Whether because of industry resistance to interference in the ‘craft’, growing public distrust/dislike of lab-grown content, simple economics or an acceptance that there are just some things AI can’t do as well (yet), the big labs seem to have changed tack with the industry.

Creativity, taste and judgement have been re-valued at a premium

Creativity, taste and judgement – underpinned by cultural relevance and human emotion – have been re-valued at a premium. But if brands, agencies and creators want to produce and reach audiences at scale, building AI-first workflows for insight, creative production, testing, distribution and measurement is the way to go.

Not so much eating your lunch, but suggesting recipes, helping make it, tasting it, serving it and writing the review.

Frankly, AI’s role and impact on more important matters – scientific discovery, human health, climate change – is far more consequential. If anything, AI is ‘over-hyped in the short-term and under-appreciated in the mid- to long-term’, as put by the AI industry’s most un-bro-like person of interest, Google DeepMind co-founder and CEO Demis Hassabis, in his packed-out fireside.

Live your best ‘pixel-imperfect’ life

Elsewhere on the Croisette, legacy brands were quick to jump on growing anti-AI consumer sentiment to champion all things low-fi and retro. Polaroid’s Creative Director Patricia Varella did a fantastic job of encouraging us all to live your best ‘pixel-imperfect, un-optimised’ life. Get bored, do your own work and stop rotting your brain, was the message.

Professor Brian Cox still thinks space is amazing, and wants us all to promote the value of intergalactic exploration and be aware of its attendant issues – from satellite congestion/collision to space junk to equitable access. Joking aside, his 10-minute opener on the importance of Earth as possibly the only civilisation with any meaning, against a stunning data-enabled visualisation of the billions of galaxies that surround us, could only leave you feeling a little humbled, whatever VIP tickets you had for the evening. And Sian Proctor, Ph.D.‘s own personal space journey was an inspiring tale.

Surprising fact (to me at least): despite each one of the UN’s 17 sustainable development goals relying on space technologies like GPS, its Office for Outer Space – whose remit is the whole of the known and unknown universe – has a staff of 21 people, according to its director Aarti Holla-Maini.

Back on earth, there were plenty of bizarre ‘conversations’ clearly put on for star power rather than substance. Malcolm Gladwell ‘interviewing’ the DJ/producer/podcaster Questlove being a case in point.

The US media giants brought the celebrity stardust, with NBCUniversal wheeling out SNL’s Colin Jost, late night stalwart Seth Meyers, Real Housewives of Beverly Hills’ Rachel Zoe and Alan Cumming (of Traitors fame) for a meandering chat about fandom. Fun, but achingly obvious they were all either told, or paid, to turn up and hawk its output to ad agencies and CMOs.

The space for ‘useful civil disobedience’ and protest is shrinking

Patagonia’s VP of Creative Alex Weller scored a home run with his call for brand activism, as well as honest impact reporting. Position your ESG report deliberately and honestly as a ‘work in progress’, not a glossy brochure of ‘resolved tensions’, giving as much space to the shortfalls as the wins. The rationale for its publishing partnership with Greenpeace’s Annie Leonard provided the most arresting thought of the day – the space for ‘useful civil disobedience’ and protest is shrinking in countries across the world, and we need to create more of it.

Mel Robbins– self-help author, podcaster and mantra-maker extraordinaire – provided an uplifting message for all wannabe creators. Get over your ‘cringe’ and start, because you’re probably better than half the people making millions as influencers. And if you’re not sure where to start, start by clarifying what you want to say and make it for one person. If it’s good, word of mouth will take care of the rest (alongside AI-optimised production and platform distribution presumably).

Meredith Kopit Levien, president and chief executive officer of The New York Times Company, gave an impassioned talk on the importance of independent, institutional media houses in the face of all the ‘what Trump just said’ dross masquerading as news. Providing the world’s most informed and insightful writers with a platform to tell the honest truth however uncomfortable – with all the necessary security, legal resources, fact-checking teams and distribution channels – is a noble thing and we should all be worried if it doesn’t exist.

The creator economy is where it’s at

The big theme of Cannes 2026 however was screamingly obvious – from the dozens of branded ports, beach-front hotels, cabanas, rooftops and secret gardens to the flurry of deals and partnerships announced this week – the creator economy is where it’s at, and it’s being monetised like never before. The big social media and entertainment platforms have fully woken up to creators’ economic value as the new alternative viewing to traditional TV and film, and the AI labs are here to help.

Who knows, maybe one day we’ll see a creator take home a Palme D’Or as well as a Cannes Lion.

By Martin Currie, Chief Executive at Citypress

To discuss how AI and the creator economy will impact your communications strategy, get in touch with our specialist team.

The post Creators – the new stars of the Croisette appeared first on Citypress.

The Foundation was established in 1998 in response to Baroness Helena Kennedy KC’s landmark Learning Works report, which set out the case for widening participation in further and higher education. The charity provides financial bursaries and ongoing pastoral support to students from further and adult education colleges across the UK who face significant barriers to higher education, including financial hardship, caring responsibilities, refugee status and disability.

Demand for its bursaries has grown sharply in recent years and now significantly outstrips the funding available. As the Foundation approaches its thirtieth anniversary in 2028, it is using the milestone to broaden its donor base and close that gap, supporting more of the students who meet the bursary criteria each year.

Citypress will support the Foundation over the coming year and beyond, with a programme of earned media activity designed to raise the Foundation’s external profile and reach new audiences of potential supporters. This includes amplifying the Foundation’s flagship annual event at the House of Lords, hosted by Baroness Kennedy, which celebrates the achievements of that year’s bursary winners and brings them together with the trustees, donors and supporters who have made their journey possible.

The partnership is being delivered through Citypress Gives, the agency’s pro bono arm, which commits 1% of agency time each year to organisations whose mission aligns with the agency’s own.

Sophie Millward, Director at Citypress, said: “For every student the Helena Kennedy Foundation funds, several more meet the criteria and go unsupported, and that gap is the one we want to help narrow. The Foundation’s mission also aligns directly with our own commitment to widening access to a career in communications, which made this an obvious partnership for us to pursue.”

Mark Cooper, Chair of Trustees, Helena Kennedy Foundation, added: “We’re incredibly grateful to Citypress for their support and excited to be working together. Every year, we see talented and determined students overcome significant barriers to pursue higher education, but we know there are many more who need support than we currently have the resources to help. Raising awareness of our work is an important part of changing that, and we look forward to working with the Citypress team to reach new audiences and grow our impact.”

The post Citypress announces pro bono partnership with the Helena Kennedy Foundation appeared first on Citypress.

There used to be a playbook. Get a job. Save a deposit. Buy a house. Climb the ladder. Start a pension. Our parents followed it. Most of us grew up assuming we’d do the same.

For millions of 18-to-45-year-olds in Britain today, that playbook has stopped working. Not because Millennials and Gen Z have given up on progress – but because the milestones no longer match the reality.

Wages haven’t kept pace with housing. Careers don’t move in straight lines. Listen to how people talk about money now and you hear a different vocabulary: paying off a credit card, moving out of a flat share, taking a career break at 30 rather than 65. For many, money aligned with their values matters more than money that simply grows.

New research Citypress has conducted with Censuswide, surveying over 2,000 UK adults aged 18-45, identifies five distinct Money Tribes – defined not by age or income, but by mindset, pressure and ambition.

Just-Starting Ups still believe in traditional milestones (24% versus a 14% average) but feel least empowered to reach them. While they’re not hostile to financial services, they are yet to build a relationship. The industry has never given them a reason to look up.

Micro-RetiriZees are pressing pause deliberately. Twice as many have taken a career break compared to the average. Products built for linear careers – steady salary, unbroken pension contributions – exclude them by design, not intention.

Multitask Maximalists are holding everything together – and often only just. 70% cite cost of living as their primary stress driver, against a 46% average. They’re not poor planners; they’re over-committed. Nearly every piece of financial services marketing talks to them as if they aren’t.

Safety Stackers are the long-game players. 74% feel financially empowered. 82% are actively building wealth. They need credibility and performance data.

The Values Collective are the most brand-critical group. 100% would accept lower returns for values-aligned investments. Three in five say financial services brands miss the mark. Winning them is hard. Losing them is loud.

Three lessons cut across all five tribes.

First, stop targeting demographics, start targeting mindsets. A 27-year-old Safety Stacker and a 40-year-old Multitask Maximalist have more in common with their tribe than their generation.

Second, meet the new milestones where they are. Paying off a credit card, funding a sabbatical, avoiding a flat share – these are today’s wins.

And third, empowerment beats aspiration. Empathy converts. Aspiration alienates.

The old playbook isn’t coming back. The brands that understand the new one – and build around it – will own what comes next.

By Joey Ng, Director at Citypress

Want to know what this means for your communications strategy? Get in touch with our specialist financial services team to discuss the Money Tribes insights.

The post Millennials and Gen Z are rewriting the money rulebook and financial services brands need to keep up appeared first on Citypress.

Visiting London Tech Week, what stood out was that the UK now has many of the right ingredients: world-leading innovation in AI, a growing chip ecosystem, deep research capability and serious ambition to help businesses scale here.

The emphasis on adoption made this year feel different and the AI Adoption Summit brought that question much closer to the centre of the conversation throughout the week.

There is a clear understanding that the economic opportunity will only be realised if AI is used confidently and effectively across the economy, and that is where the public mood matters.

AI usage is growing, but usage does not equal confidence and there is still a large proportion of the public fearful of the technology.

This is important because fear shapes behaviour even where technology is available. It can make employees more resistant to new tools, customers more cautious about AI-enabled services and business leaders more hesitant about introducing change into their organisations.

This is where communications has an important role to play for technology businesses, policymakers and employers.

Too much communication on AI still assumes the benefits are self-evident. It leans on claims about productivity and transformation, while giving people little clarity about what will actually change, how risk is being managed and why the technology should be trusted. For many people, AI still feels complex, remote and imposed from above.

Better communications will not remove every concern, nor should it try to. Some concerns about AI are legitimate and need to be addressed through responsible implementation, strong governance and clear safeguards. But it can help make those choices visible and understandable, explain where AI creates value, what its limits are and how decisions are being made.

That feels like one of the more important points to take from this week, particularly from a communications perspective.

The UK has a strong AI opportunity, but its success will to a certain extent depend on whether public confidence can keep pace with technical progress.

By Dave Shepherd-Bertram, Associate Director and Technology Lead at Citypress

To discuss your communications strategy,  get in touch with our specialist sector team 

The post London Tech Week: public fear of AI presents a key opportunity for communications appeared first on Citypress.

That was the underlying theme running through UK Private Capital’s Accelerate conference. Beneath the optimism around AI, deep tech and emerging sectors sat a more familiar concern: the UK remains exceptionally good at creating innovative businesses, but far less consistent at scaling and retaining them. 

One statistic from the latest UK Private Capital report captured the issue neatly. More than three-quarters of UK equity deals above £50m now involve at least one overseas investor. At the largest deal sizes, overseas capital accounts for the vast majority of total deal value.  

The debate around fixing that is usually framed as a policy or capital problem. In reality, part of it is also a confidence problem. 

Venture capital has always been driven by relationships, networks and belief. Investors back markets they trust, founders they believe in and ecosystems they think will produce returns. Communications has always influenced that, whether the industry openly acknowledged it or not. 

What feels different now is the level of scrutiny around those signals and the extent to which they shape differentiation in a tighter market. 

As funding conditions become more selective, investors are spending more time assessing judgement, focus and commercial credibility. The quality of the story around a business increasingly affects how quickly conviction forms around it. 

What investors increasingly respond to is clarity. A clear explanation of the problem being solved. A realistic understanding of the market. A leadership team that sounds commercially credible rather than over-rehearsed. In tougher conditions, those signals matter because they help reduce uncertainty. 

The same increasingly applies to funds themselves. 

The venture industry likes to frame itself as rational and data-led, though true confidence still plays an enormous role in where money flows. Reputation influences access, familiarity reduces perceived risk and networks shape opportunities long before formal processes begin. 

That becomes particularly important in ecosystems like the UK, where relationships between investors, universities, advisors and founders are tightly interconnected. 

A lot of venture capital decisions are ultimately pattern-recognition exercises. Investors are assessing not only businesses, but the calibre of people surrounding them, whether that’s co-investors, operators, advisors and ecosystem partners. The market pays attention to who backs a company, who joins the board and who is willing to attach their reputation to a business early. 

For communications professionals, that has implications well beyond media visibility. 

Founders are increasingly judged on clarity of thinking and market credibility before they are judged on scale. Funds are judged on the quality of their networks and the distinctiveness of their perspective. Universities and ecosystem partners are judged on whether they can demonstrate a credible track record of commercialisation rather than simply strong research credentials. 

A lot of that assessment happens long before formal diligence begins. 

One of the more commercially interesting themes from the conference was the discussion around AI and brand. As AI lowers the cost of launching products and services, trust and distinctiveness become more valuable rather than less. 

That feels significant because it exposes a weakness many businesses have historically been able to manage around. It is becoming harder to sustain a gap between what a company says about itself and what customers, employees or investors say about it elsewhere. 

The challenge is no longer simply generating visibility. It is building consistency between positioning, behaviour and external perception over time. In sectors like venture capital and professional services, where trust and credibility directly influence commercial outcomes, that matters. 

The conversations around university spinouts reinforced a similar point. The UK continues to produce world-class research and technical talent, but commercial success depends heavily on the surrounding ecosystem, like patient capital, experienced operators and long-term support networks capable of helping businesses scale. 

That is one reason reputation carries increasing weight across private capital. In a more selective market, people look harder at signals that reduce uncertainty. Track record, third-party validation and visibility with substance behind it all matter. 

None of that is new. Venture capital has always operated partly on perception and belief. 

What has changed is that tougher conditions are exposing which businesses, funds and institutions have built genuine credibility over time and which relied on market momentum to carry them through. 

For communications professionals working across venture capital, private equity and professional services, that creates a more commercially significant role than the function has sometimes been given credit for. 

Not because communications suddenly matters, but because markets like this make its influence harder to ignore. 

By Sophie Millward, Director at Citypress 

To discuss your communications strategy for 2026, get in touch with our specialist sector team

The post Why reputation is becoming a venture capital asset appeared first on Citypress.

What’s changed is how that transition adds up in practice.

We’ve now reached a more complicated phase. Costs are shifting, responsibilities sit across multiple organisations, and the overall picture is harder to explain in simple terms.

Across automotive and public transport in particular, the same issue keeps coming up: the transition may be necessary, but it’s becoming harder to clearly explain how that investment stacks up in practice – particularly across different stakeholders.

That’s where the risk sits.

It’s essential that the rationale for investing – who pays, who benefits and when – is clearly understood across the system.

In automotive, the story doesn’t join up

Take fleet and aftermarket, for example.

The long-term case for electrification is well established i.e. lower running costs, reduced maintenance, better lifecycle performance.

But in practice, those benefits don’t always translate cleanly into day-to-day decision-making.

Operators are dealing with high upfront vehicle costs, uncertain residual values and the complexity of charging infrastructure – from depot upgrades to grid connections. Suppliers are investing in new capabilities – from ADAS calibration and battery diagnostics to EV servicing – without always knowing how quickly demand will scale.

At the same time, the way the market talks about cost is inconsistent. One part focuses on long-term savings, another on rising input costs, another on policy support.

Individually, those points are valid, but together, they don’t form a clear, coherent picture of how investment plays out in reality.

This is where comms has a role – not in simplifying the challenge, but in making it easier to follow. That means aligning how different parts of the chain talk about cost and return, being clearer about where investment is required, and setting realistic expectations about how and when it pays back.

Without that, even a well-founded investment can be harder to support internally and externally.

In public transport, the picture is fragmented

In public transport, the challenge is even more structural.

Operators, local authorities and central government are all involved in delivering change – from fleet electrification to fare reform and service improvements.

Investment is happening, but the costs and benefits sit in different places.

That makes it harder to explain what that investment is actually delivering, and who stands to gain.

An operator may be investing in cleaner vehicles or electric buses, while a local authority is focused on keeping fares affordable, and central government is working towards long-term decarbonisation targets. All are valid priorities, but they don’t always add up to a clear, shared explanation.

Comms has a role here in joining that up.

That means helping stakeholders explain not just what they are doing, but how it fits together – who benefits in the short term, who benefits in the long term, and how costs are distributed. It also means being more open about trade-offs, particularly where short-term cost pressures sit against longer-term gains.

Without that alignment, progress can feel disjointed, even when it is moving in the right direction.

Clarity is becoming a constraint

Organisations are being asked to make significant investment decisions in an environment where the narrative is fragmented and still evolving.

There is a need to be clearer about where costs sit, more honest about trade-offs, and more consistent in how the benefits are described – whether that’s lower operating costs, improved reliability, regulatory compliance or long-term resilience.

Because ultimately, progress depends not just on what is being delivered, but on whether the organisations responsible for delivering it can clearly explain how those investments add up in practice.

By Fiona Carmichael, Head of Trade and Industry at Citypress

To discuss your communications strategy, get in touch with our specialist automotive and transport team  →

The post Making the transition add up: why clearer communication matters more than ever appeared first on Citypress.

Citypress, the UK’s leading employee-owned communications agency, has appointed Alex Burchill as its Head of Public Affairs.

Alex previously held senior roles at FTI Consulting, where he was part of the International Campaigns & Issues Management team, and at FleishmanHillard UK where he was part of its award-winning public affairs team and helped to establish its Europe-wide approach to digital advocacy.

Alex has worked across the UK and in Brussels, and brings in-depth experience across the FMCG, Financial Services, Tech, Energy and industrial sectors. He joins Citypress following a year of significant growth in public affairs and policy communications work for clients including Molson Coors, Lloyds Banking Group, Exchange for Change (the body running the UK’s Deposit Return Scheme), Arvato and East Midlands Freeport.

Senior director, Rory Fletcher said: “We’ve continued to see strong growth in our public affairs offer in recent years. Alex has helped some of the world’s leading companies defend their licence to operate and extend their political reputations through creative policy communications. In a more complex political environment than ever, Alex will help provide the clarity our clients need to win.”

Commenting on his appointment, Alex said: “Citypress’ authentic nationwide perspective and impressive tech stack enables clients to build winning campaigns, which effectively connect clients’ policy goals with political audiences in the UK who are increasingly disparate and fragmented.

“Now more than ever, I am glad to be joining an independent, employee-owned agency. I look forward to working with the team to draw on Citypress’ recent investments in AI, creativity and issues management to build a best-in-class policy communications offer that helps brands provide clarity in a complex world.”

The post Citypress strengthens policy comms with new PA lead appeared first on Citypress.

In the world of DE&I, we talk a lot about creating opportunity for those with less advantage. We talk far less about the thing that really shifts life chances: ownership.

Labour’s renewed focus on social mobility — its “opportunity mission” to break the link between a child’s background and their future success — is long-overdue. But if the policy conversation stops at education attainment gaps, skills and employment pathways – as important as these are – we’ll keep missing the point. People don’t move up and stay up based on skills and opportunity alone.

Wages pay the bills. Ownership creates resilience, agency and access by giving everyone a stake in their employer and the value they collectively create.

Resilience, agency and access

First, it tends to create more stability. Employee-owned companies are typically built for the long term. They don’t have the same pressure for short-term extraction and can be more focused on sustainable growth, retention and training. That matters because insecurity hits hardest at the bottom. For those without family capital, inherited assets or a quietly compounding trust fund, one bad month can knock an individual or household sideways.

Second, it changes how profits are shared. In the conventional model, value flows upwards: dividends to external shareholders. Employee ownership makes it easier to distribute profits to colleagues — and crucially, to do it fairly.

For someone early in their career, a meaningful annual profit distribution can be the difference between staying stuck and moving forward: debt reduced, savings started, a course paid for, a rental deposit found. Small steps, compounding over time.

Removing barriers

There’s a third benefit that’s often overlooked: profit for purpose. When colleagues collectively own the business, the conversation about surplus changes. It becomes entirely reasonable to earmark a portion of profits for initiatives that tackle disadvantage directly — not as vague CSR, but as practical support. Subsidised housing partnerships. Deposit schemes. Hardship funds. Paid training pathways for those without formal credentials. Stuff that actually removes barriers.

But more than that, it can create a healthy entitlement amongst employees that is so often lacking in those from lower socio-economic backgrounds, and so abundant in those with privilege. People feeling like they deserve to be treated fairly through common and collective ownership.

If Labour is serious about social mobility, it should tackle root causes through effective education and employment policy, but also, whilst encouraging collective ownership on a far greater scale.

By Martin Currie, Chief Executive at Citypress

Read more on the topic: If PR is the preserve of the elite how can we speak to a public we don’t reflect

Learn about our partnership with the Social Mobility Foundation: Citypress partners with the Social Mobility Foundation

The post Is employee ownership the missing piece in the social mobility jigsaw? appeared first on Citypress.

The market has become more sophisticated. Investors are backing firms that can grow, integrate, adapt and retain trust as client expectations shift.

That backdrop was clear at this year’s pro-manchester Corporate Finance Lunch. Although the discussion was rooted in dealmaking, it returned to a simple reality: capital is available, but it is being deployed with greater selectivity.

This is what happens when a sector matures and buyers start focusing more on quality, defensibility and clarity of proposition, and Experian data supports this. In 2025, 856 deals involving a North West company were recorded, worth £10.9bn, and professional services was the most active sector by deal volume.

The market is placing a higher premium on firms that can show, clearly and consistently, why they deserve to win.

The questions buyers are really asking

Professional services remains investable for well-known reasons: recurring client relationships, relatively low capital intensity and the opportunity to build scale through consolidation. What’s changed is how those fundamentals are tested. Buyers are looking beyond the label of “recurring revenue” and asking what makes it durable, how it scales and how exposed it is to structural change.

This is where communications becomes commercially relevant. In a selective market, differentiation often comes down to whether your strategy is understood by outsiders and consistent across audiences, from investors and lenders to clients and teams. When that articulation is weak, others will fill the gaps, and not always in your favour.

AI is integral to the investment story

Artificial intelligence came up repeatedly, and the tone has shifted from curiosity to interrogation. It’s no longer discussed as a trend, but as a due diligence topic.

For professional services firms, AI can increase capacity, improve margins and create new ways to package expertise. It can also disrupt service lines built around repeatable tasks that technology can accelerate, automate or re-price.

That doesn’t mean firms need to claim they have every answer. Broad statements about “AI opportunity” do little for investors forecasting sustainable EBITDA. What lands better is a clear explanation of where AI improves delivery, where human judgement remains core and how quality and accountability are protected as the model evolves.

Coherence is key

Consolidation also continues across much of the professional services sector.

The next phase, however, is less about acquiring revenue and more about proving that the platform becomes more valuable as it grows. Investors and lenders look for evidence that integration is working, that the operating model is improving and that the combined entity is more than a collection of acquired practices.

Narrative also plays a critical role here. It’s easy to say “buy-and-build”, but it’s harder, and far more persuasive, to explain what is being built, why the pieces fit and how the platform becomes more defensible as it scales. Where that story is coherent, processes tend to run with less friction.

And alignment is part of that cohesion. When leadership, advisors and commercial teams tell different versions of the same story, it shows up quickly in diligence.

The simplest way to stand out in 2026

Professional services firms are in a strong position this year. Activity remains high, and the broader data suggests confidence is improving even while selectivity remains in place.

Standing out is less about manufactured excitement and more about making the investment case legible. That means explaining the business in a way that withstands scrutiny while remaining clear to every stakeholder involved in a deal process.

The most effective stories are rarely the most elaborate. They connect strategy to reality. They show how the firm wins work, keeps clients, develops talent, protects quality, uses technology to strengthen delivery and achieves growth without diluting what made it valuable in the first place. When those elements align, the narrative reflects how the business actually operates.

That is where communications becomes a value lever. Clear positioning reduces perceived risk. Narrative alignment speeds decision-making. A credible articulation of defensibility supports valuation by helping investors justify confidence in future performance, not just past results.

The bottom line

Professional services remains one of the most investable sectors, and the market is still active.

The difference in 2026 is that the bar is higher, and the reward for clarity is bigger. The firms that stand out will be those that demonstrate future readiness in a way that feels grounded, credible and consistent.

You don’t need a perfect story. But you do need a coherent one, and it needs to be visible in how you operate as well as how you talk about the business.

By Sophie Millward, Director and Head of Professional Services at Citypress

To discuss your communications strategy for 2026, get in touch with our specialist sector team →

The post The investability edge: how professional services firms stand out in 2026 appeared first on Citypress.

We’re seeing waste facilities disrupted by materials they were never designed to handle, and infrastructure struggling to keep pace with political ambition. Meanwhile, industrial operators are quietly absorbing risks that rarely feature in the public story of “progress”.

These stories may look disconnected, but they share a common thread: a widening credibility gap between how the transition is being talked about, and how it is being lived.

This has moved beyond questions of messaging. It’s shaping how costs, delays and trade-offs are understood – particularly across transport, energy and adjacent systems.

From ambition to credibility

For much of the past decade, transition storytelling has been dominated by ambition: targets, pledges and roadmaps stretching reassuringly towards 2030 or 2050. That language served a purpose by helping to unlock investment and get the transition moving.

But as decarbonisation moves from strategy decks into physical systems – fleets, depots, grids, factories, plants and supply chains – ambition isn’t enough.

What matters now is credibility – with the operators who have to make systems work day to day, with workforces adapting to new skills and risks, and with communities living alongside new infrastructure.

When credibility goes, you feel it quickly – in delays, opposition, cost overruns and tougher regulatory scrutiny.

The problem with invisible systems

One reason the gap is widening is that much of the transition depends on infrastructure that the public rarely sees – and that’s rarely talked about honestly.

In transport, it is not the electric vehicle itself that creates the biggest constraint, but charging infrastructure, grid capacity, depot space, downtime and maintenance realities. Increasingly, it is also what happens after the vehicle’s first life: battery repair, remanufacturing, recycling and materials recovery.

EV batteries are a good example of where narrative and reality are drifting apart. Public messaging often treats them as a closed loop that’s already solved, when in practice the systems for reuse, second life, recycling and waste handling are still emerging, unevenly regulated and operationally complex. Those realities matter – not just environmentally, but commercially and reputationally – but they are largely absent from mainstream transition storytelling.

Similar dynamics play out in waste and energy systems, where operational constraints, contamination, resilience and reliability rarely feature in the headline narrative, even though they dominate day-to-day decision-making.

The risks of saying too little

Faced with this complexity, many organisations respond by simplifying the story – or saying less altogether. Trade-offs tend to be downplayed, interim compromises avoided, and risks discussed internally rather than externally.

In the short term, this can feel safer. But in the medium term, it often isn’t.

When organisations say very little, others fill in the gaps for them – often unhelpfully. Optimistic claims end up contradicting lived experience, and confidence is lost.

Most audiences are more sophisticated than they are given credit for. They understand that industrial transitions are difficult. What they struggle with is being told one story and experiencing another.

Why this matters now

Over time, this credibility gap starts to carry real consequences – slowing projects, increasing planning risk and undermining confidence among investors, customers and workforces.

In automotive and transport, where decarbonisation runs straight into public infrastructure, supply chains and long asset lifecycles, credibility matters more than ever. The same applies in waste and resource management, where tolerance for disruption is low and understanding of system complexity is often patchy.

In that context, the organisations that tend to fare better are not those with the most polished sustainability language, but those that can explain – plainly and consistently – how their systems actually work, where the constraints sit, and where the real opportunities for progress are.

Simple net zero narratives are starting to lose their usefulness. What comes next will be more exposed and less comfortable, but better suited to maintaining confidence as systems change.

And across transport, energy, manufacturing and waste, credibility may prove to be the most important infrastructure of all.

By Fiona Carmichael, Head of Trade and Industry at Citypress

To discuss your communications strategy for 2026, get in touch with our specialist sector team →

The post The transition credibility gap: why industrial reality is catching up with net zero storytelling  appeared first on Citypress.