkedin-in

As Shift’s President, Caroline leads our strategic development and drives our thought leadership work on key challenges and opportunities in advancing corporate respect for business and human rights.

As the President and Co-Founder of Shift, Caroline leads our organizational strategy and development and drives our thought leadership work on key challenges and opportunities in advancing corporate respect for business and human rights. Caroline speaks extensively at events around the world and frequently facilitates dialogue and debate amongst companies, governments, investors and civil society. In recent years, Caroline has focused on improving corporate human rights reporting as a catalyst for better human rights risk management, and on improving the data and methods used in evaluating companies’ social performance as part of ESG (environmental, social and governance) analysis. She has written and spoken extensively on the relevance of business respect for human rights, and the UNGPs specifically, to movements that seek to advance sustainability, equality, ESG investing, stakeholder capitalism, and human and social capital.

Caroline previously spent 14 years with the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office. From 2003 to 2006 she led the UK’s human rights negotiating team at the UN and she ran the negotiations to establish the mandate of the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General on business and human rights. The success of this initiative led to Professor John Ruggie’s appointment and from 2007-2011 Caroline was a lead advisor on his team and deeply involved in the drafting of the Guiding Principles.

From 2009 to 2011 Caroline was also the Director of the Governance and Accountability Program at the Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative at Harvard Kennedy School and she remains a Senior Program Fellow there. Caroline is a member of the Imperatives Board of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, the Board of the Capitals Coalition, the Unilever Sustainability Advisory Council, and the Steering Committee of the Taskforce on Inequality and Social-related Financial Disclosures.

Caroline’s prior British foreign service career covered Iran, Slovakia, the UN Security Council in New York and the European Union in Brussels. Caroline has a Bachelor of Arts (Hons) from Oxford University and a Master of Arts in Law and Diplomacy from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. Caroline is a British national and speaks English, French and German.