Sustainability in the Corporate Culture

Companies need to have Sustainable practices, and with that you will get Sustainable products. The vice versa is not true - just because a company makes a Sustainable product or two does not make it a Sustainable company. I could list several examples where companies that are considered "leaders" in the green movement are directly or indirectly some of the largest polluters in their region or state. One of the key issues is "how" Sustainability is viewed in the corporate culture. I would like to offer a couple of simple questions to ask to really determine whether a company is sustainable or not, but first we must define Sustainability.

What is "Sustainability"?

"Sustainable Development" is a term first used in the UN-Chartered Brundtland Commission Report on Environment and Development. It is the practice of responsible use of limited space, scarce natural resources, and respecting the fragility of eco-systems while minimizing the environmental consequences of human activities.

How is "Sustainability" viewed by a business?

Questions to ask:

• Does it start in the marketing department or the boardroom?
• Is it a "cost of doing business" or "key contributor to the bottom line"?
• What are the scientific principals that drive decision making in product design & manufacture?
• Are the benchmarks and measurements internally set or independent and externally defined?
• Is it culturally ingrained and holistic or segmented and specific in application?
• Does being environmentally responsible mean "meeting all applicable standards and regulations" or does it mean "compliance plus" where the bar is continually raised driving improved performance"
• How is it controlled, monitored, and reported?

Let's look at each one individually and briefly talk about why it's important.

Does it start in the marketing department or the boardroom?

If the drive for "Sustainability" comes from the market's desire for "green" products, then it will never penetrate deeply into an organization's culture to become a long term, consistent practice in the business. I can assure you short term focus on EB IT (Operating Result) and EVA (Economic Value Added) will drown out concerns over IQ (Indoor Air Quality) and LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) performance. You can easily tell when this occurs because the company offers a green product (or product platform) in the middle of a whole bunch of other stuff they sell. You can also easily tell because, when it comes from the marketing department, it usually is a perfect little environmental story rather than an open presentation of environmental impacts. Price, value, product quality, brand - these are reasons to buy products. We have to get to the point where Sustainable is a GIVEN.

Is Sustainability a "cost of doing business" or "key contributor to the bottom line"?

When a company understands the positive impacts of integrating sustainable practices into the entire business model, the direct impacts on the bottom line are substantial. These are investments with solid ROI and create EVA for a company - they are not "costs."

What are the scientific principals that drive decision making in the product design & manufacture?

Without clear, scientific principles to guide decision making, directions can be taken on a more single issue, often emotional, basis. A clear science makes objectives, and the subsequent decisions to reach those objectives, clear-cut and unable to be compromised. There is no "easy way out." LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) is a NON-ARBITRARY methodology used by the leading companies in Sustainability today to drive their decision making.

Are the benchmarks and measurements internally set or independent and externally defined?

Benchmarks and measurements must be set independent and external to the organization. This inherently sets a higher, more challenging, standard and eliminates potential conflicts of interest. Third party review is an absolute necessity.

It should be noted here that clear, scientific principles developed in an ANSI accredited consensus process combined with 3rd party auditing is at the core of the SMaRT standard (Sustainable Materials Rating Technology) as opposed to many of the alternatives that are currently in the market.

Is it culturally ingrained and holistic or segmented and specific in the application?

If only one or two segments of a business has a dedicated effort in sustainable practices, why not the whole business? It's the difficult areas that really need to be attacked first.

Does being environmentally responsible mean "meeting all applicable standards and regulations" or does it mean "compliance plus" where the bar is continually raised driving improved performance"

Meeting all applicable standard and regulations is a good start, but it is the minimum acceptable position. At this level Sustainability is still a "cost of doing business." Compliance Plus, or doing more and better every year, is where the economic and performance benefits truly begin.

How is it controlled, monitored and reported?

Repeatability is critical for the long term success of embedding Sustainability in the Corporate Culture. If a company doesn't measure it and report on it, they aren't going to fix it.

For more information on Denny, go here.

We welcome your comments and solutions for sustainable buisness.