Ten years ago, I addressed a large gathering of young women energy engineers. I told them in no uncertain terms that the industry’s future rested squarely on their shoulders. I highlighted the importance of communicating effectively with those outside the oil and gas bubble to build trust and integrity.
Today, the controversies around Bill C-59 and new greenwashing rules in the federal Competition Act prove my point: the sector has failed in its communication efforts.
Back then, I was confident in these young women because I believe women are better communicators than men. Organizers wanted to guide the next-gen leaders on developing skills beyond engineering basics, and I stressed the importance of communication and social sciences. I advised them to understand sociology and anthropology, warning that the industry would face complex communicative challenges in the coming decade.
Words like ‘decarbonization’ and ‘climate change’ were not part of everyday discourse back then, and good ESG reports were rare. I predicted that failing to take responsible and balanced communicative charge would put the sector at a disadvantage. I urged my audience to advocate for formal communication training and for more women in senior management positions. I also warned that male hubris and indifference to women driving communication strategy would hinder effective engagement, particularly in active and empathetic listening.
A decade later, my predictions have sadly come true. The sector has failed to create a critical mass of women in communication roles, leading to a communicative quagmire. We have too few women in strategic positions, resulting in poor public trust and engagement.
Bill C-59 exemplifies this failure. In my speech, I referenced John Gray’s , noting that women are generally superior communicators due to their empathy and ability to have real conversations. Gray’s work highlights the gender differences in communication styles and problem-solving approaches, which are crucial in connecting with the public on energy issues. Women are predisposed to collaborative solutions, while men often approach problems differently.
Sociolinguist Deborah Tannen’s work further supports this. In , Tannen argues that women use communication to build relationships, while men use it to assert status and independence. This “rapport versus report” dynamic means women are better listeners and more supportive in discussions. The industry’s failure to communicate effectively has led to tighter greenwashing rules in the Competition Act because the public does not trust the sector’s environmental claims.
Parliamentarians tightened these rules knowing that ordinary Canadians would not push back, as they distrust the sector’s environmental performance claims. The industry’s predictable, petulant reaction only worsens the trust deficit. The changes to the Competition Act now tighten the greenwashing noose around the industry’s neck, paralyzing it and preventing good environmental work from being heard.
The outcome might have differed if more women had been in senior management and communication roles over the last decade. A different communication approach might have led to a public sentiment more receptive to industry outreach on environmental matters. However, that opportunity has passed. What matters now is what we do next.
We must put women in charge of the industry’s response to Bill C-59, focusing on strategic outreach to understand Canadians’ feelings about greenwashing through empathy and active listening. Effective communication could influence parliamentarians and the Competition Bureau to take notice.
However, the “oil bro” phenomenon – where the male ego dominates communication – persists. This mindset believes in the primacy of male-controlled communication, even if it has failed for decades.
Playwright George Bernard Shaw aptly observed: “The greatest problem in communication is the illusion that it has been accomplished.” This illusion continues to hinder progress in the industry.
Bill Whitelaw is a director and advisor to many industry boards, including the Canadian Society for Evolving Energy, which he chairs. He speaks and comments frequently on social licence, innovation and technology, and energy supply networks.
©
