Working independently often means splitting your time between the work that excites you and the work that simply needs doing. I’ve been deep in the latter recently — laying the groundwork for my consultancy, defining services, and figuring out how to communicate value clearly and fairly. It’s not glamorous, but it’s necessary.
This week, I’ve also been reflecting on how disagreement shows up in conversations about climate change. It can seem like there’s a deep divide between those who believe the science and those who don’t — but I don’t think that’s quite right. The broad strokes of climate science are widely agreed upon; where the disagreements lie is in the details, and in how best to respond. And often, what looks like disagreement is really just a gap in knowledge — people haven’t had the chance (or the push) to really dig into the evidence. That’s why I think the most valuable contributions most of us can make are to learn, talk, and question — to stay curious, share what we discover, and remain aware of whose interests a particular narrative might serve. I’ll be posting a short piece about this soon.
I really benefit from thinking about questions like this, and want to spend more time on the big-picture side of my work — especially around how cities, nature, and urban wildlife (pigeons included) shape one another. But for now, the balance is tilted towards getting the consultancy running. Maybe that’s just how it goes. How do you manage the tension between the work you want to do and the work you have to do?
(This post was written with the help of AI, based on my own work and ideas. Here’s why I do it this way: Link.)
Recent Comments