Why social mobility is essential for our industry

When I first began in the asset management industry, social mobility was rarely spoken about, which surprised me as it was a key topic in my sociology degree.

The industry has made long overdue progress in raising awareness of many of the issues around diversity and inclusion, yet social mobility has often, in my view, been overlooked.

In this blog, I’m going to explore why social mobility remains an issue today and how addressing it could benefit the industry as a whole, as well as individuals.

What is social mobility?

Asked to define social mobility, I’d say it’s the ability for individuals to bring about change in their social status. Beyond that basic interpretation, a more detailed definition is harder to pin down. Many companies fall short of being able to explain exactly what the term means to them.

Perhaps this isn’t surprising, because it’s a complex subject. For example, a standard question from human resources that attempts to quantify the social mobility of the organisation might be: ‘Did your parents go to university?’ The basic idea here is simple – if the applicant says ‘yes’ then it suggests they didn’t come from an underprivileged background.

But if I look at my own circumstances, using the outdated socio-economic class system, both my parents came from ‘working class’ backgrounds, yet through sheer hard work and determination they managed to achieve undergraduate and master’s degrees while juggling jobs and raising two children. Would an application form allow me to include all this information, providing a more balanced overview? Probably not.

For those old enough to remember, higher education used to be subject to similarly reductive status hierarchies, which changed when polytechnics achieved university status post-1992. Polytechnics were originally opened in the 1960s to help working-class communities benefit from higher education. Indeed, the university I attended, Kingston, was formerly a polytechnic.

Class definitions

The systems used to categorise social class have evolved somewhat from the days of the ‘working class’ label I mentioned earlier. Before 2001, the most widely used were social class definitions based on occupation and socio-economic groups. John Goldthorpe pioneered the class schema based on different positions in the labour market. The current National Statistics Socio-economic Classification uses 14 operational categories, with some sub-categories.

Even this latest schema remains open to interpretation: My parents had successful careers as teachers, working in impoverished areas, yet their jobs in the 1990s were labelled higher-end occupations. I had a state education, yet the post code lottery would suggest I lived in a middle-class area. Does one fact have a higher weighting than the other?

Overcoming prejudice

If our industry wants to address wider inequality then I believe social mobility needs to be included. Asset managers will only benefit from an increase in social mobility, as with a wider mix of people you are, in my view, well-placed to deliver better outcomes. To tackle the issue, Legal & General has partnered with groups such as youth empowerment charity Urban Synergy and social mobility charity upReach.

The industry is now very different from the one I entered, and, on a personal note, I have overcome a number of prejudices during those years.

When mentoring, I always state that although university helps develop independence and life skills, along with a degree, it is also expensive. Many firms now are looking for skills gained outside higher education settings, which in my opinion can only be a good thing.