Why We Should All Push to Remove “Sustainability” From Our Business Vocabulary

At a recent cross-divisional meeting, we were asked to advocate for a core set of values that describe our organization, both now and in the future.  The typical words came out during this exercise, such as “excellence” and “leadership”, to varying degrees of head nods and affirmative monosyllabic words.  As a function of both my occupation and principles, I offered “sustainable” with the expectation of a similar level of collegial support.

Instead, the suggestion was largely greeted by the chirping of crickets.

I spent the rest of the exercise advocating for “sustainability” as a core value in vain, overruled in favor of more widely accepted business adjectives.  Needless to say, the experience was a bit disheartening.  With so much momentum in the world around sustainability, it seemed like a given to make the final cut.  Maybe I was a victim of a hyper-focus on this singular issue, leading to a sort of idealistic tunnel vision.

Leaving the meeting with a coworker, however, led to a change in perception of the days’ events.  As I was communicating how important the issue of sustainability is in the greater context, she commented “To be honest, I am getting a little sick of the word ‘sustainability’. What does it even mean? Everything we do is already sustainable.”

Under that circumstance, I truly felt as though I had been living in a bubble of ‘sustainability’. And to be perfectly frank, the term was beginning to wear on me as well, though not for the same reasons.  Allow me to explain.

Crafting a universally accepted definition of sustainability in a business and/or social context has been a difficult endeavor. The most commonly accepted meaning of the word most likely comes from the concept of sustainable development that was first discussed during the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro: ‘Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.’ A very good start, but a more succinct wording would come later in the form of “Enough, for everyone, forever.”

In a strictly business context, the generally accepted measurement of sustainability is the so-called triple bottom line: an accounting framework focusing on financial, social, and environmental factors to determine organizational success (or the more alliterative version of profits, people, and planet).  This relatively recent method for judging corporate performance takes a broader view of ‘value’ that is largely driven by the simultaneous trends of increased desire for socially responsible products and the magnifying power of social media. 

These overarching trends are driving a greater demand for business transparency.  Customers are increasingly willing to pay more for a product that more closely aligns with their values.  And this fundamental reshaping of the marketplace is creating winners and losers along the way.  Those organizations more willing to embrace and internalize this transformation are thriving.  Illustrating this point is a study out of Harvard that showed that over an 18-year period, companies rated high for sustainability metrics performed 4.8% better than those with a low sustainability rating while having lower overall volatility.

To achieve this type of performance requires a necessary reframing of business thinking. ‘Doing well’ and ‘doing good’ are no longer mutually exclusive activities of an organization. Companies can now do well by doing good, a very exciting prospect for many in search of greater career fulfillment.

A tangible example that is much too relevant today is the issue of carbon (and other pollutants) emissions.  Nobody in their right mind could make the case that smoke plumes rising from a factory are good.  While the production process itself may produce economic benefits, the pollution released into the atmosphere contributes to climate change, environmental damage, and human health problems.  Increased frequency and severity of droughts, marine hypoxic zones affecting seafood populations, and exacerbation of respiratory illnesses are a fraction of the consequences that impose a very real and significant financial burden on society.  In effect, emissions are an economic inefficiency.

Fortunately, these inefficiencies can be addressed through an innovative systems approach.  Take our same factory regularly emanating smoke into the atmosphere.  While much has been made of carbon capture and storage of these fugitive emissions as a solution, this ignores the potential economic value of a new resource.  Dozens of companies are currently pioneering carbon capture technologies that would turn this waste stream into a financial asset.  Captured carbon is being selectively used in a variety of industrial applications from beverage carbonation to polymer synthesis.  Another industrial byproduct, wastewater, is concurrently being used in many operations as a feedstock for anaerobic digestion.  This process creates biogas which is then used to power the facility responsible for creating the waste stream in the first place.

Converting air and water pollution from a waste product into a resource promotes sustainability by satisfying the criteria for the triple bottom line.  The financial component is met through either the creation of additional revenue streams or the ability to offset energy expenses.  These mitigated pollution sources also reduce downstream human health hazards and environmental degradation within the greater system.

And yet the standard practice to this day in nearly every business is that of a linear economy: procure virgin resource, produce product, use product, and dispose.  How can we as a species continue to exploit finite resources without seriously considering the consequences to the system at large?  Sustainability should not devolve into business buzzword like ‘synergy’, but become fundamentally engrained in every decision we make on a personal and professional level for ourselves, our friends, and our families.

And that is why the term ‘sustainability’ needs to be removed from the corporate lexicon: not because people are “sick of it”, but because the idea itself has become an innate value of our continued existence. In a sense, when sustainability becomes ‘business as usual’.

www.tosustainus.com