Climate performance and corporate culture are colliding like never before—and that tension was at the heart of a recent dinner hosted by the Centre for Climate Engagement. The event brought together directors, executives, investors, and policymakers to examine how banks are managing internal challenges as they reassess climate strategies in the face of political pressure and growing climate risks.
Chaired by CCE Director, Dr Paul Jefferiss, the evening offered a rare window into what really happens behind closed doors. Participants shared candid reflections on the barriers and enablers shaping decision-making, with a focus on the cultural dynamics that can make or break credible climate leadership.
The event was co-hosted by Tina Mavraki, author of two CCE publications:
Leadership Insight: Corporate Culture
Leadership Insight: Culture meets Climate (July 2025)
Summary
The discussion focused on the strategic and tactical gaps that organisations face in creating more effective internal dynamics, improving how decision-makers understand and engage with climate goals, and achieving better alignment across teams. Rather than debating the role of banking or cross-sector collaboration, the conversation highlighted a recurring tendency to blame regulators, often as a way to avoid acknowledging internal shortcomings. A key realisation emerged: human capital management is being overlooked in the climate transition. While significant investment has been made in setting targets, far less attention has been given to supporting the people tasked with delivering them. The group moved beyond theory to explore what good culture management looks like in practice, drawing on real-life examples rather than abstract models.
Key points from the group discussion
- The group identified bottlenecks in expectations placed on CSOs and CFOs, and how conflicting demands risk exhausting these roles.
- Discussed the potential to leverage urgency at the deal level to drive climate targets, rather than targets dictating individual decisions.
- Recognised that boards need to engage more granularly with business operations to support effective climate action but often don’t.
- Highlighted misalignment between asset owners’ expectations and how these translate (or don’t) into asset manager mandates and company engagement strategies.
- Noted progress towards practical insights and solutions, moving the conversation beyond challenges alone.
- Explored how to triage language and adapt messaging to better align with the priorities and perspectives of different stakeholder groups.
Selected quotes
“We directors have made incredible progress putting together policies and processes around climate transition. Now it’s time to understand the key bottlenecks and pressure points that these have created in our organisations and facilitate laser-sharp interventions to enable our leadership to be productive, effective, and deliver on our intended results, whatever these may be.”
Tina Mavraki
“We discussed the need for a clear, simple, and stable regulatory framework — without it, companies are reluctant to invest in meeting standards that may quickly change. We also reflected on the importance of using the language of risk to engage boards, CEOs, and especially CFOs, but recognised this is only a starting point. Risk needs to be supported by technical evidence and understood within the wider context of systemic climate and nature risks.
Paul Jefferiss, Director, Centre for Climate Engagement
Crucially, we agreed that organisations need mechanisms to help senior leaders cascade these decisions throughout the business. Overall, it was a rich conversation with a strong sense of consensus in the room.”
“We’re hearing consistently that regulators, banks, and communities want to collaborate—but the structures to do that well aren’t always there yet. That’s where CCE is focused: building practical frameworks and relationships to bridge those gaps.
Dr Eldrid Herrington, Centre for Climate Engagement
Local delivery is where climate action becomes visible and meaningful. It’s essential that financial systems can flex to support that.”
Slingshot