As professionals with a passion for Sustainability, the \u201ctrue\u201d <\/b>one, not the one made of glossy reports void of any industrial content, we find a frequent obstacle that makes the first steps with business clients grueling: proving the business case<\/b>. All right, we are dealing with profit companies, thus it is a legitimate question and we are ready to answer it. What is odd is the utter determination, to the point of challenging Sustainability a-priori, as if there was a will to counter-demonstrate that it will never be an economically viable<\/b> concept. Why this animosity? The answer that I found is that there is too much lip-service<\/b> paid to Sustainability and also that there has been a confused transition<\/b> in the last decade from Philanthropy, through CSR, to Sustainability as if they were the same thing, which is not the case<\/b>. Hence the huge misunderstanding generating such hostility.<\/p>\n
Sustainability is defined as \u201cthe ability of an organization to manage transparently its responsibilities for <\/i>Environmental Stewardship<\/i><\/b>, <\/i>Social Well Being<\/i><\/b> and <\/i>Economic Prosperity<\/i><\/b> over the long term, while being held accountable to its <\/i>Stakeholders\u201d<\/i><\/b> (Pojasek, Farver, 2012).<\/p>\n
By definition, then, an organization is rightly defined \u201csustainable\u201d then it runs its activity while generating economic prosperity, i.e. wealth<\/b> and means to assure its business continuity, in a responsible way so as to protect the environment<\/b> and doing its share – only its one, of course – to contribute to social well being.<\/p>\n
The pen-fantasists shall excuse me, but \u201cEco-sustainability\u201d<\/b> simply does not exist,<\/b> as well as \u201cSocial-sustainability\u201d or \u201cEconomic-sustainability\u201d or stools standing on just one leg do not exist either.<\/p>\n
With the above definition, used by my former Harvard professors but not at all new, the huge difference between Philanthropy and Sustainability<\/b> is clarified beyond doubt. Philanthropy is about what you do with some available wealth – as a person or as an organization as well, Sustainability is about how you run the operations<\/b> of an organization. Tu put it in a nutshell, as we like tu do it at The Embedded Sustainability Initiative<\/a>, Sustainability is walking the talk<\/b> of business excellence<\/b>. It\u2019s not by chance that among the foundations of the best Sustainability management systems are the Performance Frameworks<\/b>, like the Baldrige in the US and EFQM in Europe (and many others around the world).<\/p>\n More specifically, we use the so called Leading Indicators<\/b>, i.e. qualitative pointers that allow us to understand what is the capacity of a business to mobilize its inherent potential<\/b> at best to build its durable success. At ESI<\/a> we use indicators grouped in five areas: Leadership, Policy and Strategies, People and Knowledge Management, Partnerships and Resources, Processes<\/b> that are strongly inspired by such kind of approach. Leading Indicators are the bright counterbalance of the obscure face of reporting, i.e. the prevailing activity among organizations boasting their Sustainability.<\/p>\n There are two limiting aspects<\/b> with a focus on reporting<\/b>, compared to one on Embedded – Or Integrated – Sustainability: the fist was recently confirmed by the manager of the reporting division of a main international certification company. A lot of businesses think that reporting is about boasting how much they are \u201cgood<\/b>\u201d. In the manager\u2019s words, the majority of their clients at the obvious question \u201cwhat are your sustainability objectives\u201d, have no answer<\/b>. However, every year they want to receive a glossy report<\/b> to display on their websites and presentations. If they are really daring, they put generic assertions<\/b> about the environment or \u201cEco-sustainability\u201d, or some of those that we call the \u201clow-hanging fruits<\/b>\u201d of Sustainability, like: energy savings by substitution of incandescent bulbs with led, replacing old machinery with new more efficient one, progressively switching their vehicle fleet with less gas-guzzling ones. All good things, of course, but little to do with a thorough industrial strategy<\/b> for the long time success.<\/p>\n The second issue is that reporting is mostly based on what we call \u201cLagging Indicators\u201d.<\/b> Even the most common framework used for sustainability reporting, the GRI<\/b>, is almost completely composed of lagging indicators. Such are indicators of the past<\/b> that: at best, they can tell us what has already happened, hardly why it happened and for nothing what s going to happen. If we are lucky, we can infer from them what might happen<\/b> if we change nothing from what we did yesterday. Interesting, but not very useful to develop strategies.<\/p>\n Total Sustainability is a final objective<\/b>. Achieving that point, with the best social and economic performance, implies engaging the whole intelligence<\/b> of the organization in rethinking<\/b> its activity drastically, with objectives that are well defined, easily understandable<\/b> and regularly measured<\/b>. We have many exemplary case-histories of true Sustainability today, to illustrate what we are talking about. My favorite is Interface<\/b>, world leader in modular carpet tiles. Its late CEO and founder Ray Anderson<\/b> had an epiphany in 1994 that took him to become an inspiring example <\/b>for hundreds of entrepreneurs and leaders in the world. His Company has achieved extraordinary results<\/b>, despite operating in an oil intensive sector, pursuing the bold objective of Zero Impact by 2020. As by its 2016 Annual Report<\/b><\/a>,<\/b> Interface has a renewable energy usage of between 96 percent<\/b>\u00a0in the US<\/b> and 100 percent<\/b>\u00a0in Europe<\/b>, 55 percent\u00a0<\/b>of its raw material is either recycled or bio-based, has reduced its CO2 impact by 60 percent<\/b>. In the meantime, its profits<\/b> have doubled<\/b>, sales<\/b> risen 67 percent\u00a0<\/b>and they have fared a couple of global crisis much better then the competition. How? With clear industrial<\/b> and market<\/b> objectives<\/b>, strict adherence to their clear principles and values<\/b>. They have engaged the brains<\/b> of all their staff and some research centers<\/b> worldwide in the study of natural processes to comprehend how to solve problems without causing undesirable side-effects, all the while improving<\/b> the global Company performance<\/b>, value for shareholders<\/b> and the \u201cinfamous\u201d bottom line <\/b>– something that it is commonly said to be the only relevant driver for executives and business people.<\/p>\n Like an example? Ok: to get rid of glue<\/b> in laying out the tiles they studied how the gecko<\/b> sticks to our homes\u2019 walls almost magically in any condition. They found that he has nano hairs<\/b> that cling to the water molecules that adhere to almost every surface on Earth, no matter how dry it is. Outcome? TacTiles\u00ae<\/b>: end of glueing in the laying-out of tiles, a speedier job, less technical skills needed, saving of material and time – thus more profit, more health for customers, less healthcare expenses for the community. Win, win, win<\/b>. (Great video here<\/a>)<\/p>\n Before coming to a close with Interface, it is worth remembering that all <\/b>the Company\u2019s investments<\/b> in research, innovation, new business models, training, you-name-it relating to Sustainability objectives along these years have been amply repaid<\/b> by savings, <\/b>new products <\/b>and services, <\/b>new market segments<\/b>. This is to be remembered because another mistake stemming from the initial misunderstanding about Philanthropy and Sustainability, or the fake \u201cEco-sustainability\u201d, is the conviction that pursuing Sustainability needs redundant resources, since it is about \u201cbeing good\u201d and not \u201cdoing good business\u201d (see my book \u201cIt\u2019s Good Business to di Good with Business<\/a>\u201d if you want a read).<\/p>\n I had the opportunity to write elsewhere about Corporate Philanthropy,<\/a> thus I cannot be accused of encouraging inefficient and wasteful Philanthropy, rather the opposite. But, absurdly, we may say that Philanthropy can afford the luxury of being inefficient<\/b>. It would be a pity, but it can be. No one expects a ROI by Philanthropy. Sustainability is a way to run an organization towards well defined objectives covering the three Pillars<\/b>: environmental stewardship, economic prosperity, social wellbeing. You cannot run a business if investments don\u2019t produce a ROI<\/b>. Having said this, we have proof<\/b> (just one reading here<\/a>) that doing business ethically<\/b> and practicing Embedded Sustainability is lucrative<\/b>. A lot.<\/p>\n At this point, not to leave the reader with the impression of having been abandoned at the \u201chow to\u201d point, here is a short list<\/b> of steps to walk in order to avoid the \u201cEco-sustainability\u201d trap <\/b>and start on the journey that one day will, hopefully, bring his\/her business to full Sustainability. Don\u2019t worry, however: it is a progressive journey<\/b>, where the only moral obligation is to do one\u2019s best<\/b>, being authentic<\/b> and using one\u2019s limits and weaknesses as starting points for the most disrupting innovation.<\/p>\n Now we can add to the list the long awaited extra point, the 11th: Sustainability Reporting.<\/b> You can now remember it and will use it for:<\/p>\n In conclusion, I am confident that the numbers and considerations above have opened your eyes on the thorough business case<\/b> of Embedded Sustainability <\/b>and closed the \u201ccourt case\u201d against the nonexistent \u201cEco-sustainability\u201d, so that you don\u2019t need to waste energy over it any more. Now Enjoy your journey<\/b> towards Embedded Sustainability!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" As professionals with a passion for Sustainability, the \u201ctrue\u201d one, not the one made of glossy reports void of any industrial content, we find a frequent [\u2026]<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":10732,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[137],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10731","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n\n
\n