Two IPs In A Pod
Brilliant inventions, fresh product designs, iconic brand names and artistic creativity are not only the building blocks of successful business - they deliver a better world for us all. But these valuable forms of intellectual property must be protected in order to flourish. We are the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys - the UK's largest intellectual property organisation. Our hosts Lee Davies and Gwilym Roberts chat with entrepreneurs, creatives, patent attorneys and the occasional judge about how patents, trade marks, designs and copyright can improve our lives and solve problems for humanity.
Two IPs In A Pod
Breaking Barriers in Tech: Dr Anne-Marie Imafidon's Journey
Dr Anne-Marie Imafidon lights up our podcast with her remarkable journey from child math prodigy to founder of STEMETTES, an organization transforming how young women engage with science and technology. With disarming candor, she shares the pivotal moment at a 2012 tech conference where she realized she belonged to a "shrinking minority" as a woman in tech, a revelation that sparked what she calls her "road to Damascus moment" and ultimately led to STEMETTES' creation.
Hey Gwilym, hey, how are you? I'm going to say this is a fine day because I'm looking at my hotel bedroom window. I'm in Leeds, by the way, for the Yorkshire Regional Meeting. I'm really excited to be doing that today and I was told when I was coming up to Leeds bring a really big coat. But it's absolutely beautiful out there, a big blue sky, sun shining. It's amazing. I'm in a Costa Coffee in Elephanton Castle and the weather's lovely. So there we go. I'm sorry to have brought out the envy in you for my globetrotting.
Speaker 2:I got a good coffee. I'm not complaining. They are a client. I shouldn't endorse them. There we go.
Speaker 1:Cambridge last week, Leeds this week, San Diego in a few weeks. That's a bit more impressive than Cambridge and Leeds, isn't it? But not for people from Cambridge and Leeds, obviously.
Speaker 2:That wasn't meant as any offence. All to San.
Speaker 2:Diego, of course, anything you want to tell me about. Well, it's been a, I think, as you know, it's been a poignant week of One of the things I've been doing for Actually, let me notice how long Between 15 and 20 years is, um, I've been president of this group called union. We have three lovely dinners a year with really high-powered speakers, um, and I can host it and everything, and I decided it was fb time for something else. I had a crack, so tuesday with my last one of them, you nearly came, but then your daughter had a surprise 21st birthday. Um, I can't blame you for not knowing about that, lee, obviously, yeah, I mean she didn't surprise me with her 21st birthday.
Speaker 1:I forgot, okay, I was being polite, but yeah.
Speaker 2:So I think we agree we'll do a podcast with the union, with the new president, matt Wrigley, who's a good friend of Steve, a council member, etc. Etc. Anyway. But it was nice and then we went for a couple of cocktails afterwards. That was a good, fun evening.
Speaker 1:We missed you. Sorry I missed that. Well done for your work over the years with Union. I know you put a lot into that and good luck to Matt as he takes on the rudder of the Union ship. That's what it was.
Speaker 1:Am I mixing my maritime metaphors? Yeah, I was a rudder wrangler, that was my job. We probably should crack on with the podcast, um, because obviously we have a guest waiting in the wings. Really, really, really excited to um to be doing this podcast today because, um, you know across the across the series, we've been doing it for four years now and you know that we often touch on subjects about inclusivity, um, and widen participation, particularly in the baton attorney world, where we're always trying to make sure that the profession is diverse and represents the people that it serves. And, anne-marie, welcome to the podcast.
Speaker 4:Hi, happy to be here.
Speaker 1:So tell us a wee bit about yourself. Well, actually, why not tell us a wee bit about yourself? Tell the audience a wee bit about yourself. Take as long long as you like, because obviously, guillem and I have had the opportunity to have a little read through your um for your bio and we can't do you justice, so you're gonna have to do it yourself.
Speaker 4:Oh no, oh gosh, the pressure is on. I'm, I'm really. I mean, I like to say, well, I like maths, I like tech and I like helping people. That's normally where I start. I spend most of my time running an organisation called STEMETS. That's all about engaging, informing and connecting young women, young non-binary folk, to the STEM and STEAM industry STEM being science, technology, engineering and maths, and STEAM being science, technology, engineering, art and design and maths. I also appear in different places at different times. I'm the author of a book called she's in Control. I'm the co-chair at the Institute for the Future of Work. I hosted a couple of episodes of Countdown maybe 60 episodes of Countdown as the arithmetician at one point while Rachel Riley was on mat leave.
Speaker 1:I'm a big Countdown fan and remember your appearances vividly, so I was doubly excited when you were coming on. For that reason.
Speaker 4:Yeah, and Chancellor of University, like Chancellor of Glasgow Caledonia University, so I wear a lot of hats and do a lot of things, but ultimately it's because I like maths, tech and I like helping people, and so that means that there are any number of places I could turn up on any given week. Um, speaking about various different things that are all about, yeah, ensuring that we just do better in general across science and here you are on a geeky um science, techie and law podcast.
Speaker 1:So so where should we start? Where did the STEMET sort of initiative come from? What was the impetus?
Speaker 4:So I had a road to Damascus moment. So I've always loved maths and tech, like I said, since I was a child, had one of these Wunderkind child prodigy journeys. So I had two GCSEs by the time I left primary school, one in maths and one in ICT, went up, did my master's at Oxford in maths and comp and was done by the time I was 20 and ended up working in industry in technical roles. I actually was at an investment bank, a universal bank, really really enjoying it Really really kind of getting stuck into the tech, solving problems, being paid really well, being heard, being listened to, being respected, and ended up, as kind of part of that, speaking at a conference in the States, which for me was super exciting. You know, free trip across why not? But also it just so happened that this was the Grace Hopper celebration of women in computing and this was kind of Q3, q4 of 2012.
Speaker 4:Turned up at this conference. There were three and a half thousand people there and around and about and all of them were women and it was. It was so interesting for me because I'd never been in a majority female technical space before, because I'd never been in a majority female technical space before, but I'd never noticed that that was something that I was missing right or that kind of didn't happen very often, even though I'd always been a girl and always been in those technical and those mathematical spaces. And so I had a bit of a road to Damascus moment in hearing from the keynote that the number of women in technical fields, in the US at least, had been in free fall over the kind of the years and the decades before that conference. And so she implored all of us to stay. She gave us five reasons to stay in the industry and she gave us five reasons to recruit a friend to try and reverse that trend.
Speaker 4:And I remember being sat in that audience and thinking, my goodness, maybe this is an American problem. You know, I'm discovering so many things on this trip discovering I'm a woman in tech I didn't know that I was one of those before. Discovering I'm a black woman in tech didn't know I was one of those before. But also thinking, okay, cool, like the Americans have this problem and the Institute of Physics around that time had just put out a report, I think, called no Girl Left Behind or something along those lines did a little bit more reading and spotted that you know this wasn't an American problem.
Speaker 4:This is something we had back where I'd come from, but also that I was, you know, one of these STEM people and someone needed to do something about it, really back here in the UK, and so ended up starting Stamets as a response to how I felt being in that space, to the, to what I thought the problem was at that point. I didn't realise that 12 years later, I'd still be in this space doing this work, making things happen. But all of it really came from being in that conference and realising, wow, if I'm part of a shrinking minority, that's not going to be right. If I ever have kids, I don't want them to think I'm never going to do anything else. Full disclosure.
Speaker 1:I mean, I've started nothing as grand or successful as STEM Act, but things like Associations Week and stuff like that, where you bring people together and when you found something, it's finding those initial sort of early adopters to form a kind of a small but important critical mass. How did you get those people around you?
Speaker 4:So that ended up being easier than I thought it would be. So, as someone that was already in industry, there were a lot of people that I knew and I'd only ever done this right. So a couple of folks I'd said you know, this is the thing I'm thinking about, what do you think They'd be like, yeah, sure, happy to support? There was this thing called Twitter at that point that was kind of growing in popularity growing in popularity.
Speaker 1:Anne-Marie, tell us a little bit about some of your early successes. What was it, in the sort of like the early days, that you wanted to achieve, and did you do it?
Speaker 4:Early successes for me. You've got to kind of be clear as well that initially this was a punt. It was like it was a tryout. It's New Year and you'll know the same. Like we're saying, I kind of founded things, you, you or I don't actually feel the same way, but I didn't find it. I didn't start it and I was like this is definitely the answer. It was this works in America One. I'll give it a go here. It was actually my new year's resolution in 2013.
Speaker 4:And most other people would have said I'm going to do more yoga or I'm going to stretch more, and mine was I'm going to try this Stamets project thing, and so kind of measures of success wasn't necessarily kind of where I started. It was, hey, I want to put these spaces together and let's see what happens. Right, if we take this in a different way, if we're more modern about the way that we talk about STEM, if we're allowing them to see people they wouldn't normally see. So I think a lot of the early successes were seeing that it was quite a simple principle. You know, like if you've never ever met a scientist and you get to meet a particular woman and you know you both are enjoying the same toppings on your pancake because it's pancake day and we've got unlimited pancakes at the launch event, right? I don't know how many people have ever got to meet a physicist and understand. You know they also want Biscoff and bananas on their pancakes, and so that proximity that you have to them is much more than the proximity you might have to your physics teacher or the people that you see in your textbook or what we have in kind of common in media representations and depictions of all these people.
Speaker 4:So a lot of the early successes came from folks just getting to see the industry in a different light, in a way that it wouldn't normally be presented, because we've never really prioritised connection or belonging.
Speaker 4:When we've got folks to engage with industry, we've prioritised no, you must know the knowledge, or this must be the definition of excellence, or you must be like one of the greats in order for you to be someone that we're going to value, or you must have gone to this school, or you must have studied this and had this pathway and, you know, done the GCSEs, age two, and so a lot of the successes came from just breaking that down and being like no, there are a lot of different types of people that thrive in this space. That exists in this space, and you could be one of them. You don't have to fit that kind of narrow definition of success or narrow definition of excellence and so successes were. You know, these girls making different choices in their subjects, then feeling more comfortable in these spaces, then building an app for the first time and realizing that that was something that was well within their means to do, without necessarily being the person that's the loudest in their maths classes or that their computer science teacher really liked.
Speaker 1:So I know that Gwilym is sort of champing at the bit to come in, because you've mentioned physics, physicists a number of times and I know that's normally his cue to come in. But if I can just do one more question on the sort of like the setting up, the establishment and then. So let's move on a couple of years and the initiative is grounded, it's doing stuff. So I found in the sort of couple of initiatives I've been involved in, particularly when they involve politicians and needing to get a bit of awareness there, that quite often politicians feel like they've seen it, done it and it's ready to to move on. Did you experience that? Did you get that sort of that lag that you get when people think think, oh, it's done, we can move on now?
Speaker 4:no, the nature of this problem means that I would love for us to even get there, but it's so bad and so dire that, no, so I we've I've had generations of, I've been, I've had to engage with generations of politicians. So the end of that first year, 2013, so february 2013, we started by the first week, I think it was, of december. We're at number 10 with michael gove, david Willett. So Michael Gove was then Education Secretary, david Willett was then Universities Minister, science.
Speaker 4:This year, as part of our 12th birthday celebrations, again with a brand new crop of mps also talking about this problem, and it's something that everyone is still having to grapple with because it's, you know, now it's growth.
Speaker 4:Right now, politically, growth is the thing that folks are looking for, and we've got the ai action plan and the government is taking technology seriously in a particular way.
Speaker 4:There's geopolitical elements on semiconductor. You know, there's a lot of places where this is showing up much more as time goes on, because technology and all of what we're doing across STEM and STEAM only grows with economic importance, and so the idea that we don't have the right brains, the right potential, the right people going into these sectors and serving means that it's not really one that politicians can ignore or say been there, done that and we've solved it. It's one, actually, that they're wanting to see more scale right and more impact faster, and so I don't know if it's a privilege or a curse. Really I don't know if it's a positive or a negative that, you know, none of them really have said been there, done that and we've solved it. I think it's more likely, actually, that big companies and big corporations are pretending that they've solved it or pretending that it's not a problem. Yeah, and so that that ends up being the issue, I think, much more than politicians. Well, do you want to come in?
Speaker 2:I want to and I want to go back a little bit. I want to come back to that tech thing as well, because that's something that in part, the profession is super involved in. That should be highly relevant thing. But actually, just going back a bit and you've you mentioned that you know you don't one of the messages to all the class, that is, you don't have to have the spectacular academic career that you've had Anne-Marie to be able to do this. I think that's a really important message. But on the other hand, I think some people don't realize they even have this ability. You know these kind of the skill set and so actually, if you don't mind, it was always fun's backstories. How did you find out you were so good at maths?
Speaker 4:It was by accident. So I can't sit still. I don't sit still, and in primary school this showed up in various different ways and so in a class of 30, normally in maths class, sometimes in other lessons not numeracy lessons, of course it is in primary school I kind of finish the work ahead of everybody else and then have a chat with the mate or crack a few jokes or just distract the classroom in general, and you know I probably was most of my teachers nightmares in that. Then you'd say, hey, amory, have you finished your work? And I'd be like, yeah, I have, and then carry on with whatever it was. So it ended up looking almost like disruptive behaviour at points. Or you'd say, hey, anne-marie, what did I just say? And I'd deliver it back better than the teacher did.
Speaker 4:The extreme example, extreme incident was Ofsted were in and my year four teacher was panicking ever so slightly because Ofsted are in and watching the classroom you know what it is and I think they popped up on the board a top heavy fraction and so asked the group a question which of course they were all stumped and couldn't answer because they put the numbers the wrong way around to which at one point I kind of stood up, I put my hand up and I said, well, this is the answer. But if you put it the other way around, then this is probably what you're looking for. And that was my way of helping my teacher out during the Ofsted inspection. So so what a parent's evening then rolled around and I think there's a mounting exasperation. So they kind of said to my parents look, anne-marie knows some stuff. I've heard of people had having accelerated learning. Can we give her some secondary school stuff? So, for goodness sake, she can sit in the corner and chew on that and leave the rest of us alone. And so that was what it was and it do. You know what's so sad and so frustrating about it? So the head of numeracy in my primary school was a guy called mr davies. Until now, actually, I think we now know his first name was john. But john davies is, like you know, trying to find him. He's like trying to find a needle in the haystack. So we actually recorded something for the BBC last year back at my primary school and we're still trying to look for him and we can't find him. I did Life Scientific on Radio 4 and you know looking for and the national search for Mr John Davies continues.
Speaker 4:But I was really really fortunate because it could have been seen, as you know, behavioral problems. It could have been that pipeline to suspension, all those kinds of things, whereas actually it was like no, amory knows what she's talking about. Just for goodness sake, we need her to sit still so that the other 29 kids can get an education without her, you know, getting to entertain them in the meantime. And I wouldn't. I never take for granted, I've never taken for granted that I know these things. Never take for granted, I've never taken for granted that I know these things. So I remember sitting the paper and thinking, yeah, I wonder if this person knows that it's like a 10 year old that's answering these questions. And I was as surprised as anyone when the results came back and I was super happy. My dad took me to McDonald's. I didn't have to wash up for a week. That was great.
Speaker 4:But I think it's not something that I've ever been fully conscious of and it's hard. It's hard to reflect. It's hard to reflect because I've never not been me, if that makes sense. I've never. There's never been a time that I've been able to kind of do it one way and then do it the other way and then see this was the difference. Um, so yeah, I don't, I don't take for granted these are things that I know and I understand. I just I just enjoy them.
Speaker 4:And funny things happen throughout life, even the countdown right.
Speaker 4:There's so many things that I've done that I don't go into it being like, yeah, this is definitely going to work.
Speaker 4:I'm always willing to give things a go and I'll always learn, and I say with that as well um, it's interesting what you said in your question that yeah, there's so many folks that probably could have done this, because if you look at the maths curriculum, it builds over time and there's quite a lot of overlap between what we do at key stage two and what we do at key stage three, and so there are there's quite a lot of people that if you gave them that exam, they'd probably deal all right at it.
Speaker 4:Right. But we don't give folks the opportunity because we think we know what a genius should look like, or we think we know from people's behaviours, you know, if they're a bit of a know-it-all, you know, you assume that they're going to know better, whereas actually no. The folks that have to work at it harder, often end up doing better because they've put that effort in, because they've refined it and because the element of self-doubt means that they check and they're a bit more honest with the work, rather than just assuming it's something they can do naturally right off the bat.
Speaker 2:It's really interesting. I mean, there's the Bletchley Park, possibly the most powerful story that they sent a puzzle out to people in the newspapers saying, you know, go for this competition. And then they just found a whole bunch of people who'd never studied maths, just nailed the puzzle. They just hired them all for bletchley bar to do code breaking. I don't know if that's true, but it's a great kind of story for finding talents in surprising ways, you know it's definitely true.
Speaker 4:It definitely used to be the way that they did recruiting, which which is kind of why I made that comment earlier used it used to be that you did open a bit like almost 11 plus type thing. You did open kind of exams or open assessments for folks. I mean, if they had this natural aptitude, then you take them in. And so in the 60s, I think in the 70s, a lot of folks that ended up in IT, for example that's how they come in it wasn't with IT training, it was because they had this aptitude to see particular logics in particular ways. We've obviously gone away from that now for various reasons. But yeah, definitely a lot of folks have the affinity they're just, you know, the system doesn't recognize it. Or, like I said, we we limit opportunity to what we think is the pattern matching for what a genius could look like you mentioned also, kind of your fascinating career.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I don't think anybody goes into science thinking they're going to end up on countdown. But you never know, you never know. But I do quite a lot of tutoring through one of the access projects. I'm always having to plug it it's one of the charities, um, and you know, you tutor gcse and a level students from backgrounds inside and I do maths and physics teaching quite badly, but the principle I try and it's people who are good at it want to do it.
Speaker 2:But when I say what you're going to do next anyone doing physics they always say I want to be an astrophysicist, now, great career, don't get me wrong, there's not that much room for that. When the astrophysicist Now great career, don't get me wrong, there's not that much room for that many astrophysicists. It always occurs to me that the reason you're saying that isn't because you really want to be an astrophysicist. It's because you don't actually know what else physicists do. It's probably the only job title with physicist in it Now, if you've read it. And so I think to me one of the big challenges saying you do realize that when you got that degree you can go in all kinds of different directions.
Speaker 4:I guess that's part of the kind of teaching and support you guys give as well exactly, and I think it it ends up being quite a hard task as well because it's constantly involving and constantly changing. So we do end up saying this to a lot of our young people I I had actually the job the, the final job, that final corporate job I had didn't exist when I started at that company. Um, and with the way that things are going right, there's. There's all these new roles that keep popping up. There's all these new. I don't know, we'll get to 6g and there'll be a whole new, and quantum is coming right, so there'll be a whole new suite of things that happen with our space exploration. There's so many things that are coming up, and so it ends up being, you know whether know whether we should be asking the question what do you want to do when you're older? Or whether we should be saying what are the problems that you're interested in, that you'd like to solve, and helping them understand that, actually, rather than it being that you have to go into a predefined field or a predefined role, that you want to keep your options open Because, yeah, you can't plan. I couldn't have planned in the 90s what I would have ended up doing, because there's so many things since then that I've got to see and got to understand. And now new options and there's new ones that are opening up, you know, any given time, and so it's pretty, it's pretty hard, you're right. You know it's the work of the industry also to ensure that you're visible or ensure that you're in those spaces and, you know, connecting with folks, allowing them to see the options, but I think it's pretty hard.
Speaker 4:Physics, I think, is one that's pretty hard for folks to see. Maths is the other one. You know a lot of folks here. You know you stay in academia, you become a maths teacher and we don't have that visibility of all the different places that maths ends up being useful or ends up being kind of coming to play or coming to the fore. And I think we also make folks feel like you're kind of your science or your technical or your artistic and the two never kind of come together, which is why we we have emphasis on STEAM.
Speaker 4:But this idea that you're doing the physics to open up options rather than to narrow down what you end up doing again isn't in the language that we have of delivering. Physics isn't in the language we have of A-level choices, isn't in the language that we have of delivering physics isn't in the language we have of A-level choices isn't in the language that we have of even kind of degree programmes. So I think we definitely should be able to do better to say, hey, you know, physics and law come together in the IP profession. You know how are we able to tell those narratives in a way that means that folks can see that it's opening up rather than narrowing down what they're going to be able to do?
Speaker 2:it's all ties in with the point you make about government. I kind of recognize the importance of technology and linking it with growth and everything else, but somehow not everything's being linked up in quite the right way. So I mean, I think, incredibly importantly, we need to get all the right people into the science pipeline, or the steam pipeline, by the way, I like steam easily, but the a is r, I think, isn't it because I'm still? I'm still thinking stem.
Speaker 2:I think this other time maybe listeners don't know, I didn't know that uh, scheme good, extra, extra letter like it. But I think getting people into this pipeline really, really important, uh, and then you know, say, hey, there's all kinds of things you can do once you're, once you're in there, I think it's really important as well. The other bit that then becomes important, which is a bit beyond stem, there I think it's really important as well. The other bit that then becomes important, which is a bit beyond STEM-esque but I think it's really important to our profession, is the importance of linking up innovation and growth. We do it on the legal side to a certain extent, but really actually what we do is innovation support as a profession. So please, when you talk to the politicians make sure they're always aware that we've got the world's best patent professionals sitting there ready to monetize everything everyone thinks of for everybody's benefit.
Speaker 2:I promise I will it's actually really important to us. I think and I think only we've actually talked about whether the I needs to turn in secret should become innovation, rather than the I in terms of property or something like that.
Speaker 1:Well, you know I have the scars from trying to change SEPA's name and I'm not going there again. Can I just ask a quick question? I mean we've talked about it in the round, but I'm wondering how much of an issue this was for you in the early days and whether it sort of remains it now. But I'm not a scientist. Ok, in fact, confession comes up on the podcast occasionally. I'm a plumber. I have no idea. I have no idea how I ended up being the chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys. It's a bit of a mad lie.
Speaker 2:It comes up on every podcast we have ever done. If we don't talk about plumbing in the podcast, something's gone wrong.
Speaker 4:We should note for solicitors. It's come up unsolicited though, sorry, we should note for the listeners. Sorry it's come up unsolicited, but I mean we'll always need plumbers, we'll always need plumbers.
Speaker 1:When I was working at Tiles Further Education teacher for quite a while, and one of the issues for FE teachers particularly when you're trying to get young women into non-traditional careers like construction, engineering et cetera is to try and give them a sense of what the work opportunities are and that they're not the stereotypical sort of opportunities that they see. And I'm imagining the same is true of the science and tech world. Are you still looking for examples that you can give to young people, young women, that says you know you're not going to be stuck in a white coat in a lab. This is what science looks like in the real world.
Speaker 4:Yeah, I mean, that's a big part of what we're so we it's a big part of what we're trying to do. Yes, there are lots of different options. There are lots of different places that you might do this. Some of them are stereotypical and many of them are not. Some of them you'll have to wear overalls and some of them you won't. So definitely, it's something we're always trying to open up, but I think, because it continuously changes, so plumbers will always have right Age-old industry, something we'll always need.
Speaker 4:I think the difficulty comes with, rather than defining specific roles, showing that there's a plethora and there's an opportunity to find lots of different types of roles and the one that fits with you. But also and I guess this speaks a little bit to retention, I'm sure you know you'll you'll be kind of talking about across cpa and the other kind of ip inclusive programs that you run also that a role is not for life, which I think you know, you being a plumber. Evidence is that, and so, actually, if they're going to make this decision, that it's not a permanent decision, it's not a lifelong decision, it's one about the next role or potential roles, rather than it being you're committing yourself to the life of being a minor or the life of being someone that's doing the particular role on a construction. So for us it is about showing that there's options and that this isn't fixed, and actually they should be open to exploring those as time goes rather than saying that they want to narrow it down. That's why, you know, I talk about being a multi-hyphenate, it's why we have the way that we run our events and we have people. It's always someone new for them to come and to start to see those patterns of what folks can do.
Speaker 4:But I think the pressure or the work really, you know, needs to be done for those industries. So what are they doing to make sure that if we do end up sending a young person to do some work experience on site or to spend time with them on site, or you know they're walking past and they get to engage and see what that environment looks like how are we making sure that it looks like somewhere that a young woman thinks they can come and thrive in? And I think that ends up being really the task. There's only so much we can do, or I can do, for attraction and getting folks kind of recruiting in the door. But what are we doing in the industry to ensure that those people then want to stay, want to be there and get to thrive in those spaces? And I think that's the thing that that's the message that kind of can't go missing. Really, are we paying them? Like? What do our pay gaps look like?
Speaker 4:Do we have policies that recognise that they might be more likely to have kind of care responsibilities that go on outside of work, and how we're reflecting that? You know we at Stamets have got a four-day work week. We've got menstrual leave. You know we've got all manner of different things that we've got. You've got returnship. So if someone's left plumbing for a while because they've gone on again, extended care leave when they come back, how we're recognising those skills and allowing them to then transfer across.
Speaker 4:It's something we talk about a lot and exploring a lot at the Institute for the Future of Work this idea of reskilling and upskilling, because again, a lot of these industries are transforming With this fourth industrial revolution. You've got AI, you've got all kinds of different technology that's coming in. So how are we empowering people to be able to then switch and move across? And I think there were certain sectors and certain parts of the industry that if you didn't make that decision at 14, you'll never be allowed to ever have even a look in, you know, to come and join our ranks and come and do what we do, whereas actually that's not the way really to run things. If you want to be inclusive and it's not very good for innovation in your space anyway, right, if everyone's gone on the same journey, the same pathway and come through the same way and there's no other doors for them to come in and join you.
Speaker 1:I've got a couple of couple of questions and then guillem. So at the end of the podcast we usually do some sort of tangential, closer question. Guillem's going to do this one. I've got no idea what's coming up. We'll tell you you about that in a moment, but a couple of proper questions still first. First one obviously we'll have a lot of people listening to this who are working in science, tech, engineering, maths fields, either because they are patent attorneys and those are their backgrounds, or because they're interested in invention and creativity. What can they do to help? What can CIPA do to help? How? What can they do to help?
Speaker 4:What can SIPA do to help? How can we get involved? So, volunteer we're always looking for folks to volunteer and help out at events and on programmes and behind the scenes. So volunteerstametsorg I'd highly recommend. Folks can come and be mentors, can come and clean laptops, can come and, you know, help us do research. Actually, because we have an advocacy stream when we're working with the politicians to do some of the kind of desk research for what's going on on that front. Um. So that's one. I mean also fundraisers. I think we've got a spot in london, marathon 2026. So if there's someone that thinks that they're a great fundraiser or wants to do a bake sale or anything like that, I'm always kind of keen to have that where we've got our charity that runs alongside us to met futures 1188774, um.
Speaker 4:But I think the other thing is understanding and just doing the work, doing the iterative work to ensure that you are playing your role in that retention piece. So you know, how can you be involved in recruitment panels, how can you join affinity groups in your organisation, how can you show up and be an ally for different people across the organisations that you're in? You know? Know what are the tweaks that we need to make for some of those policies, or what's the support that you want to ensure that you've got in, to make sure that you've got different people around the table when you are in your meetings, when you are, you know, at conferences, when you are doing promotion rounds, right, all of those types of things. I think everybody's got it in their gift. Everyone, everyone has a sphere of influence, and so how are you using that to do better and ensure that the profession can do better?
Speaker 1:Sure, we'll make sure those links go out with the podcast when it's published. Now I've got a really selfish question for my last question, if that's okay. And this comes back to my love of Countdown, and I've always thought that there must be some kind of magic going on behind the maths stuff in in solving those sort of equations. I was gonna say conundrums, but that's the word bit, isn't it? But I suppose you're gonna mass conundrum as well, can't you?
Speaker 4:and I know conundrum is the nine, the nine letters at the end are the tricks?
Speaker 1:are that tricks that you use? Are there sort of some mental tricks that help you do it quickly?
Speaker 4:There are loads of tricks. What I would say, though, is to practice is the ultimate trick, isn't it? Really.
Speaker 4:The other thing and I have to be careful because you know you almost don't want to give away kind of secrets of TV too much, but we film five episodes in a day, three days on the trot, and so what I found and I think with Rachel even more so because she's done it for decades, like over a decade now is the numbers do end up, they do start talking to you, do start to see patterns and how things come, and so then sometimes I don't know if you'd quite call it autopilot. My thing was that the numbers were talking to me by episode 13, 14, 15, they were, they were just talking to you. But then the other thing that that does help, I guess, is they will tell you in your ear if it's not possible. So then you don't waste energy.
Speaker 1:We might have to cut that one out, because that's too much of a giveaway now.
Speaker 2:The numbers talk to you.
Speaker 1:That's just broken my heart and sort of ruined my feelings.
Speaker 2:She's just good at it, lee. Can I have a quick 10 seconds on the? And sort of ruined my life? She's just good at it, lee. She's just good at it. Can I have a quick ten seconds on the beauty of maths, by the way? Because I have this kind of physics-y theory that the only universes that could possibly work are universes where maths works. What I love about maths is the way that, however deep you get, it remains totally consistent. It doesn't matter how far you go in. It never stops working. It's kind of like the universe and the only places the universe and maths break down. How's about this? For a bit of a segue, this is my theory is zero and infinity. Math doesn't work for that, and the universe struggles with it as well don't, don't go there.
Speaker 4:One of our first year lectures and I'll never, I'll never forget this was we had an hour on. Zero doesn't equal to one. And I remember thinking my good, like, what an hour of what are you all still? Still now I haven't got over it, um, but I think what? So my, my take on so I fully agree with you.
Speaker 4:My take on it is that it's the beauty of maths and it's the reliability of maths, and it frustrates me that I have to live in the real world, because in the real world nothing makes sense. Things change all the time and I don't know if it's human beings. I think it goes as far as biology. It's very, very irritating because it's not very reliable, whereas with maths you just know it just works and you don't have to. And I always say this to folks, and folks are like oh, you know, did you have a tough upbringing? And I was like no, it wasn't super traumatic, I was just with human beings where if I say hello to you today and I say hello tomorrow, I get a completely different response, even though I've said it. Bang on 10, 20 in the same tone, and it drives me wild. But you can't, I can't not live with human beings. So I always say this to folks. You know, when folks kind of ask different, varying versions of.
Speaker 4:I did a thing with Stanley Tucci, for example, a couple of weeks ago, and it was if you had no responsibilities, what would you do? Right? And I'm like I would go and I'd sit on a beach on the east coast of Kenya and I would do slow mathematics. I'd just sit there and it'd be on a beach on the east coast of Kenya and I would do slow mathematics. I just sit there and it'd be me and the numbers and you know, and it would all just make sense. I wouldn't have to try and explain to folks why women should be able to be in this space or why you can't build an AI system if you haven't thought about accountability, all of these things. So you're having to kind of grapple with concepts Like no, let me just sit here and write this proof that is completely bulletproof and will always work and will always be correct and will forever.
Speaker 4:You know, if someone's born in 300 years, that thing's still. Those prime numbers are still prime. They haven changed. It's the beauty of maths, but no one, you know, you see eyes, I know for you both. Maybe not, but you see eyes glaze over because folks had terrible times in their maths lessons. I was like I don't care if your maths teacher was like that. The maths itself maintained it was highly reliable, but anyway. Anyway, you started it I did.
Speaker 2:That's a fabulous. I didn't close over, I lit up and you should have been a patent. Certainly that's the highest, highest background I could provide at this moment law, don't even get me started.
Speaker 4:and my problem with lawyers and it's not your fault as a lawyer, it should just be logical. But it's not, because you've got clauses and you've got precedents, so then things don't follow. No, it's not deterministic. No, that's the only reason I wasn't a patent lawyer. It's the law side. It's the law side.
Speaker 1:You're going to close us off with a tangential question, aren't you? Are you going to explain to us how Marie Outworks?
Speaker 2:Yeah, so at the end of it, we always come up with a closer question just to finish off, normally inspired by something during the podcast. Lee normally has a really profound and deep one. I have a silly one, so I'm getting it today, and you mentioned ages ago that you had your new year's resolution in 20, I think it was 2013. Um, sounds like you have one a year, which sounds very mathematical to me. But um, out of interest, um, I think I'll start with you. Don't know, lee, the league, what's?
Speaker 2:your best ever new year's resolution. Yeah, what's your best ever new year's resolution?
Speaker 1:well, I wasn't. Wasn't expecting that as a question. Where did that come from? Of course not. You just explained where it came from. I don't do you know what I don't generally do New Year's resolutions so that's probably not a fair question to ask me, because I can't remember the last time I made one. It's just sorry. Yeah, I'm going to fall down on this one. Willem, I don't do resolutions.
Speaker 2:Lee, we would like you to make a New Year's resolution at the beginning of 2026. What would it be?
Speaker 1:Why are you doing this to me? Is this some kind of persecution complex? What would my New Year's resolution be? I don't know. I'd probably like to get more fishing in. I don't do enough fishing. I don't make enough time to be sat on the beach where I'm at my happiest. Oh, actually, no, I've got a better one. I've got a better one. I will resolve my own internal tensions with numbers. So and I don't know whether I've talked to you about this before, Gwilym, but I have a real thing about odd numbers. I avoid odd numbers like the plague. My children annoy me hugely by always leaving the television on like 17 or 13 or volume or some volume wise. I mean not channel and stuff like that both primes, both prime numbers as well.
Speaker 1:Interesting, interesting yeah, yeah, I do. I have this real thing about um and I count a lot and make sure that you know. If there are 13 stairs and there are nearly always 13 stairs in a flight you've probably noticed that I have to go down one and back up to make it 14. Because I can't have odd numbers in my life. So my New Year's Resolution 2026 will be to resolve that internal tension. Gwilym, there you go, thank you. You've done a bit of counselling for me without knowing.
Speaker 2:There's a lot to unpick there. I'm going to pass to Anne-Marie. I'm going to pass to you, a to comment on what Lee just said because it's fascinating, and then B to give us your next this year's resolution.
Speaker 4:I was going to comment and say that's quite a tall order to ask someone a quarter of the way through one demand last minute to set the new year's resolution for the following year. Given they didn't three months ago, they're not in the loop of doing it, but lee lee rose to the challenge and what I will say is so I stopped it after that year because of, because of what happened, with me still doing now, I stopped doing new year's resolutions. Um, I actually have a word for the year. Um, each year. This year I wasn't, I didn't go public with it and I will do eventually, but I didn't go public with it.
Speaker 4:Um, but the, the, the funniest one, or the best one, or the interesting, most interesting one. It's not funny. Actually, the weirdest one was in 2020. My word for the year was jomo, which means the joy of missing out, which is almost the opposite of FOMO, which is the fear of missing out, and what I said in 2020 was um, I'd spent the years prior running around like a chicken doing lots of different things and it was really nice for me to sit out of particular things. So I was going to sit out of more and be at home more and have the joy of missing out and watching other people end up at these events doing other, whatever else it might be. And then lockdown was announced, so the whole world had to Jomo with me.
Speaker 2:It was you, yeah, sorry.
Speaker 1:Come on, gwilym, you know how it works and you obviously already know your answer, because you're clever and you think of your answer before you create the question, so go on.
Speaker 2:So I actually also don't do news resolutions. What I do is I choose one thing I want to focus on, because I'm getting old now and there's only things you want to do in your life. You can't do all of them, so I kind of pick one thing at a time. Uh, as I may have mentioned before, for a while it was getting my head around a bit of relativity, because I've always actually hidden from that. Really interesting. I can't actually talk about it going forwards currently, having married um a spanish lady, my daughter speaks Spanish. I need to learn some Spanish. So that's what's happening at the moment. I am struggling Again. The words go in one side and come out the other, but that's where I'm up to at the moment.
Speaker 1:That's nice. That's quite ordinary for you to answer a question.
Speaker 2:I'm proud of you. I also try to learn the guitar. I want to be able to slash that into solo. I can't do that either, but that's the other one. If you want the silly one, there you go.
Speaker 1:Anne-marie, thank you so much for coming on the podcast. It's been an absolute pleasure to have you on and I can't wait to have a listen back to this. If you've listened to the podcast, of course you've listened to the podcast, or you wouldn't know I was speaking, would you? So, as, obviously, because it's been a great one. Leave us a little review on wherever it is you get your podcasts from, and that'll help other people find us. And, gwilym, I will see you on the next one, and Marie, best wishes for the future. I hope the program continues to go from strength to strength. Thank you next time.