Uploaded February 2026 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
If 98% of your emissions sit outside your organisation, your resilience strategy is already compromised.
Most construction firms are optimising the wrong 2% and calling it progress.
Episode Context
I’m joined by Keith O’Flynn, Group Supply Chain Sustainability Manager at John Sisk & Son. Sisk operates across Ireland, the UK, and Europe, delivering complex projects in data centres, life sciences, commercial buildings, and infrastructure. Keith sits where sustainability, procurement, and operational risk collide, working directly with thousands of suppliers on the materials that actually drive cost, carbon, and disruption exposure.
Why This Matters Now
Construction supply chains are under simultaneous pressure from CSRD, client Scope 3 demands, volatile material costs, energy constraints, and tightening standards. At the same time, most emissions data remains incomplete, inconsistent, or wildly inaccurate. When resilience planning is built on weak data and narrow system boundaries, decisions fail under real disruption. This episode gets into where risk truly accumulates and why resilience and decarbonisation are now the same operational problem.
What Changed My Thinking
A few moments stood out. First, just how concentrated risk really is. Around 90% of Sisk’s Scope 3 emissions sit in purchased goods and services, with roughly 80% coming from concrete and steel alone. Second, the data problem. Spend-based emissions accounting can be off by plus or minus 100%, which means many decisions are being made with false confidence. And third, the operational blind spot most people miss. Construction sites often consume more energy after hours than during the working day, driven by generators, security loads, and unmanaged equipment. That’s a resilience failure hiding in plain sight.
Who This Is For
Senior supply chain, procurement, operations, sustainability, and risk leaders dealing with Scope 3 exposure, regulatory pressure, and fragile supplier ecosystems.
Engagement CTA
If you’re trying to build resilience upstream with incomplete data and tight margins, I’d like to hear how you’re approaching it.
Links & CTAs
🎧 Podcast site: resilientsupplychainpodcast.com
🔔 Subscribe for weekly conversations on supply chain resilience, risk, and decision-making
⏱️ Chapters below for direct access to key decisions and trade-offs
2️⃣ Chapters / Timestamps
00:00 – When 98% of emissions sit outside your control
00:49 – Why Scope 3 is the real resilience exposure
03:00 – Construction’s thin margins vs climate reality
05:43 – Regulation forces strategy change, not reporting
06:52 – Concrete and steel as concentrated risk vectors
08:16 – Why sites burn more energy after hours
12:31 – When emissions data can be wrong by 100%
15:44 – Sugar-and-water generators and site resilience
18:11 – Standards, insurance, and why innovation stalls
23:37 – Bringing thousands of suppliers along
26:16 – Net zero targets that actually keep leaders awake
32:21 – Why resilience sometimes means being a rebel
If 98% of your emissions sit outside your organisation, your resilience strategy is already compromised.
Most construction firms are optimising the wrong 2% and calling it progress.
Episode Context
I’m joined by Keith O’Flynn, Group Supply Chain Sustainability Manager at John Sisk & Son. Sisk operates across Ireland, the UK, and Europe, delivering complex projects in data centres, life sciences, commercial buildings, and infrastructure. Keith sits where sustainability, procurement, and operational risk collide, working directly with thousands of suppliers on the materials that actually drive cost, carbon, and disruption exposure.
Why This Matters Now
Construction supply chains are under simultaneous pressure from CSRD, client Scope 3 demands, volatile material costs, energy constraints, and tightening standards. At the same time, most emissions data remains incomplete, inconsistent, or wildly inaccurate. When resilience planning is built on weak data and narrow system boundaries, decisions fail under real disruption. This episode gets into where risk truly accumulates and why resilience and decarbonisation are now the same operational problem.
What Changed My Thinking
A few moments stood out. First, just how concentrated risk really is. Around 90% of Sisk’s Scope 3 emissions sit in purchased goods and services, with roughly 80% coming from concrete and steel alone. Second, the data problem. Spend-based emissions accounting can be off by plus or minus 100%, which means many decisions are being made with false confidence. And third, the operational blind spot most people miss. Construction sites often consume more energy after hours than during the working day, driven by generators, security loads, and unmanaged equipment. That’s a resilience failure hiding in plain sight.
Who This Is For
Senior supply chain, procurement, operations, sustainability, and risk leaders dealing with Scope 3 exposure, regulatory pressure, and fragile supplier ecosystems.
Engagement CTA
If you’re trying to build resilience upstream with incomplete data and tight margins, I’d like to hear how you’re approaching it.
Links & CTAs
🎧 Podcast site: resilientsupplychainpodcast.com
🔔 Subscribe for weekly conversations on supply chain resilience, risk, and decision-making
⏱️ Chapters below for direct access to key decisions and trade-offs
2️⃣ Chapters / Timestamps
00:00 – When 98% of emissions sit outside your control
00:49 – Why Scope 3 is the real resilience exposure
03:00 – Construction’s thin margins vs climate reality
05:43 – Regulation forces strategy change, not reporting
06:52 – Concrete and steel as concentrated risk vectors
08:16 – Why sites burn more energy after hours
12:31 – When emissions data can be wrong by 100%
15:44 – Sugar-and-water generators and site resilience
18:11 – Standards, insurance, and why innovation stalls
23:37 – Bringing thousands of suppliers along
26:16 – Net zero targets that actually keep leaders awake
32:21 – Why resilience sometimes means being a rebel
