Why (social) sustainability matters.

Talking about sustainability could have many different standpoints of reflection and discussion. At least two out of them are the most frequent in the public debate: environmental compliance and business.

The "environmental compliance" standpoint is openly clear, more reactive than proactive,and it is strictly related to the need to meet by law sustainability obligations in particular the ones related to climate and CO2 emissions.?

An approach which turns, for more and more companies across all industries, in being committed to reduce their carbon footprint by orienting accordingly their business and production models and by creating environmentally conscious workplaces aimed to encourage and foster green behaviours from employees through dedicated policies and programs (commuting, recycling, reducing energy consumption, promoting paperless office, investing in office plants, ditching the plastic, supporting green vendors).

The "business" standpoint lays on the need for the company to defend their market share producing profits, and it is fully directed by the free market.?A research?shows that: 1) the 80% of consumers are more inclined to support companies and brands with a proven history and record of sustainability,?particularly when it comes to reducing their environmental impact; 2) two-third of employees demand more sustainability from their Employers.?

The more the consumers require sustainable products and services the more the companies,across all industries, will maximize the placement on their markets of those products and services.?This is an amazing proof of how operates the "invisible hand" of the free market theorized by the Scottish moral philosopher Adam Smith in his famous work, The Wealth of Nations, to describe how, through individual self-interest and freedom of production and consumption, the best interest of the whole society is fulfilled, whilst addressing the operating model of the economic players.?

Now the question: is an environmental compliance/business driven approach enough to create a real attitude of sustainability of the companies, their organization and their employees? No at all, if we do not integrate these approaches with the most powerful lever?of a culture of sustainability which is the "human or social factor".?

This may not be an idea that readily comes to mind when considering the sustainability topic, as unfortunately, individually and at governments level, the "S" in ESG is an often overlooked aspect of the sustainability, and the "trend" is to reduce the sustainability framework to environmental, economic and climate-related ?topic as well as fair environmental practices.?

Being a social sustainable company it is a critical journey. It means having the ability to create and support qualitative relations and engagement with stakeholders. Which on its turn means also being able of identifying and managing business impacts, both positive and negative, on people.?

We risk to be blind, and not “business oriented”, if we do not take into the proper consideration that directly or indirectly, companies affect what happens to employees, workers in the value chain, customers and local communities, and it is important to manage these impacts proactively.?

It is not a case?if the?first six of the UN Global Compact's principles focus on this social dimension of corporate sustainability, of which human rights is the cornerstone. And it is not a mere concidence if the ESG 8 is focused on decent job and objectives of economic growth ( and by the way, the majority of the ESGs are socially oriented).

Of course, we could argue that it is a primary duty of governments to protect, respect, fulfil and progressively realize human rights and conditions for an equitable society but it would be poor in argument to conclude that?businesses cannot do their part.?

Businesses can, and should, do their part, contributing to improve and better the lives of the people they affect, such as by creating and assuring decent jobs, safe and healthy workplaces, gender equality, goods and services that help meet basic needs, and more inclusive value chains. With a sight at the workplaces of companies and corporations, social sustainable performance should include, as an example, respect of human rights, fair labor practices, wellness and wellbeing, welfare, equity, diversity and inclusion, work-life balance, empowerment, engagement, volunteerism and more.

This is why even more often, nowadays companies across all industries have to cope with?an alternative cost-benefit analysis similar to ROI: the social return on investment (SROI), defined as ?"a method that consents to measure social outputs and value social outcomes in monetary terms" (Boyd 2004). In few words, while traditional ROI focuses on quantitative monetary value, SROI emphasizes the social value and consistency of the business as well as of the entire organization.?

There are surely some specific and measurable dimensions that characterize the social sustainability. According to Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen, social sustainability has five dimensions: equity, diversity, social cohesion, quality of life, democracy and governance?(https://integral-sustainability.net/wp-content/uploads/sas4-2-hodgson.pdf). And all such?factors have to be properly considered in determining if a company, a business or a project is socially sustainable.?

I just want to add a further dimension, particularly relevant for the social sustainable path of companies and corporations: an appropriate leadership style, which has to be social sustainable itself (https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/85201).

And a leader should be consider “social sustainable” when she/he makes possible the inclusion into the company’s strategic plans of all the relevant stakeholders, from employees to customers, from governments to investors and the communities. A social sustainable leader, in a word, makes decisions and creates value with all those stakeholders in mind, involving them in actioning the decisions and sharing the benefits.

This means also that a social sustainable leader has to be capable of high levels of empathy and authenticity, building trustworthiness and reliability as an essential quality of the relation with the stakeholders.

After having said this, and talking more practically, several researches show that propelling a clear, structured social sustainability attitude and culture (values, policies, process and systems) it may allow the company to boost ?its ability in innovation, unlocking new markets or experimenting?new product or service lines.?

And further, social sustainability development increases the levels of the internal morale and employee engagement while improving productivity, risk management and company-community conflict.

Come to a conclusion. There is no one who can fail to see that?Social sustainability is a worthy and profitable?business investment. Employees who are treated fairly and live into inclusive and psychologically safe workplaces are happier, healthier and more productive, which means more profits for companies.

Last but not least, socially sustainable companies enjoy greater consumers patronage, becoming the latters the most reliable ambassadors ever, with a huge, effective and priceless contribution to company and brand reputation.?