"No-one asks about the ethics until it's too late"

Welcome to my Substack. I’ve started this publication because, having worked in technology & innovation across business, government bodies, NGOs and universities for the last 20+ years, I’ve got a lot I want to say about the realities of building tech without destroying humanity.

Because I am:

• Trying to expose what is going on under the headlines in technology and business, not in a salacious way but seeking the nuance that always exists between the polarising views;

• Trying to figure out what I, and people in my community can do to hold power to account; and

• Trying to be an active member of the innovation community building more responsibly.

I’m not here with all the answers, instead I am bringing access and insight to be part of a discussion that helps us all progress together.

Before I jump into the meat of today’s essay, where I will set out my stall on tech ethics, I’d like to do a very short introduction to me and the angle by which I am exploring this ever-evolving field.

I have recently taken up a position as a Royal Society Entrepreneur in Residence (more on what that means in future essays), in addition I am an entrepreneurial educator and mentor, working with some of the world’s most respected accelerator and incubator programmes for tech startups. I’ve worked with hundreds of founders AND I have also been a founder myself, so I know what it is like to be making decisions when peoples’ salaries are my responsibility.

I’ve often felt like I have nothing to add to the conversation because I sit in the middle, I am not the biggest tech founder, I am not the academic in tech or ethics (and the subjects that surround it), I don’t represent a regulatory body or a compliance officer. I slip through the cracks. I’ve been every where and yet I am not a deep subject matter expert.

So what I can bring?

My own lived experience, the inner most thoughts of some of the most exciting new technologists and founders, conversations with investors and regulators. And most importantly, I am in the rooms where I can actually start to make some changes.

It is very easy to assume that every decision made by an entrepreneur in the tech space is made out of greed or power, because that is what we see in the media.

Stories make the news if the company is big, if the decisions made by it’s founders have impact that is felt by many; technology companies have become so impactful that their influence goes beyond the power of nations; and the personalities of the founders are caricatured by the media so much that those founders begin to become the version of themselves that they see projected into the world.

Aside: As an autistic former tech founder, I understand how that mirroring works.

It is right that we find ways to hold these individuals with disproportionate power to account. We SHOULD be questioning their decisions.

But the conversations on tech ethics have become polarised and often politicised, to the detriment of many. For example, children’s safety online is getting labelled as a left-wing viewpoint as any type of regulation is deemed to strangle innovation and limit personal freedoms.

Where is the nuanced discussion and the real innovation that creates progress without causing more harm?

Meanwhile the people creating tech businesses are pressured to either ignore, or perhaps, in the case of many, completely overlook the potential negative impacts of their work, as their sole focus has to be on the money and power they can wield with their technology.

Somewhere down the line, the correct ethical conversations are not happening.

I have first hand experience - both in my own start up but also with the hundreds of tech founders that I have mentored - that says, founders are rewarded for ignoring the niggling ethical questions in their head. Investors pat them on the back for growth, consumers keep coming back for the dopamine hits and business clients like the polished outcomes and charming sales people that bigger investment affords.

No-one is asking about the ethics until it is too late.

I was once the founder trying to ensure principles flowed through all we do while trying to keep the business on the track. I couldn’t find a way to tackle the tension between what the world wanted and what seemed like the right things to do and it was one of many factors that led to an intense period of burnout.

At the time I didn’t know that there were ways in which I could have bridged that gap. But I have learned that ethics and business success don’t have to be mutually exclusive.

I remember a discussion in A-level philosophy and ethics (a class that I wasn’t enrolled in but just showed up to sometimes), where it became clear to me that ethics is situational (philosophy 101). That was over 25 years ago and still I am assessing every situation for its ethical implications. Ethics is defined in many ways, but in general it is something like ”acting with a purpose of being morally good”.

My own opinion, and that shared by many tech ethicists is that the goal is “navigating a delicate balance between technological advancement and the preservation of human values such as privacy, fariness, transparency and accountability.”1

I firmly believe that technical advancement is an intrinsic part of being human, in it’s simplest form, we have thrived, in part, because we create things that benefit the wider community at the same time, I don’t think that technical progress is a right that should be granted at all costs.

So what does walking that line actually look like?

1. Start with principles, before you build anything.

2. Build with guardrails - consider scenarios, find edge cases and consider how you would approach them.

3. Continue to adapt and ask questions when the technology is out in the world, respond quickly to mistakes or overlooked scenarios.

I will bring more case studies and depth in future essays.

Technology is not inherently good or bad, it is neutral, although in the age of AI there is more nuance and that’s a conversation for another essay, what still remains true: human implementation and human computer interaction is where the ethics come in.

For ethics to be embedded in tech, it is time to have the right conversations in the right rooms:

When I heard from a very well respected SV founder, that Pete Hegseth under Donald Trump has been the best thing for defence founders because they can get to market a lot quicker, a shiver went down my spine, partly because I don’t trust that these players are acting with the purpose of being morally good.

He stated that:

“Technologies only need to be 8% ready and they can iterate in the field”

I understand where this founder was coming from. If you believe that your technology is going to make a positive difference to people’s lives and get you some big contracts before you hit the end of the cash runway, then you want to get it out to market as soon as possible. You are having sleepless nights about how you are going to pay your team and pay your own bills, or maybe you are thinking about how you are going to impress your investors. But, if the government was less laisez-faire maybe project Maven (AI built for the pentagon) wouldn’t have been fed out of date data and the Shajareh Tayyebeh primary school would not have been mistaken for a “desired” target in Iran, 170 children would have survived that day. In this case, it was human error amplified with devastating effect by blind faith in what a chatbot was saying2.

What guardrails could have been in place?

On the other hand, I do see that a lot of regulation is putting a strangle hold on innovation. A founder I work with, has a technology that can help spinal patients be rehabilitated way beyond current technology on the market. But you will probably have to wait decades if you want to benefit from it. The regulatory pathway is heavy, and generally only accessible to big business with billions of dollars.

What steps would keep the risk low for patients and bring life changing technology to market quickly?

A recent startup investor conversation also highlighted a phenomenon which I believe is responsible for the ethical innovation gap, I call it the “slippery shoulder phenomenon”. To quote the investor “I outsource my ethics to the compliance team”. On deeper examination, this investor is busy (tax year just ended), they have to do a lot of work to be FCA compliant and they actually spend very little time with the portfolio companies that are funded by their fund. To them ethics is a small word with big meaning and they don’t have the time to figure out how it would work for them to do ethical due diligence. Financial return to their investors is what they see as their “moral good”, and if ethics doesn’t help them get there it gets forgotten.

I often speak to founders who are grappling with their own principles as they try to build the company. What do I say to them?

One of the reasons you have chosen the arduous journey of being an entrepreneur is to find some kind of freedom. What good is that freedom if you end up escaping the reach of your own moral compass?

This is not a one off exercise, this is about shifting mindset over time and building simple dynamic frameworks into your every day operations, to lower the risk of overlooked mistakes leading to devastating impact.

It’s also not about ignoring technology development all together, I might even argue that shrugging off technology all together is also a “slippery shouldered” act.

So lets walk the line together and find the place where moral good and technological progress meet.

I write about the complex realities of tech founder life, inclusive leadership, responsible innovation and commercialising technology. All views are my own.

If you want more of me you can find me on YouTube, Instagram and occasionally LinkedIn.