As someone whose University spin-off company is based in central Manchester, I was interested to see the results of the referendum on the congestion charge last week. The proposals for £2.7Bn of investment in the transport infrastructure, in return for a peak time congestion charge for motorists, would have represented Britain’s biggest congestion charging zone. However, it was resoundingly rejected by 79% of voters as part of a massive 53% turnout. This result was heralded as somewhat surprising in the light of the investment that was made to pull the proposals together and fund the pre-referendum marketing campaigns.
Many felt that the materialism and self-interest of the pre-credit crunch era was alive and well with this result; that the population of Manchester were voting not for the future of the planet, but for their own futures. However, the other way to look at it is that with the collapse of the banking system and the radical downturn, the public now wants to exercise some control in a situation where they actually can. People want to be able to say to ‘the authorities’ that an important outcome with major societal implications is the result of ‘our decision’.
In an ever-changing society, economy and world where people feel that events ‘control them’, and they have little say, the vote in Manchester was an opportunity, at least at this point in time, to exercise some control. For people to have their say and see it count – even if in the longer run it may not be good for them! When voters hear from politicians that if they vote for X they will get Y, or that it is in the interest of mankind and the free world that they do Z, they just don’t believe it any more. By voting the way they did, they weren’t necessarily saying that they disagreed with the environmental agenda or a greener future, they were saying something more profound about their involvement in decisions that affect them. They were also probably reacting to the timing of the vote, less than two weeks before the toughest financial Christmas for years. I suspect that the public may change its stance in better times – when money is less of an issue and when it feels like some power has been regained.
This same phenomenon is happening in the workplace too, as many workers feel that what is happening to their jobs, their businesses and their careers is beyond their control: that they no longer have the power to change events or even influence them seriously. We all know that when people feel they have control and autonomy at work they will feel more motivated, they will experience greater job satisfaction and are less likely to get stressed. Businesses and governments have to understand this truism if they are to engage their employees in these difficult times. The more people know, the more they can influence decisions that affect them and the more management can harness people’s ‘Dunkirk spirit’ by involving them in this economic challenge, the better.
If the whole of society is involved meaningfully in these big decisions, it can only make for a brighter future and a more cohesive society. As Ralph Waldo Emerson once wrote “the reward of a thing well done, is to have done it”.
