Boardroom Conversations with Sally-Ann Williams

Episode 13: Sally-Ann Williams – Diversity in STEM, shared values in the boardroom and governance at start-ups

Sally-Ann Williams GAICD is the CEO of tech incubator Cicada Innovations and the Chair of the Federal Government’s “Diversity in STEM” Review. She’s also a director at Qudos Bank and a member of the CSIRO Data61 Advisory Board. We discuss directors’ role in boosting diversity in STEM fields, the importance of shared values in the boardroom, and governance at start-ups. Plus: how Cicada helps technology companies to grow.

Show Notes: 
 
Click here to read more about the “Diversity in STEM” Review

Transcript

BENNETT MASON

Our guest this time is Sally-Ann Williams. She's the CEO of tech incubator Cicada Innovations and the chair of the Federal Government's Diversity in STEM Review. She's also a director at Qudos Bank, a member of the CSIRO Data61 Advisory Board and a former executive program manager at Google. Sally-Ann, thanks so much for joining us on boardroom conversations. 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

Thanks so much for having me. 

BENNETT MASON 

Now we like to start these episodes by asking guests a little bit about their career as directors. What was your first board role and how did it come about? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

It's a great question. So, I actually had quite a few interactions with both board and advisory roles very early on in my career, more in the advisory space. And that was about expertise and paying it forward into different organisations and institutions to help them think about technology and their future strategic direction. My first formal board appointment was actually joining the board of Fishburners, a not-for-profit co-working space in Sydney. And that came about because I'd been involved with the organisation and supporting it both formally and informally through my role at Google. But I was also very passionate about driving the Start-Up ecosystem in Australia in its nascent days. Before anybody talked about Start-ups and why they were a necessary part of our economy to move forward and to drive things forward. So that invitation came very, very early in the piece and it was really about being able to contribute to the strategic direction of the organisation and support its mission and vision going forward. 

BENNETT MASON 

Now we mentioned earlier that previously you had a position with Google. Everybody knows Google. You worked there for more than a decade. What did you learn from your time at that company and how do you think it's helped you in some of your current roles? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

So, I actually worked on the engineering team, and I started back in 2006 at Google Australia, and that was kind of the very early days of both Google in Australia but also the engineering organisation being based in global offices outside and far away from Mountain View. And I think there's a few things that I really take away from my time there. The first is really being comfortable in making decisions and moving forward when there are large uncertainties or large unanswered questions. And that's both from a product perspective and a strategic perspective. And Google was a great playground in the early days to learn how to do that and to think through different challenges and opportunities and evaluate them from multiple different angles and invite different people into the room to have the thorny conversations that you need to do to thrash out issues and kind of go: “What's the best pathway forward and how do we actually build this as we're driving it forward?” So for me, that was probably one of the things that I learnt. I think the second one is that I really learnt the value of being comfortable in calling out problems and challenges. But not just calling out the problem with the challenge, actually coming up with a possible solution, or at least the first step towards a solution. I think so often we look at things in our organisations and in the companies that we work with, whether it's directors or executives, and we omit to call out the elephant in the room. And I'm a big fan of identifying it early in great detail and then saying: “Well, how might we address it? He's where I'm starting from, but how about we collectively get together and address that?” So that's probably the second thing I would say. And having a confidence in myself to do that. And the third one for me, was the value of people. People are everything in an organisation and in a business and you really need to invest in them and with them to build something amazing.  That for me, is fundamentally still something that I look for in both my own organisation, but also the organisations that I contribute to. 

BENNETT MASON 

Google is obviously a very large organisation. It's got a lot of resources. Some of the organisations you work with now through Cicada are smaller, they’re start-ups. Do you find that those lessons still apply from Google over to those smaller organisations? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

Absolutely. And I think that's fundamentally what I loved about my early years at Google more than anything else was, it was a lot smaller. And there was a lot of complexity and uncertainty and even processes and systems that we hadn't built as an organisation to operate with yet. So actually, designing and building that all out and making it fit for purpose and fit for that organisation to grow is something that I think is an incredibly valuable thing and a good thing to spend time on. And with the companies that I see here at Cicada and in all the work that I do with deep tech start-ups and emerging businesses, it still comes down to those fundamental traits of how do you create an environment where people can be at their best, where they are confident and comfortable to raise issues early and often so that they can be collectively addressed as a team in how you make changes. And then how do you actually think about creating a pathway forward for a product or service or a business where you actually don't know whether the market exists because you're building it from scratch? So, all of those things absolutely ring true. And I think it's a great comfort to people when you do get in a room and you have CEOs or C-suite execs from these businesses and you can talk through the challenges that you faced, the mistakes that you've made, and acknowledge that mistakes are actually just part of the learning process and the journey of building a business. Nothing’s perfect. Nothing's going to work the first time. So how do you actually normalise those disruptions, those challenges, those stress, those growth pains that happen and make it comfortable. Particularly for the executives in these small organisations, to be willing to talk about that challenge with their board and with their advisory board and those that are funding them to normalise it and make it comfortable that collectively you can solve that together. 

BENNETT MASON 

I want to talk about some of the organisations you work with in a moment through Cicada, but let's just stick with your own career for a moment. We mentioned some of your roles in the introduction. You're a CEO but also a non-executive director. Do you find it challenging sometimes to juggle those roles and do you think there's a different mindset needed from your executive roles, opposed your non-executive director roles? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

I actually think it's a really great advantage if you have had experience on a board before you have your first CEO role or chief executive role. For me, that's my experience. I did that both at Fishburners, I was on the board of World Vision Australia and a few other places. And it gave me great experience in seeing what is expected of a CEO and also the different facets of what that can look like in boardroom dynamics, with the CEO and the executive. So, I got a little bit of the good, the bad and the ugly through those journeys. And so that really helped me form a view about how I wanted to come into this role. I do think it's a real challenge for anybody that wears both hats to continually remind themselves how are they showing up in that meeting. And as a CEO, I have to lead and direct the organisation and I should be in the details, and I should be in the operations. But when I show up as a board member on nearly all of my other boards, I do need to change that tactic and reframe the types of conversations that I'm having. Now the one caveat to that is every now and then on a board, you might have a CEO for whatever reason who moves on or becomes unavailable. And sometimes if you haven't got that emerging talent to step up in that business, you need to lean in as a board and help a little bit more operationally. So, you have to recognise that that's time bound and how do you step out of it. But I think any experience that you have that gives you a different perspective to the one that you operate in 80% of the time is a valuable tool to help you step outside of your fixed pathway and framework or mindset of thinking and help you think a little bit differently and more broadly about an issue. So for me, I think every opportunity to flex into one of those different roles is an opportunity for me to both contribute, but also be really reflective about how am I showing up in my other roles and what can I learn from this situation and take it into these other organisations, whether it be in the executive role or as a as a board member. So, I think it's incredibly valuable. 

BENNETT MASON  

Do you ever have a moment where you're sitting around the board table and an issue comes up and you almost have to catch yourself though, and think, Oh gosh, maybe, maybe I'm approaching this as management rather than a director. 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

I think we all have those moments where you have to catch yourself, and I think it's really important in that moment, if you can, to ask yourself why are you showing up that way? And what is it that you're concerned about? Now, sometimes that can be really good reason. In the space that I work, there's not a lot of people that work in deep tech. And so some of the expertise that I bring to the table may not exist in the organisation that I sit on the board for. So, there is an aspect of how can I take them on the journey and share my expertise with management but give them the space to own drive and reject it if that's what they need to do. So that is a really unique sort of position that I find myself in quite often. But the second one is for me I think is actually pulling myself up and recognising that if I'm bringing something quite new to the table and a new way of thinking about things, whether it be from a technology perspective or a digital technologies perspective, that it's a journey in that organisation to contribute to it with the skill set that I have. So how can I actually break that down and maybe work at a pace that that organisation is comfortable with versus the organisations that I live and breathe and do life alongside every day? And those two velocities are quite different at times. 

BENNETT MASON 

You've been on all sorts of boards. You mentioned World Vision Australia a moment ago and you're still on the board at Qudos Bank. What sort of factors do you consider when you're deciding whether to join a new board or not? Is there something in particular you look at? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

Absolutely. So, there's a couple of criteria that are really important to me, and I continue to refine this over time. But the number one thing for me is the people. Who am I going to be doing life alongside? Who am I going to be working and serving alongside? Because being on a board is service. It's not in your own sort of self-interest. It really is about the organisation and how can you contribute to it. So, I'm really keen to understand the other people that are sitting around that table. I'm really keen to understand who the executives are and understand whether that's going to be a good dynamic for me and whether I will also be a good dynamic for that organisation. So, there's a bit of evaluation and also sort of self-reflection on that and that's my absolute number one. The second thing I actually really look for is how can I show up and contribute. So, I know myself well enough that I have a very strong bias to action and contribution. I really like to be able to help. It is one of my core drivers in everything that I do. So, I really look for board roles that are going to be an opportunity for me to actually actively contribute in an area of need. If I'm being invited to sit there because they need somebody of a certain calibre, but there's not really a clear role for me to play, I'll actually struggle with that opportunity. And I'll really have to think through why would I want to be there? I really do love to support people and that includes the executive and other board members in decision making, in strategic direction, in growth, in dealing with the difficult things that come up in building businesses. So for me, I'm looking for that sort of active fit of where do I contribute to it? And I think the third thing that I really look for is, I evaluate who's around the table from a different lens and who's around the executive and going, have we got a diverse skill set and a diverse group of people on every lens here? So that dynamic, that organisational dynamic and that rhythm of how they work and how they contribute mutually and what that looks like from a respect perspective. I think it's really important for me to understand all of those things. Of course, I do all my due diligence on the financials and all of those things, but for me that's more important than, are they an ASX listed company, are they in the top ten? Do they have a certain profile in the media? All of that is not actually anything that I would consider at all. It's about the environment that I'm going to be in and is it going to be healthy for me and I'm going to be really healthy and helpful in that organisation as well. 

BENNETT MASON 

The factors you mentioned then, two of them were focused around people and chemistry and fit and the diversity of the room. It can be difficult sometimes to get a sense of that until you actually join the board. So, do you have any advice on how to work that out before joining up with the organisation? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

I actually do. So, I've had a lot of what I would call less than optimal experiences in organisations where I haven't found that alignment. So, for me it's about how do we have conversations about vision and values. And how do we have those both collectively as a whole board before I join, but also individually with people? And is there a comfort level for me to push on a few things and see where they lie? I don't want people who just agree with me fundamentally about values in life. I think disagreement is really healthy, but can we do it respectfully and can we challenge each other? And what does that actually look like? So I tend to go in, depending on the organisation, I tend to go in with some difficult questions and I ask things about what was the last really challenging conversation you had around the table and what did that look like from your perspective? What worked well, what didn't work well? I'm really trying to see if people have enough EQ to actually evaluate and have that conversation. I don't want to be there to warm the seat. That's not something that excites me. So, I really want to kind of understand what does dynamic look like. And if they're on the same page as me and they truly believed that people are the biggest asset to the organisation, then they'll actually take the time to get to know me and allow me to take the time to get to know them as well. Qudos Bank’s a great example. I had never thought of being on a financial services board. It was just not something that I was actively pursuing or even thinking about. But what attracted me to the opportunity about a mutual bank is not only the vision and the purpose of a mutual bank and the mutual sector. I think it's incredibly important and needs to exist to provide value for its members - who are its owners. They’re its customers and its owners. But I actually really loved the dynamic of the people around the table and the commitment that they had of where they wanted to go forward to. And so, there's this active engagement about the future direction and building something together. And that was really quite exciting and a bit surprising to me to find that opportunity come across my plate. But it's been wonderful to go on the journey so far. 

BENNETT MASON 

Sally, you've had some great advice there for practising directors and emerging directors, but I want to talk now about Cicada Innovations. We mentioned that you're the CEO there. Cicada is an incubator for start-ups or scale ups working in deep tech. Now, some of our listeners might just be learning about this space and they could be unfamiliar with terms like “incubator” or “deep tech.” So could you tell us a little bit more about the work that Cicada does and why? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

Absolutely. So, let's unpack deep tech first. Deep tech is fundamentally a belief in science and engineering-driven businesses in the economy. And we really believe here at Cicada Innovations, and I do personally, that that is the future opportunity for Australia to emerge as a global powerhouse. We’re brilliant and scientific discovery and engineering capability. How can we grow more businesses to solve some of the world's most pressing problems? So deep tech businesses are fundamentally based in IP. They typically take a long pathway to market because they're regulated. They typically solve very complex problems in the life sciences, in energy, in space, in modern manufacturing, in quantum, in all those sorts of verticals. And they require a lot of patient capital and generally some policy work to actually create a space for them to operate and then exist in as well. So, it's kind of complex, but it's the really cool stuff. If we want to see fundamental uplift in society, it's going to come out of these businesses and the people that are building these businesses. Cicada at its core does two things really well. One is we are an incubator, so we actually have three sites now where we run the incubation services for resident companies. And an incubator in this sense is very much like an incubator for chickens and eggs. It gives you the right temperature, the right environment, and the right support and infrastructure around you to bring you through, to hatch, thrive and survive in the wild. So, we equip all of our residents with connections to capital. We have labs and office spaces. We have experts that come around and mentor them. We coach them, we connect them to customers in industry here and overseas. You know, we provide them connections into policy conversations at a national level and a state level, to support them in their pathway to market. So, everything that I could possibly do on that really hard journey, and most importantly, a community of likeminded people who are on the ride. And so, the highs and lows, the high highs are very high, the low lows are very low. But when you're sharing them with other people, it's a much easier journey. The second thing that we do is we provide commercialisation services for deep tech, emerging date tech businesses and people who want to do a deep tech business. So, we have a range of programs that operate at a national level that help accelerate people's customer discovery journey in scientific and engineering businesses. Their pathway to market, their validation process and support and nurture them the entire step of the way to do two things: to de-risk the business in the early stages, but also to refine it and help get it to be that market ready. It’s really hard. I think the stat is around 90%, 95% of small businesses fail. We have an 85% survival rate of companies that are incubated here. So, it's hard work and those commercialisation services tend to try and get people to fail early before they've put too much time and effort and money into it. But to fail or pivot early and then to actually bring them in when we think they've got a hope of really taking it to market and go with them on that often decade-old journey that it takes to get there. 

BENNETT MASON 

We're recording this podcast at the Cicada offices, and you can wander around and see some of the organisations that you're working with, some of the resident companies. I don't want you to pick a favourite child, as it were, but are there some companies that you're particularly excited about at the moment? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

Look, you've asked me to pick a favourite child and I think you’re supposed to say the middle child, right? Or is it the first born? I’m not sure. I get really excited about companies that do things that maybe people haven't heard of. One of our largest companies that is kind of half out because they've grown too big, so I'm making them graduate or move out of home, is SpeeDx and they're a molecular diagnostic company. And so, they not only diagnose what you have, but more importantly they actually tell you what you're resistant to from an antibiotic perspective. And that's incredibly important because antimicrobial resistance is going to be the next - well, it is the next big challenge that we're facing as humans. And we're facing it in so many levels. Xefco is a new materials company. I love new materials. I really love companies that do things in the supply chain. So, I'm sitting opposite Calumino that do thermal sensing that's deployed in a whole bunch of different assets right now with a strategic partner in Japan. That’s really cool. We've got a semiconductor company in here. I'm going to get in trouble if I don't mention nearly all of them. And seeing as there's over 50 residents, we might be here for a while. But I can't pick a favourite because they all do something really important that can contribute to both people, planet, and prosperity in a significant way. And that for me is a good reason to get out of bed in the morning. 

BENNETT MASON 

Absolutely. You mentioned earlier that part of the role that Cicada plays is commercialisation and connecting these companies with capital markets. The economic conditions now are, to say the least, complex. Rates are rising, the era of cheap money is very much in the rear-view mirror. Has that changed over the last 12 to 24 months? Is it harder to connect these companies with capital? Are people less willing to invest? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

It's a bit of a yes and no answer. So, I think the reality is a lot of that easy money has definitely dried up, right? You're really spot on with that. But for good ideas that solve fundamental challenges that are global in nature, there has been and there always will be capital. And I think that those deep tech ideas that work in that space, because their pathway to market is so long, generally quite expensive, the type of capital that you connect them with is different from that easy money and from a lot of the early-stage venture that is out there. It’s actually very, very specific and very targeted with investors that understand either the robotics or the manufacturing process or things like that. So, they have a thesis that goes well beyond a decade of a fund. And so, for those companies that have really got to the right point in their development, that money is still there. We're really fortunate because we've been in operation for over 23 years now, that we've got great connections globally with capital markets, and that includes very diverse groups of people and organisations. And because they've had success with companies here, they do tend to come back and look under the hood and say: “Who else have you got? This is what we're really interested in.” And you try and get them not just the money, but a strategic investor that also has the network of the opportunity for deployment because they're having to build in parallel. So, they're having to build with a customer in mind and generally build with customers. And so that's an added layer of complexity, but it's also an added layer of opportunity. And so that's where we try and support as best we can. 

BENNETT MASON 

We are an AICD podcast, so I should ask you about governance. Start-ups or scale ups are, by their nature, small and growing organisations. So, they probably don't have independent boards and they might not have those firmly structured governance structures in place. What advice do you have for start-ups at Cicada or elsewhere on governance? And when is the right time to maybe think about at least bringing in independent board directors? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

So, there’s a couple of things to unpack. I think good governance in an organisation starts in the executive at any rate. And you want to see people putting in those processes and procedures in their own organisations, the monitoring and evaluation. And making sure they're meeting any sort of requirement and regulatory frameworks that they operate within. So, for me it starts there. The second thing you'll find with start-ups is often the first people that are on their board, other than the founders, are either the funders or a representative of the funders. And may be somebody from a scientific or technical advisory capacity, which can be really useful. I think for me, the really big challenge that I see companies go through is as they start to grow and scale, you actually need a different set of people sitting around your boardroom table. And you really, for most of these companies in their first ten years in life, you really need people that have had skin in the game and done what they've done. You know, done what those start-ups are trying to do. It's incredibly important that if you're working with a company that's working in advanced manufacturing, that you've got somebody around the table that has expertise in that and has actually done it in a comparable industry. So for me, that's really, really critical. But then as you get larger and if you consider, you know, listing and you're moving into a whole different set of regulatory requirements, that's when understanding what a board refresh process looks like and how do you actually ensure that you have a skills-based board continually throughout the journey of that organisation’s growth? 

That's really important to think about and I don't think we talk about that enough. I think there's a lot of organisations out there that board members stay too long, that they're well beyond ten years. And you have to kind of question and ask yourself that honest question of: are they still the right people to be sitting around the table? And if the answer is yes, wonderful. But I think we owe it to ourselves in organisations that we work with, and also personally on organisations where I sit on the board is to ask myself every time there's an opportunity for refresh: “Am I still the right person to be sitting around this table? or would the organisation be better served by somebody with a different skill set? “And that's about putting the organisation first and not putting the individual board members first in how you’re making those decisions. So for me, I’d love to see a little bit more of that happening across the ecosystem because we need to uplift and we need to transition and fresh people bring in fresh perspectives, which is an absolute gift around any boardroom table and a gift to an executive team. 

BENNETT MASON 

It must be hard, though, for those founders and early investors. They're not just financially invested in the organisation, they're emotionally invested as well. They put in their blood, sweat and tears –  

and money. leaving the board, even after ten years, is going to be a challenge. 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

It is a real challenge and I think again, that's where I think some great governance around doing a regular board review and having somebody independently come in and assess you and saying: “What's working really well, what's not working so great, and where's the uplift opportunity?” An audit never hurts anybody. It helps us become better. And really auditing ourselves as a board is a really good act of good governance. But it's also a really good act of service to the organisation. And it's not a hard and fast rule that people need to move on. But I do think having that conversation on a regular basis with somebody independent who can guide you through that is incredibly valuable for every single individual there. But also, to help really lift you into the next stage of the journey on an operational and at an organisational level. 

BENNETT MASON 

Let's shift now to another one of your roles. We mentioned earlier that you're a chair of the Government's “Diversity in STEM” review. Now it just so happens by coincidence, the morning of the day we're recording this, the Minister released your draft report. So, can you tell us what has the review discovered so far? And which groups are underrepresented in STEM and why? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

Wow, we might need about four more hours to this. But look, let me give you the highlights. So, a couple of things, I think. If I start with the “why” of this report and who's underrepresented. I think it's really critical time for us because there's a very strong focus nationally about raising Australia's ambition in science and engineering and for economic complexity to actually build the next part of the economy that is going to provide opportunities for all Australians into the future. So, I think the economic imperative is there. The second part to it is who is underrepresented. Well, there's a lot in that group. So, we can start with a gender lens, but it doesn't obviously just end with women. LGBTQI+ community is underrepresented in STEM. Our First Nations communities are underrepresented in STEM careers and in STEM opportunities. New migrants are underrepresented. People living with disabilities, people from regional areas, people that have come through the VET sector versus the tertiary sector. There's a list that goes on and on and on. And there's a lot of reasons for the underrepresentation that is both historical but largely structural in nature. So for us, with when we get engaged in this work and we started this journey, we really wanted to do two things. One is recognise that the underrepresentation goes beyond gender and there's a lot of intersectionality and there needs to be a lot more nuanced conversations about why that is and what we might do about it. Because it's actually critical if we're going to have this economic powerhouse, we need to have people that are representative of all of Australia participating in that and also having opportunity in that. So that's fundamentally the first thing. The second thing is we actually need to address the fact that there's a lot of structural impediments to people participating in this. And so, one of the very first things that we've recommended in this report, and we've got it in four broad thematic areas, but the very first one starts with leadership and governance and the critical role that that plays. And it's not just government, but it's also in industry and in community. And so, if I can just unpack that in a minute, because this one is really, really important for everybody to understand is the role of leadership and governance. And I think it's a conversation that we've been having more recently, particularly through the AICD and others around the critical role of ESG and other things in organisations, and that we need good governance. Otherwise you're just greenwashing or black cladding in the case of First Nations. Well, actually we're doing that with STEM, and we've been doing it for a really long time. There's a lot of very well-intentioned initiatives out there that have been supported by many, many people, and they make some degree of progress on the fixed targets that they're going after. But the reality is we have very limited governance and accountability around how we're measuring success in this. So, if I can give you a really concrete example around boardroom tables for industry in Australia where I'd like to see an uplift and I'd like to see people committing to this is instead of paying lip service from the CEO and the board that you care about diversity and inclusion, put performance metrics and measurements in place for every individual board member and for the board as a whole. For all of the executive, not just the diversity and inclusion person they hire to help them, but for the executive themselves and put at-risk performance at risk for not achieving those things. I often say to people that when we talk about how much people care about this, the first thing I say to them is: “How much time do you personally spend on this each week?” And the second question is: “And how much money do you contribute to it and how much are you willing to contribute to it and or put at risk from your own performance on achieving those goals?” Because if the answer is “not very much” or “not at all”, then it's actually not a priority for that organisation and everything that is being said is lip service. And it's not actually serving the transformational change that we have. So as executives and leaders out there, if you tell me that your number one thing is product growth or revenue growth or safety, and you've got three or four things and I can't see diversity inclusion on there, it's very hard for me to really believe and buy into the statements that I see coming out from your marketing arms that you're serious about this and you're actually investing in long term initiatives, which is another sort of very strong recommendation we put forward, but decadal investments to drive change. And as a board and an executive, you've got an amazing tool in your hand to give you good governance in actually holding yourselves accountable for progression of this. Put it on your internal audit. Get external auditor to hold you accountable and to help tell you where you are making progress and where you're lacking. 

You know, I think there's an incredible opportunity to give an uplift in governance around our commitments to this across Australia. And I really hope there’s some organisations brave enough to actually do that. 

BENNETT MASON 

There's some great advice there on metrics, auditing, linking REM to actual change. There'll be some directors listening and thinking: “This is all great advice, but what else can I ask management about this? What other questions should I be throwing to my executive team? What do I need to know that I might not know already about my own organisation?” 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

I think there's a really good process that you can go through, which is something what we've done in this review, which is actually not just asking your executives. Actually, go out there and find the people in the entry roles and in the middle roles who are that underprepared represented cohort in your organisation. And if they don't exist, find them outside of your organisation, the types of people that you would love to be there and ask them why they're not. Find out why they're not there. Is it because you don't have adequate facilities for them? And you know, I can give you an example from that. We heard from people who've had to make changes in engineering job sites who didn't have bathrooms for women. Really simple fix, right? Some of the structural changes that we can make in organisations to make them accessible and to make them more inclusive are really easy fixes. Some of them aren't. But if we're not going to go and hear firsthand from the people who are affected by our decisions and this goes all the way down and listen to them, we won't actually get the clarity of the answers that we need to change. The second thing I think that's really important to do is to take everybody on the journey. We heard loud and clear in our review, when we talk to people, there's some phenomenal incentives out there that are led by leadership or programs that are led with the best of intentions. But sometimes the people participating in those, are not supported by the managers. So, managers in the middle of the organisation, middle management, are they on the journey? Do they understand why you're doing this? Are they bought into it? Are there structures to support them in the transformation they need? Is there a commitment by them? If there's not, you need to kind of think about what do those things look like in your organisation. There's so much that I could go into, but there's one more that I really want to highlight because this is a fundamental challenge that we see in Australia. But I would even say globally. The work of inclusion is most often put on people who are underrepresented and it's not their day job. It's really, really clear that it's not their day job. So, when I was at Google working in the engineering team, doing program management, for better or for worse, because I was one of the most senior people in the APAC region, I added the Women in Tech Lead. Now that was great because I have a loud voice and a strong voice, and I'm not shy of using it and speaking up and calling out the elephant in the room. But at no time was I ever compensated for that work. It was on top of my day job, and this is typical of most people in organisations doing inclusion work. They do it over and above. They are the voice, they are the face, they are running the programs and they do it because they feel passionately that they’re providing a pathway forward for people just let them into it. We need to value that work. We need to recognise it and we need to recognise that we're giving them the time and the space to do it. But more importantly, we need to recognise that when it comes to promotion and career progression. Because I can tell you that I have heard from hundreds of underrepresented folks that it is not valued and quite often when they go to actually go for promotion, it's seen as a hindrance because it's detracted from their day job. So, if that's how we're valuing people, which we're not. We're actually sending a very strong signal that inclusion doesn't really matter to us because we're not willing to invest time and money into it. So, looking at some of those structural things and not being afraid to call it out and say: “Actually, we're going to turn that on its head and we're going to turn that into something we value. And we value it equally to this scientific and engineering contribution.” It's not less than, it is as much, if not more so important. We've got to get a value shift in how we think about these things. And so that's really important structurally, to look at every single system and go: “Does this system hinder, or does it accelerate?” And if it hinders, fix it. Every organisation will be different. But this work matters. And having a broader perspective of around your table in making every single decision. People who are not like you that come from different backgrounds and different experiences makes you so much stronger as an organisation and so much more profitable if that's all we care about, which it isn't for me. But you know, if that is all that you're looking at, the bottom line, it does make you better. We need to invest in it, and we need to invest in it in the same way as we invest in product development, sales. You know, all of those other things that we do that are important to our business.  

BENNETT MASON 

You mentioned that this was a structural issue, but it's also a global issue. For example, earlier in the year, back in March, International Women's Day, the theme was around promoting greater gender diversity in STEM. Are there countries around the world or organisations around the world or even in Australia that are approaching diversity in STEM the right way? Are there things that we can learn from them? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

There absolutely is and there's pockets of bright, bright sparks, I like to call them everywhere, and we've highlighted a few of them in the draft recommendations that have come out and we're certainly going to highlight a lot more in the final report in October because I believe it's important to show the example. But there's a couple of things that they have in common. So, whether it's an individual organisation, like a new research group or an entire university or a company, the first thing that they have in common is being very intentional about the outcome that they want to achieve. And so they say, they make a statement, or they set a vision about what inclusion looks like in their organisation. And they recognise where they're starting from and where they're going to go. 

The second thing that they do is as leadership, they're the ones driving this, they're inviting all of the conversation and participation from every level of the organisation, but they hold themselves accountable. I've got a great example of a company here that did this a couple of years ago, on International Women's Day, when they heard me speak very strongly about it wasn't a day for cupcakes and women to do more work, but I'd like the men to fix the structures that they built. And they came to me, and they said: “We're not where we want to be. We want to change. Will you help us?” And I said: “If you're accountable to me, right? You set your goals. I won’t beat you up. I won't publicly shame you, which is why I'm not going to name them now. But you've got to hold yourself accountable to me. What are you going to do and how are you going to get there? When are we going to have conversations about that?” So, you're going to tell me what work you've done. I'll give you guidance, but I'm not going to do the work. And to their credit, I got this amazing email on International Women's Day this year telling me how different their organisation was. They have immediately fixed representation on their board, and they did that in two months. They just did it. They had the power, and they did it. They have changed hiring processes, they've changed how they track and perform around metrics and measurements and things inside of the company. They've made so many structural changes to how their business runs that they actually have a better and a stronger business that is growing rapidly. And then they said they’ve got some areas that we're still struggling with, we struggle to get more gender diversity in our technical roles still. But here's what we're thinking about. Here's how we're trying to tackle that and what else can we do and who else can we be accountable to? And I love that, right. It starts with that really clear vision of where they want to get to and why they want to do it, but then how they're going to hold themselves accountable. And I think if we start with those two, fundamentally the “what” you do and everything else can be identified. And then it's about leaning into the hard stuff and going: “You know what? 

Yeah, it's hard to do, but I'm going to do it anyway.” You know, to paraphrase a moon-shot, there's a beautiful speech from JFK when he said: “In this decade, we're going to put a man on the moon.” Should have said “person.” But, you know, he said “man.” We don't know how we're going to do it, but we're going to do it anyway. And that's the kind of level of commitment that I'd like to see from leaders making, saying: “I don't know how I'm going to do it, but I'm going to do it anyway, and I'm going to invite you to hold me accountable. And when I get it wrong, because I will get it wrong, because we all get things wrong, we are fallible as humans. I will be absolutely okay with course correcting to drive the change that I want to say. And yet it's going to hard. But I'm going to do it anyway because it matters.” 

BENNETT MASON 

Your view is into the STEM sector and that's what your background is. But you obviously work in other areas as well. There must be lessons from this review that can be applied to other sectors and other industries? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

100%. And I think it's not one way. I don't think it's just our review that can help contribute to other sectors. I think other sectors can certainly help contribute into the STEM sector. Where there are great examples of how people have driven fundamental change from the ground up, particularly for new companies and new businesses. You have such an incredible opportunity to start by how you want to continue, and I would encourage people to really do that. If you're in a small organisation, start by how you want to continue because it's easier to build culture at the start and continue to drive towards those outcomes that you want. But I think there's absolutely learning in both directions, and we should embrace that and seek to follow it. So, when we get to the final report in October, our goal is to have lots of lighthouse case studies and examples of things where people have done something and what the impact of it has been. Because what I really want to do is to see this not just be a report that is advice to government. There's an element of that, and that's a very important element for government to lead and have a vision in this space. But quite frankly, for industry and community, this is a collective issue. It is a collective challenge, but it's actually also a collective opportunity. So how do we actually give people the tools and the techniques and those moments where they can self-identify, what they could do from somebody else's example and walk away and do it. For me, if we can do that, that will be a really different and hopefully powerful report to deliver to our community. 

BENNETT MASON 

I mentioned that draft report was released just this morning, so we'll have links to it in the show notes. But I want to talk, I suppose, more generally about STEM now. You've spoken previously about the need to invest more in R&D. I want to ask you how much more is needed from both the private and public sectors? And what are the dangers if that money doesn't turn up? What will happen if we don't invest? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

Well, I think we've seen what happens when we don't invest. Our economic complexity as a nation continues to take a dive. And I think we're well below 69 now. I really hesitate to look at it year-on-year because it just keeps going down. But I think more importantly, the upside opportunity for people and particularly for industry and SMEs out there to really be focussed on the challenges that they see and the market opportunities and look for scientific and engineering solutions to them. The economic upside for those organisations is huge. And so how do we create structures and incentives for people to do more of that? That for me, is a really big focus that we need to address. There is money being invested in research and we could have a very long debate about whether that's enough or not. And you know, I think we all know the view of the universities that it's never enough and there should be more. But I think it's a really, it's a wicked problem to only focus on that end because we can have great research. But if we don't have people invested in translation, if we don't have businesses that have the capabilities to turn that into products and services and actually bring it through to market, we're missing the bigger picture here. It's not an either or. It's a “yes and” conversation that we need to have. I think the second thing with that is to actually really understand where R&D businesses are coming from. So, at Cicada Innovations, over 23 years old. We look back on our data of those 23 years and we have about 50 resident companies employing 450 people at any given time. In that 23 years, at any given time, only about 23% of the businesses here have been direct spinouts from universities. Now I don't say that to cause alarm and go: “Ah ha! Universities aren't doing what they say they should.” Universities are fine. They're doing a great job. We need to have a look at some of their underlying funding models, which is a federal government review that's happening right now. But actually, a lot of the businesses that come out of here are people that have done PhDs or master's degrees. They've worked in industry, they've been in R&D, and they've been frustrated by a particular problem or challenge, and they've chosen to start a business. Now, the reason it's not a problem is that every single company in here at any given time all have a very strong connection, a relationship with multiple universities. And it may be around contract research, it may be around a CRCP, it may be around the hiring pipeline, it may be fully funded industry-based PhDs. So, it's not a linear pathway that we need to follow that invest more here, then dial it up at the next stage, then dial it up at the third stage. I think what we need to really do is step back and look at the system as a whole and understand where there's fundamental gaps. And there's really fundamental gaps in supporting SMEs and scalable businesses right now in Australia. And that's the largest part of our economy. That's where the jobs and opportunities come from. So, we really need to rethink how we're doing that and what that could look like. There is great hope, and I am very hopeful that the NRF, now that we've got a board announced and they move forward, and create structure, that they will be part of that for the deep tech ecosystem. But again, they're just one part of the bigger picture. So, we've got to really step back and take that high level view, which is what boards should do, step out and examine from the high. And then look at what are the individual levers where we may to dial up and dial down things. And more importantly, harness the modes towards a collective vision. So I think there's a lot that industry can do to lean in and find opportunities to grow through supporting some of these R&D SMEs that we have in here. Because they're incredibly capable and they're doing amazing things. 

BENNETT MASON 

Sally, we’re nearly out of time, but I did want to ask you one or two questions about how boards should approach technology. All directors want their organisations to embrace technology, embrace innovation, digital transformation. But even experienced directors don't know how to do it. What are just a few practical steps that boards can do to ensure that their organisations are on the right track? 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

Yeah, so the first thing I think boards need to do is really understand their risk appetite for adopting and using technology and/or other innovation practices or solutions. Right? So, understand where your risk profile is. If you're at the bleeding edge and you're a company that has already got quantum embedded in something that you do, you might be really comfortable with working with early-stage businesses and technology that has still got a few bugs and being beta tested. Because you're in that risk profile at the bleeding edge and it's your comfort zone. And so, you know how to manage that risk. You know how to drive it, you know when to release it to a customer, you know when to hold it back. If you are a traditional, very regulated, structured organisation that last did a digital transformation ten years ago and you're still bleeding from the wounds of how much you spent from it, which seems to be almost every boardroom in Australia. There's a common theme there. Everybody remembers what they did in the 2000s and how bad it was and how much money they spent. I think you need to really look at what are you trying to solve for by this digital experience or this technology adoption or this innovation agenda. What is it you're really trying to solve for and how can you bring a solution closer to where your organisation's risk appetite is? 

So, for me, for many organisations in Australia, it's actually not about being necessarily on the bleeding edge. If your comfort level isn't there, don't stop there. Start with something with a business that has a little bit of a track record. They may be an SME, so they might not be one of the big tech firms, but they've got a solution that's fit for purpose. And work with them in helping them build that and really be successful in implementation for you because that will, one, give you better results. It's either going to be a time saving or a growth opportunity or efficiencies, whatever that is. So, adopt it there and then go on the journey to understand how you can change your risk appetite. Because risk appetite is - risk can't be avoided. It's how do you manage it? But if you're not comfortable with it and you try and adopt a quantum computing solution in an organisation that still doesn't have a really good CRM, you're never going to have a good time. So I think it's about really a little bit of self-reflection first and understanding why you're going down this pathway. What you hope to achieve with it, really being really clear on those objectives. What success look like? If we achieve this, if we do this, what will it do to our bottom line? What will it do to our business? What will it do to our team, our organisation? Really articulating those because that then helps you evaluate the opportunities that then come before you. And for many organisations in Australia, it is much more about with an early-stage SME that's probably been operating for ten years, quite frankly, that you just never heard of yet. And doing that. And for those who are larger and have a greater risk appetite, it's about how do you take those longer-term strategic risks and how do you get your eyes above the horizon line to ten, 15 years out, 20 years out, 30 years out. About where your business needs to be and scan for those early opportunities and think about what your investment there looks like because that engagement and that investment is going to be really, really, really different, have a very different risk profile to adoption, to implementation now. And neither is right and wrong. You can actually do both if your organisation has capacity to. But it's being really clear about what success looks like in both and defining that and doing the hard work in that piece before you actually go out and try and do innovation. Unless of course, you just want to do some innovation theatre and you'll have a really great time, but it won't necessarily do anything to your bottom line, but you'll have fun. 

BENNETT MASON 

And fun can be important. 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

Exactly. 

BENNETT MASON 

Sally, I've had fun talking with you. We've covered a lot of ground and you've had some great advice for directors. Thank you for making the time. I know it's a busy day with the draft report out just this morning. So, thank you for joining us on boardroom conversations. 

SALLY-ANN WILLIAMS 

Thanks so much for having me and good luck to everybody out there in your board careers.