Building Sustainable Legacies

UNDERSTANDING CHALLENGES NEW SOLUTIONS
DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS BUSINESS EXAMPLES
BUILDING
SUSTAINABLE LEGACIES
THE NEW FRONTIER OF SOCIETAL VALUE CO-CREATION
REFRAMING THE GAME: THE TRANSITION

TO A NEW SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY
A SPECIAL ISSUE OF BUILDING SUSTAINABLE LEGACIES
GUEST EDITOR:
Mike Townsend, CEO, Earthshine
EDITOR:
Dr. Katrin Muff
SUPPORTED BY
ISSN 2053-8898 (PRINT) ISSN 2053-8901 (ONLINE)
BSL5_finalv2.indd 15
26/03/2015 10:46
Building
Sustainable Legacies
The new frontier of societal value co-creation
A practitioner-oriented journal from Greenleaf Publishing, published in partnership with Business School Lausanne
Writing from the future

Breaking with academic tradition, this journal offers a unique selection of articles that are written by
looking at the future challenges first and then translating these into present times. The right-aligned
layout is a material way of reminding us of the fact that no problem can be solved from the same level
of consciousness that created it (A. Einstein).
PAST
FUTURE
Our focus
We provide hands-on, pragmatic and user-friendly research, suggestions
and case studies as a resource for organisations that are committed to
implementing sustainability. It is high time to build bridges between
business and academia, with the clear purpose of helping business become
truly sustainable.
There are four dimensions to the journal:
Understanding Challenges
New Solutions
Different Dimensions
Business Examples
1. Understand sustainability challenges

2. Specific dimensions of business sustainability
3. Exciting new solutions to implement
4. Case studies of leading business examples
In addition, we will produce a special issue annually dedicated to an
important theme.
Featuring thought leaders of the future

We are featuring professionals from around the world who are at the forefront of knowledge creation:
they are pursuing a part-time doctoral sustainable business degree while working actively in various
industries worldwide.
Print subscriptions are available for Building Sustainable Legacies.

The journal is free to access online and can be downloaded directly from the Greenleaf website:
www.greenleaf-publishing.com/bsl
BSL5_Contents.indd 1
26/03/15 6:16 PM
Building Sustainable Legacies
the new frontier of societal value co-creation
General Editor Katrin Muff,

Business School Lausanne, Switzerland
Publisher Anna Comerford, Greenleaf Publishing, UK

Production Editor Sadie Gornall-Jones, Greenleaf Publishing, UK
Illustrator Klaus Elle Designer Yasmina Volet
Editorial board
Dr Tima Bansal, Ivey Business School, Canada
Dr Thomas Dyllick, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland
Dr Jonathan Gosling, Exeter University, UK
Dr Kathy Miller, Miller Consulting, USA

Dr Sandra Waddock, Boston College, USA
Correspondence
Building Sustainable Legacies encourages response from its readers to any of the issues raised in the journal.
All correspondence is welcomed and should be sent to the General Editor c/o Greenleaf Publishing,
Aizlewoods Mill, Nursery St, Sheffield S3 8GG, UK; [email protected]
For more information about Building Sustainable Legacies, see the journal homepage at www.greenleafpublishing
.com/bsl.
Subscription rates
Building Sustainable Legacies publishes three times a year. The journal is free to access online and can be
downloaded directly from the Greenleaf website at: www.greenleaf-publishing.com/bsl. Print subscriptions can
be purchased directly from Greenleaf Publishing. Email: [email protected] or order from our
website: www.greenleaf-publishing.com/bsl.
Annual print subscription
Individuals: 80.00/112.50/US$150.00
Organisations: 180.00/240.00/US$320.00
Building Sustainable Legacies
Greenleaf Publishing Ltd, Aizlewood Business Centre, Aizlewoods Mill, Nursery Street, Sheffield S3 8GG, UK
Tel: +44 (0)114 282 3475 Fax: +44 (0)114 282 3476 Email: [email protected].
www.greenleaf-publishing.com.
Advertising
Building Sustainable Legacies will accept a strictly limited amount of display advertising in future issues. It will
also be possible to book inserts. Suitable material for promotion includes publications, conferences and
consulting services. For details on rates and availability, please email [email protected].
Illustrations throughout Building Sustainable Legacies are supplied by and reproduced with the kind permission of Klaus Elle.
Illustrations are an integral part of the journals design and may not be representative of a contributors article where it appears
on the same page. For more information please contact General Editor Katrin Muff at [email protected]
26/03/15 6:16 PM
Building
Sustainable Legacies
The new frontier of societal value co-creation
ISSUE 5
Theme Issue: R
eframing
the Game: The Transition to a New Sustainable Economy,

A Special Issue of Building Sustainable Legacies
Guest Editor:
Mike Townsend, Founder and CEO Earthshine
ISBN: 978-1-78353-511-8
Editorial: Sustainable Economy Special Edition

Mike Townsend, Founder and CEO Earthshine
5-8
Redefining Business Purpose: Driving Societal and Systems Transformation

Paul Polman, CEO Unilever
9-16
Doing Business in a Well-Being Economy

Isabel Sebastian, University of Technology Sydney, Australia
17-41
The Role of Business Law in the Jigsaw Puzzle of Sustainability

Beate Sjfjell, University of Oslo, Faculty of Law
42-56
Exploring a One Planet Mindset and its Relevance in a

Transition to a Sustainable Economy
Sally Jeanrenaud, Inmaculada Adarves-Yorno and Nicolas Forsans
Business School, University of Exeter, UK
A 2x2 to Change the World
Jill Bamburg, Pinchot University, USA
57-79
80-86
Changing Directions in BusinessEducation:

Knowledge Sharing for Sustainability
Suzanne Benn, Tamsin Angus-Leppan, Melissa Edwards,
PaulBrown and Stuart White
University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
87-102
Action Research as a Transformative Force in Management Education:

Introducing the Collaboratory
Katrin Muff, Business School Lausanne, Switzerland
103-119
Purpose at the Heart of Strategy: Creating a Sustainable

Business while Solving the Worlds Challenges
Gabi Zedlmayer, Vice President and Chief Progress Officer, HP
120-128
2015 Greenleaf Publishing Limited.

All written material, unless otherwise stated, is the copyright of Greenleaf
Publishing Limited. Views expressed in articles and letters are those of the
contributors, and not necessarily those of the publisher.
print ISSN 2053-8898 online ISSN 2053-8901
26/03/15 6:16 PM
About Greenleaf Publishing

Greenleaf Publishing was founded in 1992, the year of the first Rio Earth Summit, and is now the worlds
leading independent sustainability publisher, specializing in social responsibility, business ethics, environ
mental policy and management, future business strategy and practice, and sustainable development.
Greenleaf has worked in partnership with some of the largest multilateral, governmental and corporate
organisations involved in sustainable development, including PRME, the UN-backed Principles for
Responsible Management Education; UNEP; the UN Global Compact; the WBCSD; the Dutch government;Amnesty International; the International Business Leaders Forum; and the ILO. Greenleaf has pub
lished book series on stakeholder management, business education for sustainability, system innovation
for sustainability and responsible investment, as well as a number of responsible business case study
series.The Greenleaf Publishing/PRME book series was launched recently.
In 2013, Greenleaf and GSE Research launched the Sustainable Organization Library (SOL), the largest
specialist online library in the field of sustainability and social responsibility, consisting of 8,000 papers,
chapters and case studies drawn from nearly 600 books and journal volumes. It comprises content
published by Greenleaf and a number of partner organisations including EFMD (the European Foundation
for Management Development), AMACOM, OXFAM International and Practical Action Publishing. See
www.greenleaf-publishing.com/sol for further details.
For more information visit www.greenleaf-publishing.com.
About Business School Lausanne

Business School Lausanne (BSL) is a leading innovator in business education and ranks 3rd in Switzerland
(QS 2012-13 Top 200 Global Business Schools). The schools ACBSP accredited degree programs include
BBA, Masters, full-time modular MBA, Executive MBA and DBA programs. BSL also provides Executive
Training in General Management, Corporate Finance (with preparation for the CFA Level I examination),
and Sustainable Business (in collaboration with the University of St Gallen). BSL takes a pragmatic
approach to learning by applying theory to practice and is backed by a multidisciplinary faculty of business
professionals. BSL attracts students from around the world, creating a multicultural environment of more
than 60 nationalities. Established in 1987, BSL is the co-founder of the 50+20 initiative on Management
Education for the World (www.50plus20.org) in partnership with the Global Responsible Leadership
Initiative (www.grli.org) and the Principles of Responsible Management Education (UN backed PRME).
For more information visit www.bsl-lausanne.ch.
26/03/15 6:16 PM
Editorial
Sustainable Economy Special Edition
Issue 5
Mike Townsend
Founder and CEO Earthshine
welcome to this special edition of the
BSL Journal, with our focus on the transition towards a sustainable economy.
When I set out on a journey in
search of Capitalism 2.0, a few years
ago, I was surprised at what I found
not just in terms of the range of possibilities for a more sustainable system,
nor the level of radical change that will
be required to deliver a real shift in
our economies and our lives. The real
surprise was the extent to which many
of the potential solutions are already
available.
The more I looked, the more I
foundand, viewing the scene
through a wider lens of sustainable
economics, it became possible to see
the pieces of a very interesting jigsaw
come together, bringing into focus an
attractive picture of a new, vibrant,
attractive, and sustainable economic
operating system.
Another important insight came
from reflecting on the scope of the
changes needed. If we do what is
truly required, if we no longer seek to
exploit people and resources, in the
name of accumulating and concentrating wealthif we no longer focus
on the primary interests of financial
capital, can we still call it Capitalism?
Building Sustainable Legacies 5 March 2015
BSL5_Editorial.indd 5
If what we are left with is a new and

sustainable system that no longer
resembles Capitalismwhat would
we call it? Sustainable Economy just
seemed like a more appropriate working titlealthough, I am sure the
debate will rumble on.
I also found something important
for the soulgenuine cause for hope,
generated by the very real sense that a
new system is already manifesting
an economy within which people and
businesses are able to prosper, within
planetary limits. A quiet revolution is
already under wayif we could just
allow it to flourish.
Hope often travels hand-in-hand
with frustration. I could also see that,
while a new system is desirable and
possible, and that change is already
under way, we are currently nowhere
near a tipping point, whereby the new
system takes over from the old, rendering it obsolete, and transforming
into a new (sustainable) mainstream.
There is still a very long way to go.
These sparks of hope and frustration led to further insights and a realisation that it might be possible to help
accelerate the transition, by promoting
greater awareness of the issues and
the very real possibilitiesultimately,
Greenleaf Publishing 2015
26/03/15 6:05 PM
editorial
to enable more conscious choices by

people, businesses, and our civic leaders, to start the migration towards a
better system.
And so, the Sustainable Economy
Project was born, out of a desire to
create a better economic system
coupled with a passion to encourage
a progressive form of economic activism
that will help achieve this aim.1
Our initial agenda for change
focuses on a number of key leverage
pointsfrom changing the goals and
mechanics of our system of economy,
to new models of business success and
investing, new financial and banking
systems, new institutions and greater
systemic resilience, re-localised economies, to new education curricula and
models for learning. There is much
work to be done.
We have been quietly establishing
the infrastructure to help amplify our
efforts around the world, through
our growing network of Sustainable
Economy Hubs, ambassadors, change
agents, and media partnershipsall
in support of accelerating the tipping
point in the transition towards a sustainable economy.
We believe that progressive business
schools and universities play a major
role in forming the new economy. By
expanding their remit, they can act as
catalysts in each region, shifting the conversation and creating a shared agenda
for change within their respective business and political communities:
tt Spreading
awareness of the real

possibilities for a better waythat
we do not have to be constrained
1 For further information on the Sustain-
able Economy Project please visit www

.the-sustainable-economy.org
by the current dysfunctional

paradigm
tt Shifting
the conversation in
the mainstream of business,
education, political and public
lifebuilding a practical bridge
between these constituencies
tt Extending the debate on key issues,
like how we get capital to move from

old to new economy, how we create
new business models, and so on
We also have a plan, configured
with an eye on the bigger picture, but
also to enable manageable and practical steps towards the ultimate aim
of accelerating the tipping point in
system change. The next step on this
life-affirming journey is what you see
here todaythe Sustainable Economy
Special Edition of the Building Sustainable Legacies Journal.
Each of the contributions in this Journal helps to challenge our views on what
is possible and also provides us with
concrete actions on how we can make
genuine progress. Many of the themes
also resonate with the Sustainable Economy Projects agenda for change.
We open with Paul Polmanthe
pioneering business leader and CEO
with Unilever. Polman sets the pace,
with his inspirational views on the
instrumental role of business in generating a radical shift in our economies, with 2015 seen as a pivotal year.
Polman reminds us that businesses
have a major impact in terms of their
sustainability footprint, but they are
also key players in terms of their ability to influence change at scale; by
harnessing their energy, expertise and
resources they can drive transformational change at a systemic level. He
urges us to be more.
26/03/15 6:05 PM
editorial
That we need to be playing a different game is becoming increasingly recognised. Even mainstream
commentators like the FTs Martin
Woolf are calling for new and radical
approaches in the running of our economies. Isabel Sebastian picks up this
challenge with great gusto, and makes
a great case for promoting Wellbeing
Economics as a means of re-framing
the game of economy and commerce.
She includes practical proposals for
the business and policy agendasand
how we can look beyond CSR to create
the dynamic space for genuine business and economic transformation.
Transformation necessarily requires
us to rethink our institutions, including our legal frameworksdo they
adequately support our aims, or do they
hinder the changes we need to make?
Business law is not usually included
in the discourse on how to achieve
a sustainable future and, thankfully,
Beate Sjafjell helps us to redress the
balance. Sjafjell recognises that neither the voluntary contribution of
business, nor the current regulatory
framework is sufficient in driving the
level of change that is needed. She
puts forward an elegant argument for
reforming company lawwhat she
refers to as the regulatory ecology of
companiesleading us to solid proposals, not just for regulation, but also
practical actions that companies can
adopt. To encourage the shift away
from business-as-usual, Sjafjell proposes that the duties of the board
should encompass the drawing up of
a long-term, life-cycle based business
plan. Radical, practicaland, ultimately, good business sense.
Another key enabler for radical
change is, of course, leadershipand
transformational leadership requires
the right mindset. Jeanrenaud and her

colleagues offer us the One Planet
mindset, as a powerful lever for transforming self, business and society, in
the contested transition towards a
sustainable economy. They help us to
understand what a one planet mindset
is and how this state of being provides
an essential condition, if we are to
frame business and economics in a
way that will truly enable a sustainable
future. They explore five managerial
mindsets that need to be integrated
with sustainability thinking to provide
the essential context and framing of
global challenges that will enable us
to rediscover purpose in business.
Leaders, of course, need roadmaps
and modelsto help them communicate the nature of their journeys, and
how they will be made. Which models
work best: should we create top-down
mandates, or should we try to shape
more organic and grassroots oriented
movements for change, from the bottom-up? Which route will be more
effective? Jill Bamburg helps us to see
that we should waste little time on this
sterile debate, and through her work on
change models, facilitated by her 2x2 to
change the world, she helps us to see
that it is, indeed, all good work.
In developing all the new approaches
required for changejust a few of
which we touch on in this Journal
we start to gain a deeper appreciation
of the value and the instrumental role
of education. If we dont research and
teach the right things, how can we
hope to gain the skills and insights
that will enable us to change the world
in a robust manner?
Notwithstanding the trailblazing
efforts of a few leading lights, Suzanne
Benn and her colleagues note that
business schools are often lagging
26/03/15 6:05 PM
editorial
other sectors in recognising the growing importance of sustainability concerns in business decision-making.
As a result, emergent themes such as
cooperative capitalism or new business models are neglected in business
school curricula. Through the lens of
the boundary objects Benn and her
colleagues facilitate knowledge sharing around environmental and social
aspects of corporate sustainability.
They propose that both educators and
their students should transcend disciplinary boundaries, and engage with
knowledge from different disciplinary
areas, to facilitate a systematic and
integrated approach to sustainability.
Going further into the mechanics
of transformation, Katrin Muff introduces the Collaboratorya methodology that provides an exciting
template for radical re-imagination
and redesign of business schools, in
finding a mission that is relevant to
the challenges of our time and which
makes a meaningful contribution to
society. Muff shares new perspectives
on finding purpose, developed through
partnership and participation. Her
approach is engaging and deep and
has delivered a genuine transformation at Business School Lausanne.
The model is also transferable and
can be deployed as an influential alternative vehicle for all public debate and
problem solving. This approach will
surely become the new normal for
transformation management.
A key theme, right through this edition concerns the fundamental question, what is the purpose of business? So, it
is fitting that we round off this collection
with a living example of a major global
business that is reinventing itselfto
put real purpose at the heart of its business strategy. Gabi Zedlmayer, Vice
President and Chief Progress Officer,

HP shares how HP has embraced this
opportunity, in recognition that integrating purpose is essential, not only
for society, but also for long-term business growth and the transition to a sustainable economy. Zedlmayer explores
how putting purpose at the heart of
strategy inspires companies to think
differently about innovation; to reach
beyond incremental improvements
to create transformative solutions; to
confront biases and constraints that
obscure possibilities; and to connect
customer needs with human, economic and environmental impact. The
results can be game-changing.
On behalf of everyone that has
worked on this Special Edition of the
BSL Journal, and on the Sustainable
Economy Project, itself, I hope you
find something of real interest here,
and something you can take with you
into your own realm of influence,
towards a sustainable economy.
I would like to offer my sincere
gratitude for the opportunity to work
on this collection, shared by Professor Katrin Muff, the Dean of Business
School Lausanne. The BSL Journal
provides an ideal space for us to create a real melting pot of progressive
thinking, from some of the leading
players in the often separate worlds
of business and academia. Enabling
collaboration across these boundaries
will be so important in making real
change happen in our worldand so
I commend the great approach that
Katrin and her team at BSL are advocating. Please read and enjoy.
Mike Townsend,
Copenhagen, January 2015
q
26/03/15 6:05 PM
Redefining Business Purpose

Driving Societal and Systems Transformation
Paul Polman
CEO Unilever
OO Unilever
sustainable
living plan
OO Purpose driven
brands
OO Human
development &
climate change
OO Transform
markets
OO Partnerships
OO Deforestation
The world has always faced challenges, but never so many at once:
rising unemployment, poverty, food security, climate change, geopolitical instability. Our economic system is not working for everyone.
Inequality is rising. Note the recent report from Oxfam, which suggested that by 2016 the wealthiest 1% would own 50% of the worlds
wealth. On top of that, the population is expected to grow by another
30% by 2050, putting even more strain on our planet and its finite
resources. 2015 can be the year when the world fights back. We have
the unique opportunity to be the first generation to bring an end to
poverty and the last to prevent the worst impacts of climate change.
For me, it is a business as well as a moral issue. You cant have a
healthy business in a broken world. Business can and must be
part of the solution to these challenges.
At Unilever, we are pioneering a model that puts addressing the
worlds challenges at the heart of our business operations and corporate strategy. But we need to work with others to achieve the scale
thats needed to help solve such big and pressing issues. We do that
on behalf of the people who live in poverty, or are too hungry to go
to school, those who may not even have made it beyond the age of
five due to malnutrition, natural disasters, or simply poor sanitation.
Later this year, world leaders will meet to agree a new development agenda and a binding climate deal. The outcomes will decide
the lives of many. I urge people not to stand at the sidelines but to
get involved and work together. The stakes could hardly be higher.
This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. We have to grasp it, and
business must be at the centre of the debate.
Paul Polman has been Chief Executive Officer of Unilever since 1st January
2009. Under his leadership, Unilever has set out an ambitious vision to double
its size, while reducing its overall environmental footprint and increasing its
positive social impact. Paul is Chairman of the World Business Council for
Sustainable Development, a member of the International Business Council of
the World Economic Forum, and serves on the Board of the UN Global
Compact. He is also on the Board of the Global Consumer Goods Forum.
Pauls contribution to sustainable business and addressing global issues has
been well recognized. For example, he is a former recipient of the Atlantic
Council Award for Distinguished Business Leadership and the CK Prahalad
Award for Global Sustainability Leadership. Last year he received the UN
Foundation Champion of Global Change Award.
Married with three children, Paul is a former Chairman of Perkins School for
the Blind International Advisory Board and serves as President of the
Kilimanjaro Blind Trust.
BSL5_Paul Polman.indd 9
<
www.unilever.com;
www.projectsunlight.com
26/03/15 6:08 PM
paul polman
A growing threat
The world faces enormous human development and environmental
challenges, from poverty and disease to food security and climate change.
Significant progress has been made in the last two decadesextreme poverty
has halved, hunger has reduced and over 2 billion people have improved
access to drinking water (United Nations, 2014).
But huge problems remain. Inequality has widened, one in eight people still
go to bed hungry and climate change threatens everything we have achieved
since the 1960s. Half a century of progress stands to be wiped out within a
generation.
For too long business has sat on the sidelines, either unable or unwilling to
be part of the solution to these systemic challenges. But this is now rapidly
changing as the limitations of governments and international bodies to
resolve them become ever more apparent, as consumers increasingly are
demanding change, and as the cost of inaction starts to exceed the cost
ofaction.
The cost of climate change is already high and increasing. The UN SecretaryGeneral has calculated that, since 2000, economic losses from natural
disasters total around US$2.5 trillion (United Nations, 2013). The OECD
predicts that, by 2050, over US$45 trillion of assets could be at risk from
flooding (OECD, 2013). Accenture has found that significant supply chain
disruptions can cut the share price of companies by 7% (Risk Response
Network and Accenture, 2013), while KPMG estimates that the total profit of
the food industry is at risk by 2030.
We are seeing the effect of climate change in our own business. Shipping
routes cancelled because of hurricanes in the Philippines. Factories closing
because of extreme cold weather in the United States. Distribution networks
in disarray because of floods in the UK. Reduced productivity on our tea
plantations in Kenya because of weather changes linked to deforestation of
the Mau forest. We estimate that geo-political and climate-related factors
cost Unilever currently up to 300 million a year. This not only impacts our
shareholders but with over 5 million in our supply chain and more than
2billion consumers around the world, the repercussions ripple much wider.
As tackling these issues becomes not just a moral but a commercial
imperative, a growing number of businesses are stepping up to the plate.
Today, three-quarters of the largest companies have set themselves clear social
and environmental goals, 4000 now report on CO2 emissions, and 50 of the
top 200 have set an internal price for carbon.
10
26/03/15 6:08 PM
redefining business purpose
The Unilever Sustainable Living Plan

Our own response is set out in the Unilever Sustainable Living Plan, which
has set stretching goals to reduce our environmental footprint and increase
our social impact as we grow our business. We are making progress. All of
the electricity for our sites in North America and Europe now comes from
certified, renewable sources. In absolute terms, CO2 emissions from energy
in manufacturing are nearly a third below 2008 levels, water abstraction is
down 29% and total waste sent for disposal is down two-thirdsall achieved
while increasing production volume. It is making us a more efficient
organisation and saving us moneyover 300 million in cumulative avoided
supply chain costs since 2008.
However, as combating climate change becomes more urgent, the time has
come to look beyond incremental reductions in environmental impacts and
increases in social impacts, important though these are. Business can and
must make a bigger difference to global challenges by leveraging its scale,
influence, expertise and resources to drive transformational change at a
systemic level.
This is crucial because the economic system we all live and work within
drives our behaviours and choices, and without changing them we cannot
hope to achieve the structural shifts that have to be made. Business is
responsible for more than half the worlds GDP, so unless we make change
happen, we will not see the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (GHG)
the world needs.
The Better Growth, Better Climate report, published in 2014 by the Global
Commission on the Economy and Climate, of which I was a member,
identified three key systems of the economy where there is huge potential
to invest in structural and technological change: cities, which generate
around 80% of global output and 70% of global energy use and related GHG
emissions; energy systems, where renewables and energy efficiency offer
significant investment opportunities; and land use. Food production can be
increased and land use emissions cut through more sustainable agricultural
practices and by protecting forests from further destruction.
Over half of Unilevers raw materials come from farms and forests. That is
why we have committed to work with others and to champion sustainable
agriculture in areas where we have most influence, to help smallholder
farmers to improve their farming practices and livelihoods, and to eliminate
deforestation from supply chains.
We also make and market some of the worlds leading personal hygiene and
household cleaning products, so we have also committed to help provide
good hygiene, safe drinking water and better sanitation for the millions of
people around the world who are still denied these basic human rights. All
11
26/03/15 6:08 PM
paul polman
three commitments are directly relevant to our business. All three respond to
pressing societal needs.
This is not about mitigation. It is about opportunity and aligning our purpose
in business with this opportunity. This is the message the World Business
Council for Sustainable Development is championing with its Action 2020
roadmap, which sets out the business agenda for action. It is also one of
the key findings of the Better Growth, Better Climate report, which argues
that traditional macroeconomic objectives are now best achieved through a
decisive shift to a new climate economy, with inclusive, high-quality, climateresilient growth. Although the shift will not be easy, it provides all business
sectors with new opportunities to grow.
This is certainly our experience at Unilever. Looking at the world through a
sustainability lens not only helps us future proof our supply chain, it also
fuels innovation and drives brand growth. Half our agricultural raw materials
now come from sustainable sources and we are on track to make that 100%
by 2020.1 Our brands with a strong social purpose, such as Pureit water
purifiers, Domestos toilet cleaner and Lifebuoy soap, are not only improving
millions of lives by helping to tackle the water, sanitation and hygiene
(WASH) agenda. All three achieved double-digit sales growth on average
over the past three years. This shows that there doesnt have to be a trade-off
between doing well and doing good. On the contrary, purpose-driven brands
are growing ahead of the market.
The same is true of brands that reduce environmental impacts. A laundry
fabric conditioner that reduces the water needed to rinse clothes by twothirds, dry shampoos that reduce CO2 by around 90% compared with
washing hair with heated water, ice creams that stay frozen at higher
temperatures, and compressed deodorant aerosol sprays with half the
propellant gas and 25% less aluminium, are just some of the sustainabilityinspired innovations that are growing our business.
These do not just come about because our brand managers have built
sustainability into their brand development strategies or our R&D scientists
have inserted it into their innovation processes. Everyone who works at
Unilever is aware of our Sustainable Living Plan goals and understands
the importance of this agenda. This is about bringing the challenges of the
outside world into the business, making our employees more conscious of
the issues and trends that affect our business, and being more open to ideas
that push the boundaries of what we do or come from less conventional
sources.
1 Our approach and standards are set out in the Unilever Sustainable Agricultural Code.
12
26/03/15 6:08 PM
Making 2015 a year of change

2015 can be a pivotal year for human development and climate change. In
September leaders gather in New York to agree the Sustainable Development
Goals that will replace the Millennium Development Goals.
The MDGs have made progress in a number of areas but many challenges
remain. As Oxfams report Wealth: Having It All and Wanting More has
highlighted, levels of inequality are greater than they have ever been, extreme
poverty and hunger still afflict more than 800 million people, and pressures
on the planets resources continue to grow.
Illustration: Klaus Elle
The SDGs include ending poverty and hunger, reducing inequality and
combating climate change as core goals, achievable by 2030. The SDGs
are an agenda for everyone, not just the development community, and will
require collaboration across all actors in society. The decision by SecretaryGeneral Ban Ki-Moon to invite me to represent the business community on
his High Level Panel to advise on the post-2015 development framework is
a mark of the importance the UN attaches to the role of the private sector in
co-delivering this agenda.
13
26/03/15 6:08 PM
paul polman
Then in December, the COP 21 Climate Change Conference in Paris holds

out the very real prospect of a global agreement on curbing carbon emissions
and the promise of a more stable and sustainable future.
Although run as separate agendas, these two issuesclimate and
developmentare entirely interdependent. We cannot eliminate poverty
without enabling developing countries to engage more people in economic
activity that uses natural resources, and we cannot resolve runaway climate
change without creating wealth in a more equitable and less carbon-intensive
way. Left unchecked, climate change risks not only making the poorest
poorer, but pulling the emerging middle classes back into poverty too.
Therefore, 2015 is a critical year. As Lord Stern has said, this year will shape
the next 20 years and the next 20 years will shape the century. Whatever
governments agree to in New York and Paris, and however high or low
their level of ambition proves to be, the reality is that these agreements will
succeed or fail by how they are implemented by business on the ground.
Business as usual is not an option. We have to find new ways of working and
new ways of collaborating to bring about real and lasting change.
Partnerships and collaboration will be key

These new approaches require business leaders with different mindsets
and capabilitiesmen and women who can successfully build cross-sector
coalitions, who are as familiar dealing with NGOs and policymakers as they
are with customers and suppliers, and who are comfortable operating in a
more volatile and complex environment. There are no blueprints for how
to do this or roadmaps on how to navigate our way towards this brave new
world. There is a role management education must play in preparing the
business world for a more collaborative future.
I believe the solution is in bringing together the few key players that can
make the biggest difference to create the market conditions that can lead to
tipping points. It only takes a handful of companies to change together to
trigger others to follow and transform whole markets.
This has been the thinking behind Unilevers commitment to play a leading
role in helping to end deforestation linked to supply chains. According to
the IPCC, deforestation accounts for up to 15% of global greenhouse gas
emissions, making it one of the largest contributors to climate change.
More than 1.6 billion people worldwide depend directly on forests for food,
medicines and fuel, including 60 million indigenous people who are almost
entirely dependent on forests for their lives and livelihoods.
14
26/03/15 6:08 PM
Palm oil, a key cause of deforestation, is an important and versatile ingredient

found in 50% of all consumer goods. Multinational companies account for
around 20% of all palm oil purchases. That is why, in 2010, all 400 members
of the global Consumer Goods Forum (CGF) pledged to help achieve zero
net deforestation by 2020. The CGF includes all the worlds major consumer
goods companies, representing about 5% of global GDP. This has accelerated
the number of companies committed to buying 100% sustainable palm oil by
2020 or sooner.
This led us to launch the Tropical Forest Alliance at Rio+20 in 2012, a
partnership between the CGF and six governments, including Indonesia, a
major producer of palm oil, the US and the UK. This in turn led to the New
York Declaration on Forests, which took centre stage at the UN Climate
Change Conference in September 2014, at which over 170 entities signed up
to halving deforestation by 2020 and ending it by 2030.
This new pledge was the first time in history that a critical mass of developed
and developing country world leaders partnered around such a goal, which
also includes a commitment to restore hundreds of millions of hectares
of forest land. Today, with pledges from all the major palm oil producers
and most of the worlds big manufacturers and retailers, over 70% of the
worlds globally traded palm oil is now committed to be sustainably sourced.
Plantations under commitments cover an area the size of Portugal and the
resulting saving to the planet is an estimated reduction of 400450 million
tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2020.
While these organisations still have to deliver on their commitmentsso
far only 18% of palm oil produced is certified sustainablethis shows what
companies, governments and civil society can achieve if we align our efforts
behind common goals to achieve transformative change.
If the consumer goods sector can do this with deforestation, just think of the
difference that could be made if other sectors convene similar coalitions to
drive sustainable practices in other commodity supply chains and with other
sources of greenhouse gas emissions.
I am optimistic. Momentum is building. Progress is being made. By
changing the way we do business, by seeing the transformation to a lowcarbon economy as an opportunity to be seized, not a risk to be managed,
by looking beyond our own impacts to systemic areas where we can make
a transformational difference, and by working with others to achieve
shared goals, business can play a much bigger role in helping to create a
betterfuture.
But theres no time to lose. The time to act is now.
15
26/03/15 6:08 PM
paul polman
References
OECD (2013), Water Security for Better Lives, OECD, Paris.
Risk Response Network and Accenture (2013), Building Resilience in Supply Chains, World
Economic Forum, Geneva.
United Nations (2013), UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, Geneva.
United Nations (2014), The Millennium Development Goals Report 2014, United Nations,
New York.
16
26/03/15 6:08 PM
Doing Business in a Well-Being Economy

Isabel Sebastian
Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
OO Well-being
OO New Economic
Paradigm
OO Human Needs
OO Life Satisfaction
OO Business
Purpose
OO CSR
This article explores business sustainability and CSR in light of

research on well-being and happiness, and Bhutans New Development Paradigm as a model for leveraging change towards a wellbeing economy. Key implications for business emerging from a
literature review and interviews with business and government leaders in Bhutan and across the world are grounded in the authors
professional experience in business sustainability. A deep understanding of how well-being can be evaluated in three distinct ways
potentially provides a new perspective on the old economic paradigm
assumption that humanity is driven by insatiable material wants.
This has profound implications challenging business to consider its
purpose in the context of an economy that values well-being of its
people across multiple dimensions, not only material well-being.
Mapping the synergy between leverage points for systemic change
and Bhutans New Development Paradigm reveals that changing
measures of success is only one lever out of many and possibly not
enough by itself to shift economic paradigms. Three starting points
in core business activities are offered as practical examples for applying this research. Ultimately though, businesses aspiring to operate
in a well-being economy have to be willing to look for opportunities
beyond fulfilling humanitys immediate material needs to shape a
world of prosperity and true happiness for all.
Isabel has worked in travel, tourism and boutique hotels for the majority of
her 20-year career. Her experience spans from Europe to Asia and Australia
specialising in sustainable business operations and well-being outcomes
within management, strategic planning, teaching and consulting roles. She
has worked in travel & tour companies, airlines, industry associations, NGOs,
universities, boutique hotels and as a director of her sustainable tourism
consultancy in Australia. For the past eight years she worked in Bhutan,
implementing a beyond CSR project, incorporating the principles of Gross
National Happiness (GNH) during 2010/11. She is currently undertaking a
PhD at the Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney,
and has been an Associate at the Environment and Sustainability Institute at
Exeter University between Dec 2015 and March 2015.
BSL5_Isabel Sebastian.indd 17
u
!
2
Institute for Sustainable Futures,

University of Technology Sydney,
PO Box 123, Broadway, NSW 2007,
Australia
[email protected]
+61 2 9514 4950
17
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
Is corporate social responsibility (CSR) enough in a new

economy?
shifting a system
such as the
economy requires
simultaneous
action on a number
of leverage points
by a critical mass of
the systems
stakeholders
Many of the genuine CSR and corporate sustainability champions

have pushed sustainability performance a long way towards
doing less harm and contributing more to society and nature
through their business activities. However, these efforts have not
consistently delivered more sustainable outcomes for the economy,
society and the environment (Windsor, 2012; Kemper & Martin
2010). Part of the reason for this is that shifting a system such
as the economy requires simultaneous action on a number of
leverage points by a critical mass of the systems stakeholders.
When political leaders speak of Well-being Economics (APPGWE

2014) and business leaders speak of Human Economies (Seidman
2014) they describe the leverage points and transformation necessary to
address the ecological and social challenges of a globalised world. Even the
most challenging conversation that goes to the very heart of the purpose
of business in society is emerging in the business sectorthe conundrum
of infinite economic growth on a planet with finite resources (Miller,
2013). Phillipe Joubert, Senior Adviser to the World Business Council for
Sustainable Development points out that business as usual is no longer
possible (Benson, 2012) and that business innovation and ingenuity needs to
turn to designing new business models to support a new economic system.
There are a string of other terms being used interchangeably and with
overlapping ideas to describe a new style of economy that is more sustainable
and equitable than the current system. Prefixes to the term economy or
economics attempt to describe this phenomenon, such as welfare (Pigou
etal. 2013), sustainable (Meadows & Club of Rome. 1972); green (Pearce
etal. 1989); human (Hart etal. 2010); ethical (Arvidsson, 2008); well-being
(APPGWE, 2014); Darwin (Frank, 2011); conscious (Mackey & Sisodia, 2013);
common good (Daly etal. 1989; Felber 2010) and many more. Particularly
since the most recent economic crisis there is a noticeable increase in
ideas on how to transition to a new economic order. Critics point out that
these ideas of a new economic system are unrealistic and would threaten
economies to collapse (Frst 2011; Ben-Ami 2010). However, at the same
time there is a rising interest from business leaders and entrepreneurs to
ready themselves for an economy where measures of progress go beyond
purely material well-being. No one wants economic collapse or to lose the
standard of living they are used to. New economic thinking and models
contribute a wide range of systems solutions to avoid collapse and suffering.
Therefore, the question whether CSR can prepare business for re-imagining
its business model in a new economic order may be provocative, but now
could be the time to ask it. When thinking of new strategy, new customers
and new markets, new economic thinking has to stretch to include new
measures of success, such as happiness and well-being and the core of
18
26/03/15 6:08 PM
doing business in a well-being economy
business purpose. If CSR and sustainability activities are able to

influence the core of a businesss purpose then they may be the
perfect stepping stone towards new economic thinking. However,
if they are considered a burden, obligation or marketing tool they
may not be able to provide a platform for systems change.
Happiness in economic thought
If CSR and
sustainability
activities are able to
influence the core
of a businesss
purpose then they
may be the perfect
stepping stone
towards new
economic thinking.
However, if they are
considered a
burden, obligation
or marketing tool
they may not be
able to provide a
platform for
systems change
The pursuit of happiness in economics clearly matters as defined

in the term utility (Bentham, 1789). It refers to the benefit that
a person experiences from consuming goods and services. The
economics discipline traditionally assumes that the satisfaction
of a person is determined by their consumption of goods and
services, creating a tension between limited resources and the
unlimited wants of humankind. However, consumer demand
theory does recognise the law of diminishing marginal utility
(Jevons, 1866) as the threshold of satisfaction after which
consumption will no longer bring pleasure. In other words, the
total benefit and pleasure derived from more consumption will increase at
a slower and slower rate until it declines, the more a person consumes of a
particular product or service. This process is also referred to in psychology
as adaptation (Diener etal. 2006) or a balancing feedback loop in
systems-theory (Meadows, 2008). The challenge of measuring the the last 40 years of
subjective and ever-changing levels of satisfaction derived from research into
consumption then is solved in the field of economics by observing happiness and
the consumption choices people make, revealing their ultimate well-being starts to
preferences (Frey and Stutzer 2001). Economics assumes that illuminate the
humans are rational, predictable and that their preferences are the dead-end that
foremost indication to judge their relative happiness. consumption
Most business models are based on fulfilling the seemingly beyond basic needs
unlimited wants of humankind often forgetting or ignoring the presents when it
fact that the actual benefit and pleasure will decrease with more comes to finding
consumption. It is here that the last 40 years of research into lasting
happiness and well-being starts to illuminate the dead-end that contentment,
consumption beyond basic needs presents when it comes to happiness and
finding lasting contentment, happiness and well-being. well-being
What do we know about happiness and well-being?

Happiness and well-being research offers a new dimension for understanding
the economic system, peoples behaviours, choices and perceived sense of
19
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
well-being. Over the past 40 years, disciplines ranging from psychology to

neuroscience and from economics to business science, just to name a few,
have been researching what makes humans and societies happy and well.
One of the early thoughts in Western philosophy on happiness dates back to
Aristotles idea of eudemonia, interpreted as the good life, flourishing or
living a life with purpose for the highest human good, where happiness is
not only about how a person feels but also about what a person does (Alipour
etal., 2012). There is still much debate about definitions of happiness and
subjective well-being, the difference between the two, the causal relationships
between happiness and its drivers such as income, and whether it can be
measured reliably or not (Easterlin 1974; Diener 1984; Kahneman & Krueger,
2006; Veenhoven & Hagerty, 2006; Seligman, 2011). It is apparent from
much of the scientific literature that well-being is a complex and contestable
construct and that, despite intense academic scrutiny and a voluminous
literature, its definition remains unresolved (Carlisle etal. 2009).
While there is still no agreement on definitions of happiness and well-being,
there seems to have been some alignment particularly in the last three years
about how to measure those phenomena (Kahneman & Deaton 2010).
This in itself potentially implies that there has to be some agreement on
how positive emotions, life satisfaction and a sense of meaning in life are
comprised in the concept of well-being.
The underlying assumption to all of this research seems to be the fact that
every human being is motivated by the search for happiness with many
considering it a given right (McMahon, 2007). Happiness research therefore
now provides much fuel to inform the beyond GDP debate (European
Commission, 2013), which has inspired new measures of progress, policies,
theories and indicators of sustainable development and well-being in many
countries across the world (Hk etal. 2012).
These indicators describe, rather than define what contributes to happiness
and well-being. Some examples of indicators and theories on what
contributes to happiness have emerged from:
tt Authors
such as Richard Layard (2005), Martin Seligman (2011), Daniel

Kahneman (2011) and Paul Dolan (2014)
tt Government initiatives such as Bhutans Gross National Happiness (GNH)
Index (Ura etal. 2012), Office for National Statistics UK National Well-being:
Measuring what matters (2014) and the OECDs Better Life Index (2013)
tt Community
initiatives such as the Australian National Development

Index (Salvaris, 2013) and NGO initiatives such as the Legatum
Prosperity Index (Legatum, 2014), New Economics Foundations
Happy Planet Index, and academic initiatives such as the Social
ProgressImperativesSocial Progress Index
A comparison of the determinants of happiness and well-being from these

sources and the literature reveals a set of 11 key areas of life that are considered
vital contributing factors to happiness and well-being as shown in Figure 1.
20
26/03/15 6:08 PM
Figure 1 Determinants of happiness and well-being

Psychological
wellbeing &
personal
values
Good health &

healthy living
Economic
situation &
standard of
living
Education &
life-long
learning
Political
situation &
safety, security,
freedom
Meaningful
engagement
& purpose
Genetics
(between
30 - 40%)
Cultural
vitality &
art / creativity
Natures
vitality
Community
vitality &
close
relationships
Time use /
work-life
balance
For the purpose of this article, the determinant of Economic Situation &
Standard of Living is of particular interest since this is where business
currently plays a major role in fulfilling material needs of people and
societies. There are a number of key insights from happiness and well-being
research in relation to standard of living that provide important insights for
business:
tt Income
increases levels of happiness up to a certain point, beyond which

people adjust their expectations and it does not improve subjective wellbeing (Easterlin, 1995; Diener and Seligman, 2004; Clark etal. 2008)
tt Studies
in the US have found the threshold where the happiness derived

from more income diminishes at around US$75,000 income per year
(Kahneman & Deaton 2010)
tt Social
comparison means that in any society rich people are happier than
poor people, but over time richer societies are no happier than poorer
ones (Layard, 2005; Graham 2009)
tt People compare themselves to others close by (reference group)
and adjust expectations of how much income generates happiness
(Easterlin,2003)
tt The
process of adapting to higher standards of living results in more

consumption in an attempt to experience more satisfaction and
happiness. In other words we are caught on a hedonic treadmill
(Brickman and Campbell, 1971) that inevitably brings us back to a
happiness set-point (Headey, 2006)
21
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
tt Global
GDP has increased by 300% since 1950; however global genuine

progress per capita as measured by Genuine Progress Indicator peaked
in 1978. A study comparing life satisfaction in 17 countries from 1950 to
2003 shows no significant improvements since 1975 (Kubiszewski etal.
2013). This is also called the threshold point beyond which, if there is
more economic growth, quality of life may begin to deteriorate
(Max-Neef, 1995)
Not only what we measure determines what we do

The pursuit of improving the quality of life and well-being for a large
proportion of the global population has driven much of human activity and
ingenuity, particularly over the last 100 years. This pursuit has established
economic growth as the key measure of success of human industriousness,
productivity and nations. The measure of Gross National Product (GNP)
developed by Kuznets (1934) allows consistent comparison of the amount
of effort that is expended in an economy regardless of whether this effort
improves or deteriorates societal well-being. Kuznets himself warned that this
measure should not be mistaken as a barometer of societal well-being or to
determine social policy. In his words the welfare of a nation can scarcely be
inferred from a measurement of national income (European Commission,
2013). Despite his warnings, GNP (or GDP) was adopted by most nations
from hereon as their measure of economic progress and for the purpose of
comparison between each other. Economist and Nobel Laureate
Joseph Stiglitz (2009) said that in a performance based society,
Changing the
what we measure determines what we do and if we measure the
success measure of
wrong thing, we do the wrong thing.
an economy would
The current economic, environmental and societal difficulties
clearly be a
that
the globalised world and humanity find themselves in seem
game-changer,
adequate proof for Stiglitzs assertion. Changing the success
somewhat like
measure of an economy would clearly be a game-changer,
changing the rules
somewhat like changing the rules of a Monopoly game from the
of a Monopoly game
winner being the one with most property to the one who managed
from the winner
to establish the most communities with optimal well-being and
being the one with
life satisfaction. Changing the rules of a game requires willingness
most property to the
and interest of the players, just like changing the measures of
one who managed
progress requires politicians, business leaders and societies
to establish the
to want to see the world through a new lens. This willingness,
most communities
however, depends on the other variable mentioned by Stiglitz
with optimal
our competition and performance mindsets. Some argue it is
well-being and life
human nature to compete for survival and others argue that
satisfaction
cooperation and altruism are just as common in evolution (Ridley
22
26/03/15 6:08 PM
2003). Either way, important recent findings from neuroscience

have shown that the capacity for attitudes and behaviours such
as compassion can be taught and learned (Klimecki etal. 2014;
Leiberg etal. 2011) just like competitive behaviour can be learned.
Research findings relating to neuroplasticity in adult brains
therefore provide some of the most promising opportunities
for those genuinely committed to empowering individuals and
societies to create economies that are dedicated to well-being.
Therefore, this raises the question of what it will take for all the
players in the economy, particularly business, to move towards
promoting all dimensions of well-being as the winning game
rather than just material well-being.
this raises the

question of what it
will take for all the
players in the
economy,
particularly
business, to move
towards promoting
all dimensions of
well-being as the
winning game
rather than just
material well-being
While more voices are emerging from among policy, economic,

academic and business thinkers, promoting new indicators of
progress beyond GDP to include well-being as a key aim or even as
an over-arching societal aim (European Commission, 2013; National Research
Council, 2013; NDP, 2013; ODonnell 2014), there are only a few that call for
a shift of mindsets, willingness and paradigms through a new narrative for a
new economy (Korten & Scharmer 2014).
The extensive focus on the many new measures of progress and prosperity
has resulted at least in some agreement about measuring the different
dimensions of what is now called subjective well-being (Kahneman and
Deaton, 2010; National Research Council, 2013; OECD, 2013).
There are three distinct aspects of subjective well-being recognised as
providing reliable evaluation of happiness and well-being:
1. Life satisfaction or evaluative well-being measures how people think
about their life overall considering past events, opportunities and
outcomes up to the present
2. Emotional or experienced well-being measures the frequency and
intensity of emotions experienced by an individual on a day to day basis
looking at immediate present experience of pleasant or unpleasant
emotions (also called hedonic well-being)
3. Life purpose and meaning measures the outlook looking more towards
the future at a persons sense of contribution and engagement (also called
eudemonic well-being)
For the purpose of this article I will be referring to these three ways of
experiencing well-being and happiness that otherwise could have conflicting
and overlapping meanings. Figure 2 is an attempt at a visual representation
of how the vast empirical and theoretical body of research on assessing
happiness and well-being could be viewed in context. It also includes an
23
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
example of the questions that might be asked to assess the three expressions
of happiness and well-being. It is, however, important to note that most
research that measures well-being and happiness will incorporate a
substantial set of questions under each of these three categories.
tic
ne
Standard
of Living
Sense of purpose &

meaning in life
Ge
Cultural
Vitality
Education &
life-long
learning
Psychological
Wellbeing
Positive
Emotions &
sensations
such as:
Joy
Affection
Stress
Sadness
Anger
itio
Gen
Community
Vitality
Health
Negative
pos
osi
dis
p
etic
Pre
Timeuse
on
Natures
vitality
3. Life Purpose
Outlook
siti
Safety,
Security,
Freedom
FUTURE / LONGER TERM
spo
2. Emotional
Experienced Wellbeing
Hedonic
i
red
cP
1. Life-satisfaction
Evaluative Wellbeing
ti
ne
PRESENT /
SHORT TERM
PAST / LONGER TERM
Ge
tion
Figure 2 Three dimensions of measuring subjective well-being
dis
Pre
etic
Gen
on
siti
po
dis
Pre
Meaningful
engagement,
paid or
volunteer work
On a scale of 110
how satisfied are
you with your life
overall?
In the last 24 hours which

emotions did you
experience and how
intensely on a scale of
110?
On a scale of
110, rate your
sense of purpose
in life?
While genetic predisposition is said to account for 3040% of variation in

happiness levels (De Neve etal., 2012; Lykken & Tellegen, 1996, Rietveld
etal. 2013), there is another 6070% that can be influenced through
other external influences and internal capabilities. Therefore the choices,
behaviours, thoughts and actions in the present will have a large impact
on how we evaluate our life satisfaction overall and will also set the stage
for how we evaluate future outlook on life. At the same time our evaluation
of our life satisfaction and outlook on life can also influence our present
emotional experience. In other words, they can both be the cause, effect
and condition of a present emotional state. The only influence we have
over our lives though are the choices, behaviours, thoughts and actions
that we express and exert in the present moment. Therefore it is of
crucial importance to understand the interconnectedness of past, present
and future perceptions of well-being and happiness. The tremendous
implications for business when evaluating well-being in this way are
explored in the later section of this article.
24
26/03/15 6:08 PM
A new development paradigm: a perspective from Bhutan

An interesting approach to development and progress is practised in Bhutan
where the government sets societal well-being as its over-arching aim to
guide all government activities within the country. His Majesty, the 4th King
of Bhutan articulated this approach in 1976, when he famously declared that
Gross National Happiness is more important than Gross National Product
(GNH Centre, 2013). Initially, the statement provided an intuitive guiding
principle; however over the past 10 years two tools for operationalising GNH
have been developedthe GNH Index (Ura etal. 2012) and a
GNH policy-screening tool. A set of 33 indicators provide a deep The difference in
insight into the state of the nation through Bhutanese perceptions Bhutan compared
and satisfaction across the nine domains with other
of education, environmental conservation, standard of living, countries that are
community vitality, time-use, good governance, health, psychological now measuring or
well-being and cultural preservation. The Bhutanese government promoting the use
uses the policy-screening tool to ensure that only policies are of well-being
implemented that enhance or at least do not weaken the GNH indicators is that
Index. The difference in Bhutan compared with other countries that both GNH tools are
are now measuring or promoting the use of well-being indicators actively being used
is that both GNH tools are actively being used by Bhutans by Bhutans
government as a compass for decision-making on budgetallocations
government as a
and programmes. A wide range of research has been published
compass for
on the measurement approach of the GNH index (Helliwell etal.
decision-making on
2012; Ura etal., 2012) and its application in policy decision-making
budgetallocations
(Martin, 2012); however very little research has explored the impact
and programmes
of a GNH or well-being economy on the business sector.
Commissioned by the United Nations, over the past two years
Bhutan coordinated an international trans-disciplinary working group of
some 70 experts spanning all fields of science including leading academics
and thought leaders such as David Suzuki, Martin Seligman and Tim
Jackson to mention just a few (NDP, 2013). The aim was to develop a
New Development Paradigm (NDP) framework that would support global
development with the central purpose of societal well-being. Figure 3 is
an adapted version of the NDP framework highlighting how this model is
currently being implementedin Bhutan.
25
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
Figure 3 Adapted version of the New Development Paradigm

Source: Towards a New Development Paradigm report by the Government of Bhutan (NDP 2013)
Planetary Boundaries
Z. Societal happiness & wellbeing
(constitution &
government policy)
A. Satisfying
essential human
needs
(government &
business)
C. Responsible
resource use
(government &
business)
E. Happiness skills
(GNH Centre)
B. Holistic
development
agenda
(GNH Commission,
Centre for Bhutan
Studies & SNDP)
D. Outcome:
equitable &
sustainable
society
(society, Centre for
Bhutan Studies)
Planetary Boundaries
As highlighted in Figure 3, the NDP framework places Societal Happiness

and Well-being as the ultimate goal of all development and progress and is
based on two fundamental assumptions (NDP, 2013) that:
tt The
universal human goal to pursue well-being and happiness is not just

a private or individual goal but a societal vision
tt Planetary
boundaries exist and that there are severe ecological realities

that require a recalibration of current development activities
The framework brings together a new paradigm and solutions from across
the world, with the UN vision and global commitments, and Bhutans
experience of aiming for GNH. The framework as proposed by the
international working group adopts well-known principles of sustainable
development, balancing economic, social and environmental concerns (box
B), promoting responsible resource use (box C) and measurement of wellbeing indicators (box D) to ensure that any development improves societal
well-being (box Z) across all domains. Of most interest though are two
new dimensions, previously unseen in sustainable development models,
26
26/03/15 6:08 PM
which reveal the very essence of a well-being economy. First,

the distinction between the long-term needs for a satisfying life The NDP model
versus the insatiable short-term needs (box A) provides a window therefore provides
of opportunity to promote the understanding of the multiple new perspectives
dimensions of well-being across global societies. Second is the not only on new
acknowledgement that creating the conditions for sustainability measures of
and measuring societal happiness and well-being by themselves progress and
are not enough when the aim is societal well-being. The NDP success but more
model proposes that the opportunity for every person to pursue importantly it
their full human potential requires that they are able to acquire highlights the role
the knowledge, skills and ability for self-actualisation and skilful and opportunity of
emotion management or emotional intelligence described as each individual
happiness skills (box E). This claim is supported by the research person in creating
that shows that skills like compassion and happiness can be systems change.
learned (Leiberg etal., 2011; Ricard 2006). The NDP model
therefore provides new perspectives not only on new measures
of progress and success but more importantly it highlights the role and
opportunity of each individual person in creating systems change.
The NDP framework was submitted to the UN post-2015 consultative process
as a contribution to the formulation of a new set of sustainable development
goals, which will be released in 2015.
Levers for systemic change

Interestingly the NDP framework displays key components identified by
Meadows (1999, 2008) as effective levers for creating systemic change.
According to Meadows (2009), creating change in a dynamic system
means finding the most effective leverage points to push, as they are the
most powerful places to intervene in a system. They are the points where
small changes have the potential to lead to large shifts in behaviour and
the dynamics of an entire system (Meadows, 2009). According to Forrester
(1971), evidence suggests that the people who are deeply immersed in
organisational and structural systems (such as governments or the financial
and money sectors) often intuitively know where to find those points of
power, but most of the time they push change in the wrong direction.
Meadows (2009) asserts that world leaders are rightly obsessed with
economic growth as the answer to virtually all problems; however they are
pushing with all their might in the wrong direction. As Forrester (1971)
found in his studies of systems dynamics, complex systems are often
counterintuitive, resulting in their leverage points being not what one
27
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
would expect. Therefore, these leverage points are often used backward,
which causes an existing problem to be systematically worsened rather
than being solved (Meadows, 2009). The worsening global financial, social
and environmental crisis could be evidence of this systemic worsening
due to the direction of change applied to leverage points by policy makers
and business leaders over the last 100 years. Hence, the real systems
leverage points can often seem incredibly obscure, frustratingly subtle
and very surprising. A key question is whether the NDP model, with its
goal as societal happiness and well-being, could be one of those powerful
counterintuitive leverage points to use?
Meadows (1999) proposed a 12-point scale to evaluate the effectiveness of
leverage points in complex systems. Table 1 outlines a condensed version of
the scale as six leverage categories. Meadows (1999) suggests that changing
measurements and parameters is a lower order leverage point compared
to shifting mindsets and being able to let go of out-dated perspectives. She
proposes that transcending paradigms is the most powerful leverage point
to create a shift in complex systems. However, the most powerful
leverage point also introduces major uncertainty, complexity and
working at the
potentially chaos that may be beyond human comprehension and
highest level of
would require relinquishing some of the control over the system.
systems change
As Meadows points out, working at the highest level of systems
requires individual
change requires individual transformation and mastery, or in other
transformation and
words complete willingness to change how we view the world and
mastery, or in other
to let go of old paradigms. It requires recognition that our own
words complete
worldview is a limited understanding of the laws of the universe
willingness to
and that no paradigm reflects the truth and that this in itself is a
change how we view
paradigm. Her profound conclusion is that: In the end, it seems
the world and to let
that power has less to do with pushing leverage points than it does
go of old paradigms.
with strategically, profoundly, madly letting go! (Meadows, 2009)
Meadows sentiment is also echoed in the NDP framework
highlighting that: The inner transformation of our own mindsets and
behaviours is as important for happiness as the transformation of the outer
conditions of well-being (NDP, 2013).
28
26/03/15 6:08 PM
Figure 4Visual representation of the authors interpretation of the relationship

between the components of the NDP Model (A, B, C, D, Z) and
Meadows (2009) 12 leverage points (condensed here into six categories,
in order of least to most powerful S, T, U, V, W, X)
Z. Overarching goal:
societal wellbeing & happiness
X. Willingness to
change perspectives
and let go of old paradigms
A. Identifying essential
human needs
B. Holistic
development
agenda
New development
paradigm
components
Systems leverage
points for change
W. Respecting diverse
world views
C. Responsible
resource use
V. Setting new rules, goals,
intentions & purpose
D. Outcome:
equitable &
sustainable
society
U. Relationships, feedback
loops, information flows
E. Emotional
intelligence
(happiness skills)
S. Changing
measures
of success
T. Adjusting resources
stocks & flows
All six of the NDP model components address one of the levers of change,
indicating that the NDP model is a well-balanced framework with potential to
cause systemic change.
The aim of a well-being economy in light of

a New Development Paradigm
The NDP framework provides an interesting lens through which to
understand the implications of a well-being economy for the business sector.
The aim of a well-being economy in an NDP context would be to:
tt Avoid
the perpetuation of the hedonic treadmill of ever increasing

consumption as it has been shown not to improve long-term societal
29
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
happiness and well-being once a comfortable standard of living has been

reached
tt Ensure
that government policy and business strategy work together to

provide opportunities, conditions, products and services that empower
individuals and societies to understand and cater for all three dimensions
of happiness and well-being
tt Adopt
policies and strategies that position improving societal well-being

as the most important over-arching national and international goal, and
are based on the results of measuring across the three dimensions of
subjective well-being
tt Be
alert to recognise the point in economic development when standard

of living has reached the optimal level for the majority of people (the
point beyond which a higher standard of living does not significantly
contribute to increases in well-being) to refocus development and
business efforts on long-term life satisfaction instead of further
improving the standard of living
Particularly in developed countries, where markets are saturated and

consumption is stagnant or declining, educating consumers and engaging
them in activities that will enhance overall life satisfaction and life purpose
would be the most important paradigm shift that responsible businesses
could lead. On the other hand, most developing countries would most
likely choose to focus on improving conditions for health, safety and access
to food and shelterprimarily improving the standard of living for their
citizens. Therefore, economic development policies and business strategies
in developing countries would be vastly different from those in developed
countries as there will be different starting points and pathways to improving
societal well-being.
It is also important to note in this context that the aim of a well-being
economy would not be to deny or eliminate the existence of negative
emotions. As mentioned in the NDP model under the label of happiness
skills, a well-being economy is about empowering people with emotional
intelligence skills to experience the full range of human emotions and to know
how to process and deal with them in a constructive, agile and positive way.
How can business use CSR as a stepping-stone towards

well-being economic orientation?
Businesses, ranging from entrepreneurs to multinational companies are
the engine of economic activity in most nations across the world. Sudkhedv
(2012) suggests that 70% of the global workforce is employed by, and
30
26/03/15 6:08 PM
almost 60% of global GDP is generated by, the private business

sector. Business is therefore a key stakeholder and at the centre
of the transformation that is required to create a systemic shift,
from economies that purely grow production and consumption,
perpetuating the hedonic treadmill measured through GDP, to
growing improved outcomes in societal well-being, quality of life,
life satisfaction and engagement with a life purpose.
Business is
therefore a key
stakeholder and at
the centre of the
transformation that
is required to create
a systemic shift
Now more than ever before business has a significant role in

creating more responsible economic development and economies.
It seems that creating well-being in society through different business models
is beginning to receive more attention from business leaders such as Yvonne
Chuinard of Patagonia, the late Ray Anderson of Interface, Dov Seidman of
LRN, Paul Polman of Unilever, Ian Cheshire of Kingfisher and Tony Hsieh of
Zappos.
A shift towards more responsible and holistic business models has been
observed with a rising number of companies dedicating their purpose to
solving social or environmental problems while being profitable businesses
(Haugh, 2005; Leaderbeater, 1997). This shift can also be seen in the fact that
some 90% of all Fortune 500 companies now report on their corporate social
disclosure (Weber and Marley, 2012). While some see social entrepreneurship
as an exciting emerging field (Roberts & Woods, 2005), others posit that
there is no non-social business (Seelos & Mair, 2005) and that the original
purpose of all business activity was to provide benefits to society and build
conditions for societal well-being through employment (Reynolds etal. 2002).
Either way, business in all its shapes and forms, whether a social enterprise,
a CSR champion or a purely self-interested, profit-oriented business, seems
to be the gateway to building an economy that fosters all dimensions of wellbeing for all of its stakeholders.
When overlaying the NDP model with Meadows (1999) leverage points it
becomes apparent that business can be a powerful actor in creating systems
change towards a well-being economy. Table 2 provides examples of what
businesses that see their role in a well-being economy could do.
31
26/03/15 6:08 PM
32
Z. Overarching goal:
societal well-being
Adopting KPIs that

prioritise stakeholder
and societal
well-being
Product & Service

innovation that
is focused on
enhancing life
satisfaction,
psychological
well-being and life
purpose
Reporting on the
well-being indicators
of all business
stakeholders across
the 3 dimensions
outlined in Figure 2
Leverage points /
New Development
Paradigm
components
S. Changing
parameters and
measures of
success
T. Adjusting
resource
stocks, flows,
infrastructure,
networks, products
and services
U. Transparency
of relationships,
behaviours,
feedback loops,
information flows
Engaging with
all business
stakeholders
especially customers
to understand
their genuine
needs across the
11 determinants of
well-being
Focusing innovation
in the areas of the 11
determinants of wellbeing (see Figure 1)
Clearly differentiating
between
stakeholders
essential needs
and the wants that
perpetuate the
hedonic treadmill
A. Identifying
genuine human
needs
Sharing insights with

all stakeholders on
well-being challenges
addressed and
outcomes achieved
Investing in
infrastructure and
resources that
offer products
and services in
the areas of the 11
determinants of
well-being
Measuring business
success against a set
of holistic objectives
and targets
B. Holistic business
strategy
Rewarding
behaviours and
communication
that respect natural,
human and social
resources and
enhances them
rather than depleting
them
Adopting circular,
sharing and
collaborative
resource practices
Measuring key
environmental,
social and human
indicators
C. Responsible
Resource Use
Encouraging
behaviours and
communication that
respect resources
through marketing
and public relations
Transitioning to
offering increasing
numbers of products
and services that help
people fulfil needs
within the areas of
the 11 determinants of
well-being
Measuring well-being
indicators of all
stakeholders across
the 11 determinants
D. Outcome:
equitable &
sustainable society
Dealing with
integrity, honesty
and patience with all
stakeholders in the
interest of societal
well-being
Providing
opportunities for
all stakeholders
to acquire skills
and experience in
managing emotions
in a skilful and agile
way
Measuring
psychological
well-being of all
stakeholders
E. Emotional
Intelligence & agility
Table 1Some examples of business strategies and activities in a well-being economy (leverage point categories down the left column are listed
in order of least effective [6] to most effective [1])
isabel sebastian
26/03/15 6:08 PM

Understanding the
positive and negative
impacts on natural,
human and social
resources resulting
from business
activity
Setting operating
procedures and
policies that
clearly outline the
respectful use of
natural, human and
social resources in
undertaking business
activity
Exploring and
Reinventing the
Championing and
considering shared
way energy and
promoting the
ownership structures natural resources are
difference between
sourced and used,
the hedonic
human resources are
treadmill style of
nurtured and social
consumption and
capital is enhanced
the type of consumer
through any business
engagement
activity
that delivers life
satisfaction and life
purpose
Committing to a new
story that measures
progress across
all 3 dimensions
of well-being (see
Figure 2) as the most
important measure of
progress for business
and economic activity;
recognising GDP
growth as a deficient
and misleading
progress measure
Building tolerance,
acceptance and
inclusiveness of
a wide range of
world views through
business objectives
and strategies
Organising business
strategy around
financial, social,
environmental and
well-being objectives
& targets that
address any of the
11 determinants of
well-being
X. Willingness and
ability to change
perspectives and let
go of old paradigms
Engaging with
all business
stakeholders to
co-create business
purpose and
intentions that
address any of the
11 determinants of
well-being
Fulfilling short-term
essential needs of
stakeholders first
and when adequate
standard of living is
reached then focusing
on life satisfaction
needs in the 11 areas
of well-being
Redefining the
purpose and vision
of a business
towards societal
well-being
W. Respecting and Promoting

understanding
industry, national
diverse world views and international
dialogue that fosters
the exchange of
wisdom, insight and
compassion
V. Setting new
rules, goals,
intentions and
purpose
Distributing profits,
wealth and benefits
equitably among
stakeholders, solving
trade-off conflicts
by activating the
generosity of those
who are better off
Using emotional
intelligence to create
shared value of
business activity for
all stakeholders
Leading by example
by forgoing shortterm gains for
long-term benefits
to the business, its
stakeholders and
society
Committing to
using the power
of business with
compassion
to facilitate all
stakeholders to live
a deeply satisfying
life, grounded in
psychological wellbeing and with a
sense of purpose
and meaning in life
Facilitating interstakeholder
group dialogue to
foster awareness,
understanding and
compassion for a
wide range of world
views and common
goals
Empowering all
stakeholders to
take charge of
their psychological
well-being to
build emotional
intelligence and
agility
33
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
Where to begin?
While Table 2 provides a full spectrum of examples of the leverage points for
businesses wanting to engage in a well-being economy, Table 2 presents three
essential starting points.
Table 2 Three essential starting points
From this.
To this.
Market Research
Researching consumer behaviour and

Redesign consumer research into
preferences is an extensive field with the
measuring the well-being and happiness
purpose of identifying attitudes, needs,
across the three dimensions of subjective
wants and decision-making and levels of
well-being. Ideally, this would be done
happiness and satisfaction of consumers.
across all stakeholders including employees,
Most of consumer research focuses on how
suppliers, customers, shareholders and
satisfied customers are with products and
all other stakeholders. This would help
services, which evaluates the immediate
businesses to understand if products
experienced satisfaction or disappointment
and services are able to deliver beyond
of a particular product or service;
the immediate experienced emotional
happiness.
Business Purpose
Product development and innovation are
Basing product/service development on
driven by a businesss vision and purpose.
the results of well-being research that
Identifying and fulfilling new customer
clearly differentiates between the outcomes
needs and creating new wants therefore
of overall life satisfaction, experienced
is the purpose of most businesses. The
happiness and life purpose for all target
great majority of businesses in developed
markets. For example, in developed
countries focus on fulfilment of needs
economies where consumer needs are
to evoke an immediate experience of
saturated, demand is stagnant or declining
pleasurable emotions and sensations rather
and where consumers are locked in on a
than improving overall life satisfaction or
hedonic treadmill, businesses could focus
life purpose.
on any of the 11 determinants that increase
evaluative well-being (life satisfaction) or
that help improve peoples outlook through
engagement with a purpose and meaning
in life.
Employees and Supply Chain
While many employers are recognising that
happier employees are more productive
and higher levels of employee satisfaction
and well-being makes organisations more
successful, many of the supply chain
workers in the globalised economy are
suffering.
34
To ensure that conditions not only

within company offices provide the best
possible opportunity for employees to
improve subjective well-being in all three
dimensions, but to ensure supply chain
employees and customer outlets provide the
same possibility.
26/03/15 6:08 PM
when overall life

satisfaction hardly
improves even with
ever-increasing
living standards it is
time for business to
engage a different
strategy.
The role of business is particularly important as many consumeroriented businesses are based on perpetuating the hedonic
treadmill by simply fulfilling the short-term demands of
consumers. This is an important role, when it comes to fulfilling
essential needs such as food, shelter, health and safety needs
where standards of living are low. However, when overall life
satisfaction hardly improves even with ever-increasing living
standards it is time for business to engage a different strategy.
If businesses only focus on short-term satisfaction from attempting to

increase standards of living beyond the optimal point, humanity will never be
able to reach its full potential and life satisfaction. Acknowledged in the law
of diminishing marginal utility and the concept of the hedonic treadmill,
purely focusing on delivering positive emotions in the shortterm is likely to perpetuate the current economic paradigm and If businesses only
global crisis. This approach potentially keeps people trapped in a focus on short-term
consumption-addiction cycle. While aiming for market saturation satisfaction from
makes for a successful business strategy at the moment, it may attempting to
also be in part responsible for preventing humanity evolving increase standards
beyond a consumerist society. Companies that keep perpetuating of living beyond the
old paradigm thinking, basing their growth strategy on selling optimal point,
more fast-moving consumer goods, are in danger of finding humanity will never
themselves wedded to a losing strategy very soon. Perhaps now be able to reach its
is the time to consider recalibrating business growth strategies full potential and
to growing well-being across the 11 determinants of well-being as life satisfaction
outlined in Figure 1 above.
35
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
Businesses, their
leaders and
stakeholders, that are
committed to being
at the forefront of
creating a well-being
economy, therefore
would need to take
some courageous
steps beyond CSR
strategies
The fact that people can experience high levels of positive

emotions but at the same time report low overall life satisfaction
and vice versa provides wide ranging opportunities for business
to play a role in operating in a well-being economy. Sustainable
business practices and CSR excellence provide an important basis
of values and intentions within the business sector to contribute
to reducing negative impacts of doing business. However, those
alone are not enough to steer businesses on a path towards
improving societal well-being letalone the well-being of its
stakeholders. Businesses, their leaders and stakeholders, that
are committed to being at the forefront of creating a well-being
economy, therefore would need to take some courageous steps
beyond CSR strategiessuch as:
tt Raising
awareness and understanding in the economy of the difference

between short-term experienced happy emotions (hedonic well-being),
versus long-term life satisfaction derived from the things that matter in
life (the 11 determinants of well-being)
tt Taking
an honest look at the purpose of a business and whether it delivers

or supports any of the 11 areas of life that contribute to life satisfaction. If
the answer is no, then this may be a good time to plan a transition to new
product or service innovations in some of the 11 areas that contribute to
long-term well-being and life satisfaction
tt Exploring the 11 determinants of well-being for new business
opportunities with the intention of bringing long-term life satisfaction to
societies with a high standard of living and continuing to satisfy essential
needs where standards of living are still lagging behind
Conclusion
The progress made by business in CSR and sustainability is testament to
the commitment and innovation towards a more sustainable economy.
However, for business to be ready to perform in an economy where success
is measured by a holistic set of well-being indicators, this will require
more from business. It will require a deep understanding of the science of
well-being and happiness, an acknowledgement of the interconnectedness
of shared responsibility for pushing the right leverage points and the
willingness to give up old paradigms.
Too often, a focus on well-being and happiness is considered either as a
luxury or trivial. However, especially during hard economic times, when
GDP growth is promoted as the only solution, this is the perfect moment
to transform our perspectives on what kind of prosperity really matters in
36
26/03/15 6:08 PM
life and how we define societies success. The intention of this article is to
challenge the view of GDP growth, both through encouraging businesses
and their leaders to explore a new narrative, and by outlining some practical
approaches, to growing well-being across its multiple dimensions; thus
providing an alternative pathway to building flourishing businesses and
deeply satisfied societies in a sustainable economy.
References
Alipour, A., Pedram, A., Abedi, M. and Rostami, Z. (2012) What is Happiness?
Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research In Business, 3: 12, pp. 660-667
All-Party Parliamentary Group on Wellbeing Economics (APPGWE) (2014), Wellbeing in
four policy areas, New Economics Foundation, London, UK
Ben-Ami, D. (2010), Ferraris for all: In defence for economic progress, Policy, Bristol;
Portland, OR.
Benson, E. (2012), Corporate leaders, governments and civil society agree that corporate
reporting metrics, beyond GDP indicators and the Sustainable Development Goals
must be aligned to the same understanding of progress, media release, Green Economy
Coalition, London, viewed 15 May 2013, http://measurewhatmatters.info/wp-content/
uploads/2014/01/RIO+20-MEDIA-RELEASE-Measuring-what-matters.pdf.
Bentham, J. (1789) An Introduction to the Principle of Morals and Legislations (1789);
reprinted (Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 1948).
Brickman P, Campbell DT. (1971), Hedonic Relativism and Planning the Good Society. In
MH Appley (Ed.): 287 304
Carlisle, S., Henderson, G. & Hanlon, P.W. (2009), Wellbeing: A collateral casualty of
modernity?, Soc Sci Med, vol. 69, no. 10, pp. 1556-60.
Clark, A.E., Frijters, P. & Shields, M.A. (2008), Relative income, happiness, and utility:
An explanation for the easterlin paradox and other puzzles, Journal of Economic
Literature, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 95-144.
Daly, H.E., Cobb, J.B. & Cobb, C.W. (1989), For the common good: Redirecting the economy
toward community, the environment, and a sustainable future, Beacon Press, Boston.
De Neve, N.JE., De Neve N.A., Christakis, J.H., Fowler B.S. Frey, G., (2012), Economics,
and Happiness, CESIFO Working Paper No. 2946, Category 12: Empirical and
Theoretical Methods, Original Version: February 2010, This Version August 2012
Diener, E. (1984) Subjective well-being Psychological Bulletin 95: 3, pp. 542-575.
Diener, E. and Seligman, M., (2004), Beyond Money: Toward an Economy of Well-being,
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Vol 5., no. 1, pp. 1-31
Diener, E., Lucas, R.E. & Scollon, C.N. (2006), Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the
adaptation theory of well-being, American Psychologist, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 305-14.
37
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
Dolan, P. (2014), Happiness by Design: Finding pleasure and purpose in everyday life,
Penguin Random House, UK
Easterlin, R., A. (1974) Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical
evidence In P.A. David and M.W. Reader (eds.) Nations and households in economic
growth; Essays in honour of Moses Abramovitz (p. 89-125) New York: Academic Press
Easterlin, R.A., (1995) Will Raising the Income of all Increase the Happiness of All?
Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organisation 27: 1, pp. 35-47
Easterlin, R.A. (2005) Feeding the illusion of growth and happiness: A reply to Hagerty
and Veenhoven, 2006, Social Indicators Research 74: 3, pp.429-443
Easterlin, R.A. (2003), Explaining happiness, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, vol. 100, no. 19,
pp. 11176-83.
European Commission (2013), Beyond GDP, Key quotes. Retrieved on 02/07/2013 from
http://www.beyond-gdp.eu/key_quotes.html.
Felber, C. (2010), Die Gemeinwohl-Oekonomie, Das Wirtschaftsmodell der Zukunft, Deuticke,
Germany
Forrester, JW. (1971), World Dynamics. Wright-Allen Press, Cambridge.
Frank, R., 2011, Darwin Economy: Liberty, competition and the Common Good, Princeton
University Press, USA
Frey, B.S. and Stutzer, A. (2001) Happiness and Economics: How the Economy and
Institutions affect Human Well-being, Princeton University Press
Frst, E., (2011), Ein Wegweiser in die Armut und ins Chaos, DiePresse.com, 30
January, viewed on 12 December 2014, http://diepresse.com/home/meinung/
gastkommentar/629941/Ein-Wegweiser-in-die-Armut-und-ins-Chaos?from=suche.
intern.portal
Graham, C. (2009), Happiness around the world: the paradox of happy peasants and miserable
millionaires, New York: Oxford University Press
Gross National Happiness (GNH) Center (2013). Background of Gross National
Happiness. Retrieved 02/07/2013 from http://www.gnhbhutan.org/about/The_
background_of_Gross_National_Happiness.aspx
Hk, T., Janous kov S., Abdallah S., Seaford C. and Mahony S., (2012), Review report
on Beyond GDP indicators: categorisation, intentions and impacts. Final version
of BRAINPOoL deliverable 1.1, A collaborative project funded by the European
Commission under the FP7 programme (Contract no. 283024). CUEC Prague, 18
October 2012
Hart, K., Laville J.L, Cattani, A. (eds) (2010), The Human Economy: A Citizens Guide
Cambridge: Polity Press
Haugh, H., (2005), A research agenda for social entrepreneurship, Social Enterprise
Journal, Vol. 1 Iss 1 pp. 1 - 12
Headey B. (2006), Subjective Well-Being: Revisions to Dynamic Equilibrium Theory
Using National Panel Data and Panel Regression Methods. Social Indicators Research
79: 369 403
38
26/03/15 6:08 PM
Helliwell, J., Layard, R., Sachs, J. (Eds.). (2012). World Happiness Report 2012. Sustainable
Development Solutions Network: A Global Initiative for the United Nations. New York,
USA
Jevons, W. S. (1866) Brief Account of a General Mathematical Theory of Political Economy,
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, London, XXIX (June 1866), pp. 282-87.
Kahneman, D. (2011), Thinking Fast and Slow, Penguin Books, London
Kahneman, D. and Deaton, A. (2010), High income improves evaluation of life but not
emotional well-being, PNAS, Vol. 107, No.38, pp. 1648916493
Kahneman, D., and Krueger, A. (2006) Developments in the Measurement of Subjective
Well-Being Journal of Economic Perspectives 20: 1, pp. 3-24
Kemper, A., & Martin, R. L. (2010) After the fall: The global financial crisis as a test of
corporate social responsibility theories. European Management Review, 7: 229-239.
Klimecki, O.M., Leiberg, S., Ricard, M. & Singer, T. (2014), Differential pattern of
functional brain plasticity after compassion and empathy training, Social Cognitive &
Affective Neuroscience, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 873-9.
Korten, D. and Scharmer, O., (2014), Shaping a New Narrative for a New Economy,
8 December, viewed 3 December 2014, http://www.ceholmesconsulting.com/
shaping-narrative-economy/
Kubiszewski, I., Costanza, R., Franco, C., Lawn, P., Talberth, J., Jackson, T., Aylmer, C.,
(2013). Beyond GDP: Measuring and achieving global genuine progress, Ecological
Economics 93, pp. 5768.
Kuznets, S. (1934). National Income, 19291932. 73rd US Congress, 2d session, Senate
document no. 124, page 7.
Leadbeater C. (1997) The Rise of the Social Entrepreneur. London: Demos.
Legatum Institute (2014). The Legatum Prosperity Index. Retrieved 29 November 2014,
from http://www.prosperity.com/#!/
Leiberg, S., Klimecki, O. & Singer, T. (2011), Short-term compassion training increases
prosocial behavior in a newly developed prosocial game, PLoS One, vol. 6, no. 3, p.
e17798.
Layard, R. (2005) Happiness: Lessons from a New Science London Penguin
Lykken, D. and Tellegen, A. (1996), Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological
Science 7: 186-89
Martin, A., (2012), Happiness and Wellbeing, a New Economic Paradigm, The Global
Policy debate and implications for multi-national businesses, MBA Research
Dissertation, Exeter University, UK
McMahon, D., (2007), The Pursuit of Happiness: A History from the Greeks to the Present
London: Allen Lane/Penguin
Max-Neef, M., (1995), Economic growth and quality of life: a threshold hypothesis.
Ecological Economics 15 (2), 115118.
Meadows, D.H. & Club of Rome. (1972), The limits to growth; a report for the Club of Romes
project on the predicament of mankind, Universe Books, New York.
39
26/03/15 6:08 PM
isabel sebastian
Meadows D. (1999), Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System, The Sustainability

Institute, VT USA
Meadows D. (2008), Thinking in Systems, In Wright, D. (Ed) Thinking in Systems, The
Sustainability Institute, Chelsea Green Publishing, VT USA
Meadows, D. (2009). Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System. Solutions. Vol 1,
No. 1. pp. 41-49. Retrieved on 21/05/13 from http://thesolutionsjournal.anu.edu.au/
node/419
Miller, H., (2013), Patagonia founder takes aim: The elephant in the room is growth,
GreenBiz, 1 March, viewed 12 December 2014, http://www.greenbiz.com/
news/2013/03/01/patagonia-founder-takes-aim-elephant-room-growth
National Research Council. (2013). Subjective Well-Being: Measuring Happiness,
Suffering, and Other Dimensions of Experience. Panel on Measuring Subjective WellBeing in a Policy-Relevant Framework. A.A. Stone and C. Mackie, Editors. Committee
on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
New Development Paradigm (NDP) Steering Committee and Secretariat, (2013),
Happiness: Towards a New Development Paradigm, Report of the Royal Government
of Bhutan
ODonnell, G., Deaton, A., Durand, M., Halpern, D. and Layard, R (2014), Wellbeing and
PolicyReport 2014, Legatum Institute, UK
OECD (2013), Hows Life? 2013: Measuring Well-being, OECD Publishing, accessed at
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/how-s-life-2013_9789264201392-en viewed 15
January 2014
Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2014), Measuring National Well-being: Life in the UK,
2014 accessed at http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/wellbeing/measuring-national-wellbeing/life-in-the-uk--2014/art-mnwb--life-in-the-uk--2014.html on 8 April 2014
Pearce, D., Markandya, A., and Barbier E.B. (1989), Blueprint for a Green Economy, for
the UK Department of Environment, Earthscan, UK
Pigou, A.C., Aslanbeigui, N. & Oakes, G. 2013, The economics of welfare, Fourth edition.
Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York.
Reynolds, P. D., Bygrave, W. D., Autio, E., Cox, L. W., & Hay, M. (2002). Global
entrepreneurship monitor. Babson College, London Business School, Ewing Marion
Kauffman Foundation.
Ricard, M. (2006), Happiness: A guide to developing lifes most important skill, 1st English
language edn, Little, Brown, New York
Ridley, M. (2003), Nature via nurture: Genes, experience, and what makes us human, 1st edn,
HarperCollins, New York, N.Y
Rietveld, C., Cesarini, D., Benjamin D.J., Koellinger, P.D., De Neve J.E., Tiemeier, H.,
Johannesson, M., Magnusson, P.K.E, Pedersen, N.L, Krueger, R.F., and Bartels, M.,
(2013), Molecular genetics and subjective well-being, PNAS, June 11, vol. 110, no. 24,
pp. 96929697
Roberts. D. & Woods, C. (2005). Changing the World on a Shoestring: The Concept of
Social Entrepreneurship. University of Auckland Business Review, 45-51.
40
26/03/15 6:08 PM
Salvaris, M (2013), Measuring the Kind of Australia we want: The Australian National
Development Index, the Gross Domestic Product and the Global Movement to
Redefine Progress, The Australian Economic Review, Vol. 46, no. 1, pp 78-91
Seelos, C. & Mair, J. (2005). Social Entrepreneurship: Creating New Business Models to
Serve the Poor. Business Horizons, 241-246.
Seidman, D., (2014), From Knowledge Economy to Human Economy, Harvard Business
Review, accessed at https://hbr.org/2014/11/from-the-knowledge-economy-to-thehuman-economy on 13 November 2014
Seligman, M. (2011) Building Resilience, Harvard Business Review, 89: 4, pp. 100-106
Stiglitz, J., (2009), Interview with Joseph Stiglitz in Pittsburgh 23 September 2009; min
1:30 http://youtube.com.
Sukhdev, P. (2012). Corporation 2020: Transforming Business for Tomorrows World,
Washington DC, USA: Island Press.
Ura, K., Alkire, S., Zangmo, T., Wangdi, K. (2012), A Short Guide to Gross National
Happiness Index, Centre for Bhutan Studies, Thimphu, Royal Government of Bhutan
Veenhoven, R.R., and Hagerty, M.R. (2006) Rising Happiness in Nations 1946-2004
Social Indicators Research 79: 3, pp. 421-436
Veenhoven, R.R. (2012) Happiness and Well-being: Not quite the same Comments to the
draft declaration Realizing the world we all want Comments from participants on draft
outcome document http://www.2apr.gov.bt/index.php/background-reading/205 accessed
25th September 2013
Weber, J., & Marley, K. (2012). In search of stakeholder salience: Exploring corporate social
and sustainability reports. Business and Society, 51 (4), 626-649.
Windsor, D (2012). Toward a General Theory of Responsibility and Irresponsibility. 2012
Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society, vol. 23, pages 4859.
41
26/03/15 6:08 PM
The Role of Business Law in the Jigsaw

Puzzle of Sustainability
Beate Sjfjell*
University of Oslo, Faculty of Law, Norway
This article presents the argument that reforming business law is a

necessary contribution to the greening of our economies and societies. The article is specifically about European business law, while
similar arguments can be made for other regions of the world.
Sustainable development has a strong legal position among the
ultimate objectives of the European Union, underpinned by the growing recognition in the EU of the inextricable entity of humanity, our
natural environment and our economic system. Contrary to common
belief, EU law is not just about free movement and market integration. This article starts with the assertion that EU Treaty law contains
the necessary elements for the EU to instigate change and take the
lead to shift from the path of business as usual, towards a truly sustainable development. The codification of the sustainable development principle in the environmental integration rule in Article 11
TFEU is the key. Article 11 TFEU, properly interpreted, has significant
legal implications for the institutions of the European Union, entailing direct obligations on all levels: Law-making, administration,
supervision and judicial control.
This article thereafter shows the significance this has for the regulation of European companies and financial markets central to the
greening of our economies and societies and how Article 11 TFEU
should be implemented. A reform of European company law is
central here, with a number of other areas of business law providing
important contributions as well. The article concludes by presenting
the core elements of work-in-progress reform proposals based inter
alia on the results of the international Sustainable Companies Project.
OO European Union
Treaty law
OO Sustainable
companies
OO Corporate social
responsibility
OO Directors duties
OO Purpose of the
company
OO Company law
OO Planetary
boundaries
* I would like to thank the international network of scholars of the Sustainable Companies
Project and the participants at the Oslo workshop, where these reform ideas were
hammered out, for insightful contributions especially Jukka Mhnen, Filip Gregor,
Mark Taylor and Georgina Tsagas. For encouragement and succinct advice during the
whole process I am grateful to Chris Halburd, and for inspiring comments on a draft of
this article, the wonderful editor Michael Townsend.
42
BSL5_Beate Sjafjell.indd 42
26/03/15 6:09 PM
the role of business law in the jigsaw puzzle of sustainability

Beate Sjfjell is Professor Dr. Juris at the University of Oslo, Faculty of Law.
Beate is head of the Facultys Research Group Companies, Markets, Society and
the Environment (jus.uio.no/companies) and the international Sustainable
Companies project (2010-2014), as well as of the new international project:
Sustainable Market Actors for Responsible Trade (SMART). Beates publications
include Towards a Sustainable European Company Law (Kluwer Law
International, 2009), and the edited volumes The Greening of European Business
Under EU Law: Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously (Routledge, 2015, co-editor Anja
Wiesbrock) and Company Law and Sustainability: Legal Barriers and Opportunities
(Cambridge University Press, 2015, co-editor: Benjamin Richardson).
u
!
University of Oslo, Faculty of Law,

Department of Private Law, P.O.
Box 6706 St Olavs plass, NO-0130,
Oslo, Norway
[email protected]
43
26/03/15 6:09 PM
beate sjfjell
Business as usual is not an option
Drawn by Katarina Sjfjell, age 12
The discussion of whether we need a fundamental transition should be

over. Ever stronger warnings from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change emphasise that business as usual is a very certain path towards
a very uncertain future, and that is just one of the planetary boundaries
that we are transgressing or threatening. To secure a liveable and just
society for ourselves, for our children and childrens children, we need to
find a new path towards a circular economy where social and economic
development is ensured within the non-negotiable ecological limits of our
planet. From this starting point, based on the knowledge that business
as usual is not an option, the question is not whether but how we can
achieve such a fundamental transition away from the push for infinite
growth within finite resources and onto a path towards truly sustainable
development. The topic for this article is the necessary contribution
of business law in the jigsaw puzzle of sustainability. This article is
specifically on European business law, while it is in its essence also
relevant for other regions of the world.
Sustainable development has a strong legal position among the ultimate

objectives of the European Union (EU), underpinned by the growing
recognition in the EU of the inextricable entity of humanity, our natural
44
26/03/15 6:09 PM
environment and our economic system1 (Sjfjell, 2009: 171-248). The Lisbon
Treaty has further strengthened sustainable development as an overarching
goal, in Europe and globally.2 Contrary to common belief, EU law is not
just about free movement and market integration, although in practice it
may seem that way sometimes.3 The lack of proper implementation of this
overarching Treaty goal necessitates forward-looking legal scholarship, where
we spell out what the Treaties require of EU law and policy.
This article builds on research-based insights that EU Treaty law contains
the necessary elements for the EU to instigate change and take the lead
to shift from the path of business as usual, towards a truly sustainable
development. The codification of the sustainable development principle
in the environmental integration rule in Article 11 of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is the key. This codification has
enhanced the position of sustainable development as an overarching objective
and especially that of its environmental dimension (Nowaq, 2015).4 Article
11 TFEU requires full integration of environmental protection requirements
into all policies and activities of the EU with the aim of achieving sustainable
development. Properly interpreted, Article 11 has significant legal
implications for the institutions of the European Union, entailing direct
obligations on all levels: law-making, administration, supervision and judicial
control (Sjfjell, 2015a).
In the next section this article discusses the significance this has for the
regulation of European companies and financial markets, central to the
greening of our economies and societies, and how Article 11 TFEU should
be implemented in that area. A reform of European company law is the
core here. The article concludes by presenting the core elements of work-in-
1 The ultimate objectives of the European Union are stated in the relevant provisions of
the Treaties; until 1 Dec. 2009 particularly Article 2 of the former EC Treaty: the Treaty
establishing the European Community (1957), last amended (and name changed to
TFEU) by the Treaty of Lisbon, OJ 2008 C115 (consolidated version); as well as the
former Art. 2 and Art. 6 of the Treaty on European Union (1992), last amended by the
Treaty of Lisbon, OJ 2008 C115 (consolidated version), hereinafter referred to as the
EU Treaty (abbreviated TEU in accordance with the new reference style of the Lisbon
Treaty). Now see notably the new Art. 3 TEU.
2 Articles 3(3), 3(5) and 21(2)(d) and (f) TEU.
3 The withdrawal in December 2014 of the EU circular economy package is illustrative. This
package could have been a first step towards a more sustainable economy and it is easy to
understand the doubt as to whether this will be replaced by a more ambitious package
in 2015, see Recycling industry erupts as EU Commission ditches circular economy
package, Ben Messenger, Waste Management World, 17 Dec. 2014 (online at www.wastemanagement-world.com/articles/2014/12/recycling-industry-erupts-as-eu-commissionditches-circular-economy-package.html).
4 As discussed by Julian Nowaq, the wording of the provision was through the Maastricht
Treaty changed from shall be a competent of to must be integrated, laying down the
foundations of the current justiciable version of what is now Article 11 TFEU.
45
26/03/15 6:09 PM
beate sjfjell
progress reform proposals based inter alia on the results of the international
Sustainable Companies Project.5
Reforming business law for sustainability

Business law is usually not included in the discourse on how to achieve
sustainable development, not even in the discussion of the role of business in
sustainable development. Business law in the EU today is first and foremost a
vehicle of market integration, through the removal of obstacles and barriers,
the facilitation and enabling of businesses and financial markets and the
protection of shareholders and other participants, creditors and to a limited
extent employees (Sjfjell, 2009: 127-170). The argument for a new approach
to business law in a sustainable development perspective may be summarised
in three points: First, we are very far from achieving the goal of a sustainable
development; second, we need the contribution of business to have any
hopes of achieving the goal; and third, neither the voluntary contribution
of business nor the current legal framework regulating the environmental
impact of business is sufficient. A holistic reform is required.
Company law has a crucial role to play in the transformation towards
sustainability because it provides the legal framework for the internal
workings of the company, including its decision-making (Sjfjell and
Richardson, 2015). Based on the research of the Sustainable Companies
Project,6 company law has been identified as a crucial aspect of that which
may be called the regulatory ecology of companies.7 A thoughtful, wellfounded reform of company law is therefore expected to impact on not only
the decision-making within the company but also its relationship with its
shareholders, its employees and society at large, by stimulating the enormous
potential within business to create long-term, sustainable value through an
internalisation of environmental and social externalities.
5 For more information about this University of Oslo-led project, see http://jus.uio.no/companies
under Projects (last visited 22 Jun. 2014).

6 This project has had as its aim to integrate environmental concerns better into the decision-
making in companies and has analysed the barriers and possibilities that company law,
including the regulation (or lack thereof) of corporate groups, reporting requirements
and accounting law, pose for the shift towards sustainable companies. Based on these
results, reform proposals have been developed.
7 The use of regulatory ecology in this company law and sustainability context is based on
a presentation by Mark Taylor at the workshop Sustainable Companies in the EU, held
at the University of Oslo 5-9 May 2014. This is more commonly discussed under the
umbrella of polycentric regulation (Black, 2008; Taylor, 2011).
46
26/03/15 6:09 PM
This tentative reform proposal springs out of a research project that has had
the deeper integration of environmental concerns into the decision-making
of companies as its aim. Envisaged as the basis for a proposal for a new
EU directive, and in recognition of the inextricable interconnectedness of
environmental, social and economic aspects of business, this reform proposal
encompasses all three dimensions (Sjfjell, 2015b).
Article 11 TFEU entails that any legal basis in EU law is also a legal basis for
protecting the environment, and shall be used as such if that is relevant as
a contribution to sustainable development. This entails that as long as there
is a legal basis for regulating a company law issue, there is also a legal basis
for integrating environmental protection requirements in that company law
legislation. The main idea of this tentative proposal would probably best be
implemented through the adoption of a new company law directive, while
changes in other directives may also be suggested.
While the mainstream corporate governance debate tends to regard
maximisation of shareholder profit as the sole purpose of companies, this
is, as a matter of law, to a great extent incorrect, especially understood as
societys purpose with companies in aggregate (Sjfjell etal., 2015).
No company law system insists on boards focusing only on returns for
shareholders. In some jurisdictions environmental sustainability has
begun tentatively to make inroads into the explicit duties of the board
(Johnston, 2014; Lambooy, 2010). All jurisdictions expect boards to ensure
environmental legal compliance. Generally company law across jurisdictions
also allows boards to integrate environmental externalities beyond legal
compliance, at least as far as the business case argument allows; i.e. as far as
the case can be made that this is profitable for the company in the long run.
Indeed, the cross-jurisdictional analysis of the Sustainable Companies Project
has shown that there is a great unexplored potential in the current company
law regimes for companies to shift away from the path of business as usual
and onto a path towards sustainability by shifting their focus from shortterm maximisation of returns to shareholders to long-term value creation
(Sjfjelletal., 2015).
However, boards do in aggregate not even choose the environmentally
friendly, low-carbon option within the realm of the business case, letalone
challenge the outer boundaries of the scope to pursue profit in a sustainable
manner. This is evidenced through the cross-jurisdictional general lack
of case law where board decisions are challenged on such grounds. This
is because of the overriding social norm of shareholder primacy, which,
supported by management remuneration incentives and other drivers, leads
to an extremely narrow, short-term, profit maximisation focus (Sjfjell etal.,
2015). This has been pinpointed also by the EU Commission as a problem but
not adequately acted on (Sjfjell and Anker-Srensen, 2013). The resulting
practice of companies in aggregate is detrimental to those affected by climate
47
26/03/15 6:09 PM
beate sjfjell
change and environmental degradation today and to the possibility for future
generations to fulfil their own needs. It is also damaging to any shareholder
with more than a very short-term perspective on their investment, including
institutional investors such as pension funds or sovereign wealth funds, as
well as to the companies themselves.8
Shareholder primacy as the main barrier to sustainable companies has been
allowed to flourish notably because the law has not specified what the societal
purpose of companies is; leaving a vacuum that has been filled with this
social norm (Sjfjell etal., 2015). This also indicates a way forward. A reform
that clearly spells out the societal purpose will set a key issue straight in a
principle-based manner, enabling forward-looking sustainable business.
What urgently needs to be done is to clarify that while companies in the
aggregate may and should have profit as their core purpose this should be
achieved within the overarching societal purpose of sustainable development
(Willard, 2014). The purpose of the company, as a matter of company law,
needs to be redefined. To encourage the shift away from business as usual,
it is necessary to internalise the fundamental recognition that there are
ecological limits that we cannot transgress if we are to achieve sustainability.
Long-term economic sustainability presupposes that business is conducted
with respect for the ecological limits. If we are to achieve a safe operating
space for humanity, we cannot continue with incremental improvements;
neither can we focus on whichever environmental challenge gets the most
attention at any given time. The concept of planetary boundaries (Rockstrm
etal., 2009), state-of-the-art natural science, embodies this fundamental
recognition and should form the space within which all economic and social
development is to take place.
This concept should therefore be a key issue in a redefined purpose of
companies as a matter of company law.9
8 While the preamble of the proposal for an amendment of the Shareholder Rights Directive
claims in Recital 2 that the financial crisis has revealed that shareholders in many cases
supported managers excessive short-term risk taking, an at least as valid concern is that
shareholders have pressurised directors and managers to focus on short-term returns only.
9 The tentative reform proposal presented in a short form here was first proposed in a Nordic
context early in 2014 (Sjfjell and Mhnen, 2014) and further developed in an EU law
context later the same year (Sjfjell, 2015b).
48
26/03/15 6:09 PM
Planetary boundaries
Source: Rockstrm et al. (2009a) and Steffen et al. (2011).10

Climate change
Biosphere integrity
E/MSY
Novel entities
BII
Stratospheric
ozone depletion
Land-system
change
?
Atmospheric aerosol
loading
Freshwater use
P
N
Ocean acidification
Biogeochemical flows
Beyond zone of uncertainty (high risk)

In zone of uncertainty (increasing risk)
Below boundary (safe)
Boundary not yet quantified
The redefined purpose of companies in an EU company law directive could

for example be formulated like this: The purpose of a company is to create
sustainable value within the planetary boundaries while respecting the
interests of its investors and other involved parties.
The most fundamental key issues here are the purpose of creating sustainable
value and the space within with value can be created: within the planetary
boundaries. A further development of this idea into a proper legislative
proposal would require explanatory notes where the concept of sustainable
value was given content. The basic idea is that sustainable value is long-term
and inclusive, as opposed to short-term and exclusive pursuit of shareholder
returns. Protection and promotion of the interest of the shareholders, other
10 The planetary boundaries include as shown in the figure above, biosphere integrity,
global freshwater and land use, ocean acidification, atmospheric aerosol loading,
stratospheric ozone depletion, cycling of phosphorus and nitrogen (biogeochemical
flows) and novel entities (new substances, new forms of existing substances, and
modified life forms that have the potential for unwanted geophysical and/or biological
effects). It is estimated that humanity has already transgressed three of these
boundaries: climate change, biosphere integrity, biogeochemical flows and landsystem change (Steffen et al., 2015). The planetary boundaries may be revised through
new evidence, and scientific uncertainty is naturally unavoidable. The environmental
precautionary principle is of essence. Indeed, the conceptual framework for planetary
boundaries itself proposes a strongly precautionary approach, by setting the discrete
boundary value at the lower and more conservative bound of the uncertainty range (as
stated already in Rockstrm etal., 2009b).
49
26/03/15 6:09 PM
beate sjfjell
investors and other involved parties, including employees, creditors and

other contractual parties, is encompassed through the formulation that
sustainable value is to be sought while respecting the interest of its investors
and other involved parties.11 Broader societal impact can also be included in
sustainable value and other involved parties depending on how this is defined in
explanatory notes and implemented, interpreted and put into practice.
Fitting comfortably into the teleological, dynamic EU law method, these
concepts give room for development over time in pace with the development
of generally accepted ethical norms of society, both in terms of which
interests are included and of the balancing between them.
While the operationalisation of planetary boundaries in a company law and
corporate governance context requires more work, the formulation within
the planetary boundaries is used to signal clearly that these are indeed nonnegotiable boundaries, where the room for trade-offs is limited. As a matter
of principle there can be no trade-offs threatening the planetary boundaries,
as opposed to balancing social and economic aspects, while recognising that
the ultimate goal is to achieve not only a safe operating space for humanity
but a safe and just space for humanity (Raworth, 2012).
We can envisage future development of sector guidelines and standards and
merging natural science and corporate governance that to an even greater
extent can allow a sector-by-sector and business-by-business definition of
what staying within planetary boundaries entails. However, we can already
now put forward a proposal on how to operationalise this purpose. The key
components of such an operationalisation are to integrate the purpose into
the duties of the board and require that each company draws up a long-term,
life-cycle based business plan. The duties of the board are arguably the best
place in the regulatory ecology of the companies to introduce the operational
part of such a redefined purpose of the companies as this article proposes,
because of the key role the board according to company law has in the
governance of companies (Sjfjell and Anker-Srensen, 2013). This can be
done by introducing the concept of life-cycle based creation of sustainable value
as what the board is to promote and ensure. A life-cycle-based assessment is a
key concept here, as a proper cradle-to-cradle assessment of the value creation
of the company allows for a full overview of the environmental, social and
economic consequences of the basis of the companys business (Ekern, 2015).
This in turn allows for fundamental changes or slighter adjustments, as the
case may be, of the business strategy of the company to ensure that that the
value creation is indeed sustainable.
Realising the enormous potential for sustainable value creation within each
company cannot be undertaken through regulation in a command-andcontrol, top-down manner. Rather, each company must identify its own
11 Using investors rather than shareholders recognises the complex structures of finance
through debt, equity or grants.

50
26/03/15 6:09 PM
individual, innovative way of creating sustainable value. To achieve this, and

to ensure that it is brought right up to the level of the board, the duties of
the board should encompass the drawing up of a long-term, life-cycle based
business plan. Risk management and due diligence would be a part of the
companys toolbox to ensure that the business plan is implemented within
the company and its activities.
The business plan shall contain the long-term plan for the company.12 The
business plan shall describe how the company is to achieve life-cycle based
value creation within the planetary boundaries, or more poetically, what is the
companys long-term vision for sustainable value creation. A requirement for
such a business plan, designed thoughtfully, would involve a standardisation
of a process that companies wishing to achieve long-term sustainable value
would need to do anyway. The standardisation would contribute to lowering
costs and establishing a level playing field. As we will see below, this proposal
presents a more structured and robust basis for the companys decisionmaking and its communication with its stakeholders than do the reporting
requirements in many jurisdictions including the new EU requirements
(Villiers and Mhnen, 2015).13
A life-cycle-based approach is key here, whereby this proposal fits well
together with the integrated product policy of the EU where the life-cycle
perspective is identified as the leading principle (Ekern, 2015). A life-cyclebased approach entails an assessment in a cradle-to-cradle perspective of
a product, including every phase from the sourcing of the materials used
in the production through the production, marketing and selling of the
product, to the user phase and finally to the recycling or waste management
of the product. This would enable the company to identify its potential for
increased efficiency in use of energy and other resources and pinpoint and
mitigate material negative environmental and social impacts. In the context
of creating sustainable value within the planetary boundaries, the process
would require identifying and mitigating material negative environmental
and social impact. This may be possible to do through an adjustment of
aspects of the life cycle of the business. However, it may also result in a
decision to more fundamentally change the business strategy of the company.
The purpose of sustainable value within the planetary boundaries requires
transformation rather than incremental improvements of environmental and
social performance. This would also mean that the companies that already
have sustainable business models in the sense indicated here would gain
the competitive advantage over companies that profit from environmental
destruction and social inequality.
12 A tentative indication is that long-term here would be 1530 years (or the full time span
of the company, if it has a shorter time horizon).

13 Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council
Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC as regards disclosure of non-financial and

diversity information by certain large companies and groups, COM(2013) 207 final
2013/0110 (COD), adopted by the European Parliament April 2014.
51
26/03/15 6:09 PM
beate sjfjell
A full life-cycle-based assessment to identify and mitigate negative

environmental and social impacts, as described immediately above, would
have to be undertaken for any products the company sells, either by the
company itself, or by the manufacturer/supplier. This would be a way of
dealing with the pulverisation of responsibility for environmental and social
impacts that we see today through multinational groups of companies and
international supply chains. Any European company would need to draw up
its own life-cycle based business plan or substantiate that this was covered
e.g. by a parent companys business plan. A life-cycle assessment would need
to be conducted for any product involved in the value creation of a European
company, either by the company itself or by the supplier.
An issue for further research will be how to ensure that such a reform is
not circumvented through companies in third-world countries selling their
products to European purchasers. Goods imported by or sold to European
companies would already be covered by the tentative reform proposal
indicated here. Among unresolved issues are direct sales to European
consumers. Whether these are substantial enough issues to warrant
additional regulation remains to be investigated.
The plan shall include milestones or objectives to be achieved along the
way, and key performance indicators (KPIs) in as far as the impacts can be
quantified, relevant to the specific plan of the company, which the company
can report on annually. This should not mean that the company cannot in
addition also set goals that are not (easily) quantifiable. The long-term plan
should be broken down into shorter time segments,14 entailing that the
company at these regular intervals must undertake a full assessment of its
business plan and consider necessary revisions.
The directors duties could for example be formulated like this:
The board of the company is to ensure the life-cycle based creation of sustainable
value. To this end, the board shall adopt and regularly revise a long-term business
plan for the company, based on a life-cycle assessment of the companys main
areas of business.
A mandatory table of contents of the business plan should be drawn up as

an annex to the directive, to encourage proper compliance and comparability
between companies. Giving the business plan a specific title could be
considered, to ease reference to this requirement in other EU contexts.
Guidelines endorsed by the European Commission should set out how the
relevant and sufficient KPIs are to be selected according to the sector and
concrete business plan of the company.
Effective enforcement of these duties is on the one hand necessary to ensure
that the requirements become more than words on paper and that they are
not used as a basis for greenwashing. A sensible starting point is to turn
14 For example, 15 years broken down into three or five year segments.
52
26/03/15 6:09 PM
the drawing up of the business plan itself into an enforceable duty. This can
easily be done for new companies by including it among the documents
required to incorporate a new business. For existing companies, it can be
required within a certain time-period, for example 18 months after the entry
into force of the new rule. This could easily be enforced within the existing
systems in the Member States by the company registrar, which could check
the business plan for new companies (as it checks whether it has other
relevant documents), and probably also for existing companies (as it checks
whether accounts are sent in when they should), with the same type of
sanctions as for other such core documents. With a minimum content of
such a business plan, the registrar could then also check whether these items
were filled in without evaluating the content.
The qualitative control of the business plan should probably be limited to
the selection of KPIs to ensure that these core indicators against which
the company is to report are relevant and sufficient. With guidelines or
standards endorsed by the European Commission to identify the relevant and
sufficient indicators, such a check, which only needs to be undertaken when
the business plan is drawn up or fundamentally revised, should not be too
burdensome to require. An issue to be developed further is how this could
be undertaken; most likely it can be covered by auditors with experience with
sustainability assurance.15
Obviously, implementing such a reform will have costs. On the other hand,
there are also potential substantial benefits already in the short-term for the
companies. The life-cycle assessment will have the added benefits of making
legal compliance easier (because all aspects of production are brought onto
the table); it will increase efficiency, cut costs, and allow for the identification
and mitigation of environmental and social impacts. Done properly, it would
involve a full internalisation of environmental and social externalities,
allowing the company to create value in a truly sustainable manner.
Instigating such a transition within companies would also reduce the need
for detailed external regulation. It would further stimulate the innovation that
we need to encourage the achievement of the dual goal of Europe having the
market leaders of tomorrow and of business being part of the transformation
from the highly risky business as usual towards sustainability.16
The proposal here would give a clear duty on which to report and give content
to the recently adopted non-financial reporting requirement on the EU level.17
15 See e.g. the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board www.sasb.org accessed 21 June
2014
16 This could e.g. lead to innovative business models such as renting a service of having a
product instead of selling the product, and could contribute to mitigating the
incompatibility of the goals of the EUs Europe 2020 strategy of (infinite) growth and a
smart, sustainable and inclusive economy, http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/ (accessed
10 July 2014).
17 See n. 13 above and Villiers and Mhnen, 2015.
53
26/03/15 6:09 PM
beate sjfjell
In the directive this is to be done on a comply-or-explain basis. As a part of

the tentative reform proposal presented here, this reporting should be an
obligatory part of the management report, linked directly to the business plan
idea presented above, and reporting against the key performance indicators
approved as a part of that plan.
The company would in other words be required to report annually, in its
management report, on the milestones and key performance indicators
(KPIs) identified in the business plan; i.e. on how the company meets its
objectives and how the impacts are measured. This would make best practice
mandatory. The content of this could be further developed in guidelines, a
first step of which is on its way through the guidelines the Commission is to
develop according to the new non-financial reporting directive (Villiers and
Mhnen, 2015).
This would be the second point of enforcement of the proposed reform:
the reporting against the KPIs. The accuracy of the information provided in
reports should ideally be verified, which could be envisaged on the basis of
sector guidelines or standards endorsed by the European Commission.
An issue for further development is how the reporting should be verified.
Is a consistency check by auditors sufficient, or should one envisage a full
sustainability assurance?18 These requirements could be tightened through
subsequent reform, but ideally a full sustainability assurance requirement
should be in place from the beginning.
To make such a reform effective, the key concept of creating sustainable value
within the planetary boundaries would also need to be included in other areas
of business law. This can for example be done by giving the business plan
requirement legal significance in financial market law, public procurement,
state aid and consumer regulation (Sjfjell, 2015b; Wiesbrock, 2015).
Transformation rather than incremental improvement is necessary. Truly
transformative proposals are bound to meet resistance. This does not mean
that they are not politically possible to achieve a sufficient majority on.
There are a number of signs indicating that we are living in a time where
conventional wisdom is questioned, and where sustainability issues are
discussed in contexts where such topics were previously ignored. With
shareholder primacy increasingly being denoted as the worlds dumbest
idea (Welch in Stout, 2012), there are indications that management thinkers
as well as some of the largest companies in the world are moving beyond
the detrimental goal of short-term maximisation of returns to shareholders
(Serafeim, 2013; Christensen and van Bever, 2014).
18 See e.g. the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board www.sasb.org accessed 21 June
2014.
54
26/03/15 6:09 PM
This article presents an idea for a reform of company law that, if enacted,
could form one of the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle of sustainability that we so
urgently need to get into place.
Bibliography
Black, J. (2008) Constructing and Contesting Legitimacy and Accountability in Polycentric
Regulatory Regimes, Regulation and Governance 2.
Christensen, C. M. and van Bever, D. (2014) The Capitalists Dilemma, Harvard Business
Review, Jun. 2014, 60-68.
Ekern, E. M. (2015) Towards an Integrated Product Regulatory Framework Based on
Life Cycle Thinking, in Sjfjell, B. and Wiesbrock, A. (eds) The Greening of European
Business under EU Law: Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously, London: Routledge, 144-162.
Johnston, A. (2014) Reforming English Company Law to Promote Sustainable
Companies, in European Company Law, 11(2), 63-66.
Lambooy, T. (2010) Corporate Social Responsibility: legal and semi-legal frameworks supporting
CSR: developments 20002010 and case studies, Deventer: Kluwer.
Nowaq, J. (2015) The Sky is the Limit: on the drafting of Article 11 TFEUs integration
obligation and its intended reach, in Sjfjell, B. and Wiesbrock, A. (eds) The Greening
of European Business under EU Law: Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously, London:
Routledge, 15-30.
Raworth, K. (2012) A safe and just space for humanity: can we live within the doughnut,
(Online), Available: www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/dp-a-safe-and-justspace-for-humanity-130212-en.pdf (Oxford: Oxfam International), (last visited
2 Jan. 2014).
Rockstrm, J. etal (2009a) Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for
humanity, (Online), Available: www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/ (last
visited 14 Jan. 2014).
Rockstrm, J. etal (2009b) Supplementary Information, (Online), Available: www.
stockholmresilience.org/ (under research; planetary boundaries), (last visited 20 Dec. 2013).
Serafeim, G. (2013) The Role of the Corporation in Society: An Alternative View and
Opportunities for Future Research, Harvard Business School Working Paper 14-110.
Available: SSRN: ssrn.com/abstract=2270579 (last visited 21 Jun. 2014).
Sjfjell, B. (2009) Towards a Sustainable European Company Law, Alphen aan den Rijn:
Kluwer Law International.
Sjfjell, B. (2015a) The Legal Significance of Article 11 TFEU for EU Institutions and
Member States, in Sjfjell, B. and Wiesbrock, A. (eds) The Greening of European
Business under EU Law: Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously, London: Routledge, 51-72, and
also available on SSRN: ssrn.com/abstract=2530006.
55
26/03/15 6:09 PM
beate sjfjell
Sjfjell, B. (2015b) Corporate Governance for Sustainability: The Necessary Reform of EU

Company Law, in Sjfjell, B. and Wiesbrock, A. (eds) The Greening of European Business
under EU Law: Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously, London: Routledge, 97-117.
Sjfjell, B. and Anker-Srensen, L. (2013) Directors Duties and Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR), in Birkmose, H. S., Neville, M. and Srensen, K. E. (eds), Boards
of Directors in European Companies, Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer.
Sjfjell, B. and Mhnen, J. (2014) Upgrading the Nordic Corporate Governance Model
for Sustainable Companies, European Company Law (2014) 11, 5862
Sjfjell, B. etal (2015) Shareholder Primacy: the Main Barrier to Sustainable Companies
in Sjfjell, B. and Richardson, B. (eds), Company Law and Sustainability, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press (forthcoming 2015).
Steffen, W., et al (2015) Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a
changing planet (Online), Science, Vol 347, No 6223, Available: DOI: 10.1126/
science.1259855 (last visited 10 Mar. 2015).
Taylor, M. B. (2011) The Ruggie Framework: Polycentric Regulation and theImplications
for Corporate Social Responsibility, Etikk i Praksis, Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics 5,
no. 1.
Villiers, C. and Mhnen, J. (2015) Article 11: Integrated Reporting or Non-Financial
Reporting?, in The Greening of European Business under EU Law: Taking Article 11 TFEU
Seriously, Beate Sjfjell and Anja Wiesbrock (eds), London: Routledge, 118-143.
Welch, J. in Stout, L. (2012) The Shareholder Value Myth, San Francisco: Berret-Koehlers
Publishing.
Wiesbrock, A. (2015) Sustainable State Aid: A full environmental integration into EU state
aid rules?, in Sjfjell, B. and Wiesbrock, A. (ed.) The Greening of European Business
under EU Law: Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously, London: Routledge, 75-96.
Willard, B. (2014) Better is Not Good Enough: Toward True Corporate Sustainability,
(Online), Available: www.greattransition.org/document/better-is-not-good-enoughtoward-true-corporate-sustainability (last visited 21 Jun. 2014).
56
26/03/15 6:09 PM
Exploring a One Planet Mindset and its

Relevance in a Transition to a
Sustainable Economy
Sally Jeanrenaud, Inmaculada Adarves-Yorno and Nicolas Forsans
Business School, University of Exeter, UK
OO One Planet
MBA
OO Mindsets
OO Values
OO Business
OO Sustainable
Economy
OO Transition
Exeters One Planet MBA (OP MBA), co-founded and delivered with
WWF International, is helping develop a new generation of business
leaders, integrating sustainability thinking across its business education curriculum, and fostering a One Planet Mindset. But what is
a One Planet Mindset? And what is its significance in a transition to
a sustainable economy? This paper draws on the sustainability and
management literature, and explorations with students to offer some
preliminary reflections on these questions. It makes the case that a
One Planet Mindset aggregates knowledge, values and skills which
help deliver positive outcomes for people, planet and prosperity. It
engages a new metaphor of nature as a living planet one that recognizes that the health of the economy is rooted in, and not independent of, living planetary systems. Such a mindset provides a
powerful lever for transforming, self, business and society in the
contested transition to a sustainable economy.
Dr Sally Jeanrenaud is a Senior Research Fellow in Sustainable Development,

Business School, University of Exeter. She has over twenty years experience in
international sustainable development, with research, policy, management and
field experience from Asia, Africa and Western Europe. Her research interests
lie in areas of the transitions to sustainable economy, sustainability-oriented
innovation, innovations inspired by nature, and in multi-stakeholder and
collaborative approaches. Sally teaches the Changing Business Environment
and the Biomimicry and Business modules on the One Planet MBA, and also
supervises PhD, and post graduate dissertations.
Dr Inmaculada Adarves-Yorno is a Senior Lecturer in Leadership, working at the
University of Exeter. She has a five-year degree in Psychology, two masters and a
PhD in social and organizational psychology. She has received awards and
fellowships from the Spanish Ministry of Social Issues, Spanish Ministry of
Culture, the British Council, the Economic and Social Research Council and
Exeter University. As a leadership developer she has designed, led and
collaborated in a wide range of programmes (residential, undergraduate, Masters,
MBAs, including the One Planet MBA). She is specialised in experiential
learning, authentic leadership, change agency and personal development.
Prof Nicolas Forsans is a professor in International Strategic Management,
with expertise in the fields of international business and corporate strategy,
and in the disruption of business models by emerging technologies (digital in
particular). His research publications have focused on multinational firm
strategies, the rising importance of emerging economies in global business
and the foreign direct investment activities (mostly through mergers and
acquisitions) of emerging country multinational firms in the western world.
BSL5_Sally Jeanrenaud.indd 57
u
!
u
!
u
!
Business School
Streatham Court
Rennes Drive
Exeter, UK EX4 4PU
[email protected]
Business School
Streatham Court
Rennes Drive
Exeter, UK EX4 4PU
[email protected]
Business School
Streatham Court
Rennes Drive
Exeter, UK EX4 4PU
[email protected]
57
26/03/15 6:24 PM
sally jeanrenaud, inmaculada adarves-yorno, nicolas forsans
Progress is impossible without change, and those that cannot change their
minds, cannot change anything (George Bernard Shaw).
Objectives and questions

The objective of this paper is to explore the idea of a One Planet Mindset and
its significance in a transition to a sustainable economy.
We ask two main questions:
tt What
tt Why
is a One Planet Mindset?
is it significant in a transition to a sustainable economy?
To help answer these question we briefly review the One Planet concept
as framed by WWF; some of the literature on mindsets and sustainable
business; and draw on research with MBA students.
Background
A One Planet perspective
WWF, the worlds leading conservation NGO, has developed several One
Planet initiatives over the last 13 years. The inspiration for and scientific
underpinnings of its One Planet approach are derived from WWFs Living
Planet Report, one of the worlds leading science-based analyses on the health
of the planet, which has been published every two years since 1998.
These indicate that worldwide we need 1.5 planets to regenerate
the natural resources we currently use: for example, we are
harvesting more fish than the oceans can replenish and emitting
more carbon into the atmosphere than the forests and oceans can
absorb. However, WWF claims that it is not too late to change
course, and that we do have the capacity to create a prosperous
future that provides food, water and energy for the 910
billion people who are expected to share the planet in 2050, but only if all
stakeholdersgovernments, companies, communities, citizensstep up to
this challenge (WWF 2012).
worldwide we need
1.5 planets to
regenerate the
natural resources
we currently use
WWFs work draws on and is corroborated by a wealth of other evidencebased analyses on the state of the planet, including the work of the Global
Footprint Network; the Zoological Society of London; UNEPs Global
Environmental Outlook (GEO) reports; the Stockholm Resilience Centre
58
26/03/15 6:24 PM
exploring a one planet mindset and its relevance in a transition to a sustainable economy
and its research on planetary boundaries (Rockstrom et al. 2010) among

others. While WWF has a particular expertise in framing the environmental
sustainability challenges, other organisations spell out the global social and
economic risks more explicitly.
The World Economic Forum, for example, put income disparity and
unemployment and underemployment in their top five global risks to the
economy in their 2014 Global Risks Register. Oxfam (2013) reports that 1% of
the population owns almost half the worlds wealth. Seven out of ten people
live in countries where economic inequality has increased in the last 30
years. They claim that the growing divide between the haves and have-nots is
unethical, socially divisive, politically corrosive, ecologically damaging, and
actually damages economic growth in the long term.
In relation to economic challenges, Korten (2010) claims that our current
economic system is unstable and driving boom and bust cycles, creating
debt and holding governments hostage to financiers. He asserts that we have
created a financial sector that favours speculation and phantom
wealth over real investment. Sukhdev (2012) also points out our
our economy is
subsidy and fiscal regimes support business-as-usual. Some US$1
trillion per annum are spent on perverse subsidies which support unsustainable,
the old fossil-fuel based, throw-away economy, and thwart efforts unfair, unstable and
to build a new sustainable one. is making us
unhappy
Stuart Wallis (2011) succinctly sums it up as 4 Us: our economy
is unsustainable, unfair, unstable and is making us unhappy;
and we need a transition to an economy which is socially just and WWFs One Planet
maximises wellbeing within environmental limits. Perspective
articulates five key
WWFs One Planet Perspective (2012:106) articulates five key
policy dimensions and priority action points intended to inform policy dimensions
better choices for a living planet: 1) preserve natural capital; 2) and priority action
produce better; 3) consume more wisely; 4) redirect financial flows; points intended to
and 5) govern resources equitably. Its One Planet Perspective inform better
underpins a range of solution-oriented One Planet initiatives that choices for a living
have been developed over the last 13 years (see Appendix 1). These planet
have several features in common:
tt The
idea that we only have one planets worth of resources to provide for
a rapidly growing population
tt A
critique of the existing economic system which relies on fossil fuels,

and on unsustainable take-make-waste production and consumption
systems
tt Positive
solutions, through its One Planet initiatives, which offer

inspiring ideas about how to create more sustainable futures
tt A
perspective that addresses the interdependent environmental, social

and economic dimensions of sustainability challenges
59
26/03/15 6:24 PM
tt Management
decisions that support ecosystem integrity and pro-poor

growth and development
tt The idea that sustainability challenges can be transformed into

commercial opportunities and that business and industry can be a
positive force for good
tt The
need to work with multiple stakeholders including governments,

business and communities to co-create solutions at a system-level
tt An
underlying narrative that as living beings, we are dependent on a

living planet, and that the health of the planet is fundamental to the
economy
WWFs framing of a One Planet Perspective provides an important basis for

our discussion of One Planet Mindsets within the context of the One Planet
MBA. But we are also interested in how the programme and students are
co-creating a One Planet Mindset as the MBA adapts and evolves over time.
The significance of mindsets

What is a mindset, and why are we interested in them in the context of
developing sustainable businesses and the transition (albeit contested) to a
sustainable economy?
60
26/03/15 6:24 PM
People define mindsets in various ways. For example, Meadows

(1999) describes mindsets as the shared ideas in the mind of
society; the deepest set of beliefs about how the world works, or
shared social agreements about the nature of reality. Mindsets
give rise to systems which structure our societies and economies.
Mindsets such as one can own land or nature is a stock of
resources to be converted to human purposes, or growth is good
may be taken for granted by some societies, but may completely
dumbfound others. Korten (2014) describes similar elements as
stories and argues that human beings live by shared cultural
stories: They are the lens through which we view reality. They
shape what we most value as a society and the institutions by
which we structure power.
Meadows (1999:18) claims that change agents who have managed
to intervene in a system at the level of mindsets or paradigms have
hit a leverage point that totally transforms those systems. (The
concepts of mindset and paradigm are used interchangeably in
Meadows 1999 paper.) Changing mindsets is considered more
powerful than changing other things in a system such as rules,
incentives or infrastructures. Mindsets are often considered
harder to change than anything else in the system, and their
role is therefore ignored or undervalued. Society tends to resist
Meadows describes
mindsets as the
shared ideas in the
mind of society; the
deepest set of
beliefs about how
the world works
change agents who

have managed to
intervene in a
system at the level
of mindsets or
paradigms have hit
a leverage point
that totally
transforms those
systems
61
26/03/15 6:24 PM
challenges to its paradigms harder than it resists anything else; but in a single
individual changes can happen in a split second: a falling of scales from the
eyes, a new way of seeing (Meadows 1999:18).
To so many thought leaders and writers, our current economic and
business mindsets are based on outdated paradigms of economic
thought; and these are driving us towards social, environmental
and economic collapse (Korten, 2001; Bakan, 2003; Porritt, 2007;
Haque 2011). There are a growing number of initiatives helping to
define what a new sustainable economy might look like, and how
governments, businesses and communities need to work together
for systems change (Jackson, 2009; Generation, 2012; Elkington,
2012; Mackey and Sisodia, 2013; Scharmer & Kaufer, 2013;
Townsend and Zarnett, 2013). Acknowledging the work of many
pioneering leaders, Townsend and Zarnett (2013) have developed an initial
synthesis of nine design principles underpinning a sustainable economy:
our current
economic and
business mindsets
are based on
outdated paradigms
of economic
thought
1. Less growth, more wellbeing

2. A broader view of what capital means
3. Based on responsible enterprise, adding real value, where it is needed
4. Holistic systems thinking; aligned with the circular economy
5. Enabled by a well-functioning money system
6. Away from speculative bubbles, towards creating longer-term real wealth
7. Shared ownership and distribution of resources and wealth
8. Based on collaboration and striving together
9. Founded on new institutions and greater systemic resilience
A transition to a sustainable economy has risks and opportunities for
business. Among other things we need to reform markets to address real
needs of all stakeholders; reduce waste and costs, and create new jobs; reform
company reporting; redesign incentive structures to encourage long-term
behaviour; create new forms of share and ownership structures; and redirect
investments. Additionally, Scharmer & Kaufer (2013) argue that we need to
transform ourselves as part of this process, to make a shift from ego-system
to eco-system economies. This involves changing the inner place from which
we operate in order to transcend old mindsets and open up to new ones.
Managerial mindsets
How can a new generation of business leaders open up to new possibilities
and learn to manage themselves, their organisations and relationships in the
context of transition to a sustainable economy?
62
26/03/15 6:24 PM
While Gosling and Mintzberg (2003) do not locate their work

within the context of a shift to a sustainable economy, we argue Five Managerial
that their work on managerial mindsets is relevant to managing Mindsets need to be
such a transition. They claim that Five Managerial Mindsets integrated in
need to be integrated in effective management practices. This effective
integration evolves from weaving together reflection on action management
in various domains, relating to self, organisations, contexts, practices
relationships and change. These might be considered as attitudes
which open up space for new possibilities to emerge.
tt Reflective
mind-set: managing self. This emphasises developing meaning

from reflection on ones own experiences as a manager. Reflection might
be considered the suspended space between where the manager has had
an experience and the explanation for it, where an individual is able to
make connections, including possible future options. Organisations need
people who are capable of seeing beyond their own personal behaviour or
immediate situations, and see the world around them
tt Analytical
mind-set: managing organisations. Organisations are complex

systems of people, physical assets, techniques, and structures and
which require an analytic mindset and approach to solving problems.
But managing organisations going beyond the superficialities of data
and analysis, to understanding the deeper meanings of structures and
systems. Complex decision-making involves more than dealing with
quantitative data; it requires understanding qualitative (soft) data and the
nuances underlying them, such as values
tt Worldly
mind-set: managing context. An important distinction is made

between the words globalisation and worldly. The former involves
perceiving the world from a distance, while the latter delves into the
cultures, habits and customs of peoples living near and far. Effective
organisations manage to create both a global and worldly view within
their operations, while less successful ones tend to reflect the cultures
of the home office managers. Developing worldly perspective involves
responding to specific conditions.
tt Collaborative mind-set: managing relationships. This involves

understanding and managing the relationships between people, rather
than managing the people themselves. A collaborative mindset entails
transcending the heroic style of leadership, and the conventional belief
that managers must bestow their blessing upon their staff. Rather it
is leadership in the background, building commitment among people
through engagement with them, and encouraging dispersed forms of
leadership
tt Action
mind-set: managing change. Many managerial skills are needed

to move an organisation in a new direction, and to maintain its course.
It involves coordinating the aspirations and energies of others and
encouraging them towards a common vision; and understanding the
63
26/03/15 6:24 PM
landscape in which people are working and collaborating. Managers

must know which things need to be changed and which ones must be
maintained. Carefully planned action and reflection are both required and
need to be integrated
Graham-Rowe (2011) reflects whether good business skills and sustainability
skills are increasingly the same thing, and says that it is not entirely clear how
sustainability skills differ from the skills you would expect any competent
business leader to possess. Perks (cited in Graham-Rowe 2011), however,
argues that: Sustainability adds context. You can be a good leader but if you
dont have a view of where the world is heading then you wont have the skills
to make your business succeed.
Transition to a sustainable economy

What kinds of knowledge, values and sustainability skills are required by a
new generation of business leaders in building sustainable businesses and
making a transition to a sustainable economy? The literature in this area is
vast, and we can only touch on a few key points.
Knowledge
John Elkington (1999), in his book Cannibals with Forks, was one of the first
thinkers to bring concepts of sustainability into business management,
by defining the significance of the triple bottom line to business. This
emphasises social, environmental and economic dimensions of corporate
performance, instead of an exclusive focus on the financial bottom line.
These are also sometimes described as the three Ps: People, Planet and Profit;
or the 3 Es: Equity, Ecology and Economy, and have become an influential
concept in business thinking and practice.
Triple bottom line thinking implies that business leaders require
new types of knowledge and ways of thinking to be effective.
UNEP (2013) points out that sustainability challenges have
significant implications for reorienting strategy, leadership,
governance, supply chains, operations, financing, reporting and
reputation, as resources become scarcer, prices increase, and
government regulations get stricter. Adams et al. (2012) explore
how sustainability is driving innovation in business, across
products, processes, organisations, and systems; while Volans
(2013) outlines how business is creating breakthrough solutions in tackling
the worlds greatest environmental, social and governance challenges, and
shaping new forms of capitalism.
Triple bottom line

thinking implies that
business leaders
require new types of
knowledge and ways
of thinking to be
effective
These all suggest that a new generation of business leaders will require a
much broader knowledge of the role of business in society, of the interlinked
sustainability challenges and how to transform these into business
64
26/03/15 6:24 PM
opportunities. It will require a shift from silo to systems thinking, and an

ability to link knowledge from different domains. For example, they will
require a knowledge of living planetary systems and their boundaries, such
as the carbon, water and nitrogen cycles, and how business operations
interact with them (Whiteman et al. 2012); ways to value the contribution
of natural capital (UNEP 2011); and knowledge about social challenges
and how to create healthy, vibrant communities (Strandberg 2014). They
require familiarity with innovative business models which are transforming
how corporations operate, such as the circular economy (Ellen MacArthur
Foundation 2011), the sharing economy (Botsman and Rogers 2010), and the
green economy (UNEP 2011), and how to create shared value propositions
(Porter and Kramer 2011).
Values
In his book, The Sustainable Self, Paul Murray (2011) highlights the critical
role of the personal dimensions of sustainability as well as the professional
ones. He puts personal motivations, values, attitudes and beliefs centrestage and emphasises the relationship between personal core values and
sustainability values, and how these influence our potential to deliver change.
Murrays work draws on deeper psychological understandings of values.
Schwartz (1992), for example, defines a value as: a desirable trans-situational
goal varying in importance, which serves as a guiding principle in the
life of a person or other social entity (p. 21). In their theory of universal
content and structure of values Schwartz and Bilski (1990) identified value
orientations. These are dened as clusters of compatible values or value
types. Research has found a relationship between certain value orientations
and pro-environmental attitudes and behaviour (Hansla et al. 2008) as well as
corporate social responsibility (CSR) (Potocan & Nedelko, 2014). For example,
self-transcendence values (valuing and caring for all people and nature) have
been found to be positively related to pro-environmental and CSR attitudes
and behaviour, whereas self-enhancing values (concerned with
power and achievement) have been shown to be negatively related
to pro-environmental and CSR attitudes and behaviour. we are also
interested in the role
In our framing of One Planet Mindsets, then, we are also of personal values,
interested in the role of personal values, and how these motivate and how these
behaviour. These represent an important sensibility towards nature motivate behaviour
and people that is not captured by technical knowledge alone.
Skills
Graham-Rowe (2011) claims that the task of ensuring that business leaders
have the skills they need to take their companies forwards into a new
economy is one of the most pressing challenges that businesses are likely to
face over the next five years.
65
26/03/15 6:24 PM
However, the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment

(IEMA) (2014) report that many organisations are asleep at the wheel
when it comes to developing the skills and capabilities needed to address
sustainability challenges, which would enable them to survive and stay
competitive. For example, 82% of organisations surveyed by IEMA say that
their procurement staff are not capable of contributing to their environmental
and sustainability agendas. Asda recently launched its resilience plan after
research revealed that an estimated 95% of all the fresh produce on its
shelves is at risk from climate change.
Leaders and
managers need
skills-training in
how to integrate
sustainability into
long-term decision
making, throughout
their organisations
and value chains
Leaders and managers need skills-training in how to integrate

sustainability into long-term decision making, throughout their
organisations and value chains. Skills-training is also required
to help businesses adapt manufacturing processes and service
delivery to cope with supply volatility and to work towards a
circular economy (IEMA 2014). Business in the Community
(2010) outline leadership skills such as the ability to develop
long-term vision, to inspire, empower, collaborate, innovate, and
communicate; while other research highlights the skills needed
to embed sustainability within organisational cultures (Bertels,
2010); and collaborative partnerships to unlock a new wave of
innovation for sustainability (Gray and Stites, 2013).
IEMA (2011) has developed a skills map which identifies the types of
knowledge, analytical thinking, communications, sustainable practices, and
leadership for change required by business in a transition to a sustainable
economy, relevant to actors fulfilling different roles in organisations. They
claim that employing people with the right skills, knowledge and expertise
could save UK businesses 55 billion a year, through energy and resource
savings.
Towards a One Planet Mindset

This paper explores how One Planet Mindsets are developed and articulated
in the context of the One Planet MBA, in the Business School, University
of Exeter, United Kingdom. (For more information on the origins and
description of the OP MBA see Appendix 2.)
As described on its website, the One Planet MBA was founded in
collaboration with WWF International in 2011, and aims to develop a new
generation of business leaders equipped with the knowledge, skills and
understanding required to create, build and develop sustainable, profitable
businesses capable of succeeding in a fast changing international business
landscape. It recognises that environmental, social and financial changes
66
26/03/15 6:24 PM
are challenging traditional business models, and that tomorrows business

leaders across the globe must recognise and embrace these challenges and be
capable of developing more sustainable business practices and processes.
As a preliminary exploration of the One Planet Mindset among One Planet
MBA students we looked at two things:
tt The
knowledge that they independently seek to generate and develop

during their dissertations. This will indicate that on top of the material
delivered to them, students actively seek to generate knowledge relevant
to building sustainable businesses and the transition to a sustainable
economy
tt Whether
their self-transcendence values overcompensate for their selfenhancement values. As noted above, self-transcendence values are
strongly related with pro-environmental and pro-social behaviours and
indicate sensibilities associated with sustainability values
Knowledge
We reviewed the titles and objectives of 117 dissertation and consultancy
reports researched by full-time and executive students between 2011 and
2014. We tracked the use of the word sustainability in the titles or objectives,
and the use of at least two of the three dimensions of sustainability
(environmental, social or economic) in their work. Dissertation titles reflect
topics of interest to the students while consultancy projects are largely framed
by corporate partners, with some input from students.
A review of 117 dissertation and consultancy projects undertaken
by One Planet MBA students between 2011 and 2014 indicate
that 59% of their independent projects addressed a sustainability
theme explicitly.
A review of 117
dissertation and
consultancy
projects undertaken
by One Planet MBA
students between
2011 and 2014
indicate that 59% of
their independent
projects addressed
a sustainability
theme explicitly
Original and groundbreaking work has been undertaken on

subjects such as: happiness and wellbeing and new business
metrics; the circular economy; stakeholder engagement; shared
value; materiality analyses; sustainable supply chain analyses;
servisation (shifting from delivering products to delivering services);
sustainable finance; youth leadership for sustainability; net positive
impact; sustainable tourism; sustainable soil management;
sustainable marketing and communications; food waste; waste
management; business models which scale sustainable practices;
biomimicry for business; renewable energies; green economy;
sustainability and human resources; storytelling and sustainability, among
many others. The dissertations and reports undertaken by One Planet MBA
students suggest that they are generating knowledge relevant to a transition to
a sustainable economy.
67
26/03/15 6:24 PM
Values
To explore the value orientations of the OP MBA students we draw on both
quantitative and class discussions.
In the quantitative research we were interested to explore whether OP MBAs
have higher self-transcendent values than self-enhancement values. The
sample was composed of 24 students, and the data was collected 8 weeks
after they started the programme. We used a short version of the Schwartz
(1994) value scale.
the value
orientations of OP
MBA students
would support the
pro-environmental
and pro-social
attitudes and
behaviours
Results show how self-transcendent values (M = 8.98, SD = 1.60)

were significantly higher than self-enhancement values (M = 7.54,
SD = 1.62), t(24) = 2.75, p = 0.01. These results suggest that the
value orientations of OP MBA students would support the proenvironmental and pro-social attitudes and behaviours.
Informal but structured class discussions on the values, knowledge

and skills required for a transition to a sustainable economy have
also been a feature of modules taught in the OP MBA as well
several delivered on the MBA in Responsible Management in
Audencia School of Management in Nantes, France. Discussions
have been held with international cohorts of 3040 students in both
locations. Several sets of class contributions were recorded, and incorporated
in Table 1.
Framing a One Planet Mindset

Combining knowledge from the literature, research and explorations with
students we offer a preliminary framework for understanding the
features of a One Planet Mindset. We present values, knowledge
We present values,
and skills against the triple bottom line of People, Planet and
knowledge and
Prosperity.
We have replaced the original framing of P for Profit
skills against the
with
P
for Prosperity, to reflect evolving ideas of wealth and
triple bottom line of
wellbeing, which do not preclude financial profit, but have a more
People, Planet and
nuanced understanding of what constitutes prosperity (Jackson
Prosperity
2009).
68
26/03/15 6:24 PM
Table 1 Framing a One Planet Mindset

Planet
People
Prosperity
Values
Respect for all life
Social justice
Profit, Wealth,
Wellbeing
Knowledge
Challenges:
Challenges:
Challenges:
of challenges &
new models
e.g. Carbon
e.g. Population &

consumption
e.g. Unsustainable
growth
Equality & rights
Externalities
Work conditions
Fiscal regimes
Access
Subsidies
New Models: e.g.

Circular economy
New Models: e.g.

Sharing economy
New Models: e.g.

Green economy
Relatedness to
nature
Authentic
leadership
Commercial
Awareness
Long term vision
Listening
Integrity
Global & local

perspectives
Inspiring change
Responsibility
Biodiversity
Water
Resources
Waste
Planetaryboundaries
Personal and
professional skills
Systems thinking
Smart data &
analytical skills
Global and worldly SustainabilityRelationship skills oriented

innovation (SOI)
Influencing skills
New business
Collaborative
models
Stakeholder
New funding
management
models
Triple bottom line
accounting skills
Conclusion: building a sustainable legacy

In conclusion we will reflect on the two questions posed at the beginning of
the paper, and offer a few thoughts on further research.
What is a One Planet Mindset?

We propose that the One Planet Mindset can be understood as a new
umbrella concept, or leitmotif; one that aggregates the reflective managerial
mindsets already developed with the specific knowledge, value orientations
and skills required for a transition to a sustainable economy. We have
69
26/03/15 6:24 PM
suggested a preliminary framework that integrates values, knowledge and

skills with the sustainability issues of people, planet and prosperity. As Bogue
remarked in 1994: We need leaders with concepts in their heads, convictions
in their hearts and caring in their hands.
In relation to values, preliminary research suggests that the One Planet
Mindset appeals to change agents with intrinsic and self-transcendent
values (sensibility towards life, nature and people) which motivate proenvironmental and pro-social attitudes and behaviours. In relation to
knowledge, we argue that a One Planet Mindset implies a critique of many
of the assumptions of the existing economic system, and supports the
development of innovative business and economic models with positive
impacts for planet, people and prosperity, through new articulations of
leadership, strategy, operations, capital, finance, governance, and metrics. In
relation to skills and behaviours, a One Planet Mindset prioritises attributes
required for transforming self, business and society (e.g. ethical, long-term
vision, holistic, collaborative, globally minded, innovative, reflective, etc.).
Why is it significant in a transition to a sustainable economy?

Following Meadows (1999) we maintain that mindsets embed our
deepest beliefs and assumptions about the world and frame what
is considered worthy and valuable. Although mindsets are invisible
and intangible, they influence our attitudes, values, knowledge
and behaviours, which shape our societies and economies.
When mindsets shift we see and value new things and behave in
different ways. The focus on fostering new mindsets highlights
a powerful lever of systems change. It also draws attention to some of the
inner dimensions of social change in the transition, critical to a sustainable
economy.
When mindsets
shift we see and
value new things
and behave in
different ways
So far we have argued that a One Planet Mindset addresses and integrates the
kind of knowledge, values and skills required by a new generation of business
leaders to guide a transition to a sustainable economy which implies different
goals, values, models, skills, power structures and measures of success.
But, perhaps a more profound answer to the question of why a One Planet
Mindset is significant in a transition to a sustainable economy is
A One Planet
that it engages a new metaphor of nature: not nature as a machine,
Mindset thus
or set of resources (that business is increasingly worried about in a
represents a new
complex and resource-constrained world), but as something alive,
sensibility towards
as a set of inter-connected and self-organising planetary systems
nature. It
with limits.
re-connects us and
As living beings we are dependent on these life-supporting
re-grounds us in a
systems for the air we breathe, the water we drink and the soil we
living planet
grow our crops in. The health of the economy is rooted in, and not
70
26/03/15 6:24 PM
independent of them. A One Planet Mindset thus represents a new sensibility

towards nature. It re-connects us and re-grounds us in a living planet. It
recognises that while we cannot change the laws of nature, we can learn to
live within natures budget, and work with the grain of life. This, we propose,
contributes a potentially powerful and transformative new mindset through
which to do business and build a sustainable economy.
Future research
The ideas presented in this paper prompt further questions, such as the
role of educational programmes in supporting and fostering such mindsets
among a new generation of business leaders; the challenges of taking a
sustainable business and economy agenda forward; and the relevance of
working on the inner dimensions of social change.
Our observations suggest that educational programmes, such as Exeters One
Planet MBA, have important roles to play in helping develop such mindsets.
They do this by integrating sustainability across the curricula, rather than
treating it as a bolt on module; developing innovative pedagogies which
promote experiential learning, opportunities for personal reflection and
collective reflection and transformation; and by encouraging multicultural
and multi-stakeholder engagement. But we need to learn more about how
such programmes are transformed and delivered, and their impacts on
students to understand how they foster new ways of thinking and acting.
In this paper we have also mentioned the idea of a contested transition
to a sustainable economy. There are clearly challenges in developing new
mindsets, and in taking a sustainable economy agenda forward. Society clings
to ideologies and resists changing mindsets more strongly than anything
else. New business and economic models profoundly challenge existing
belief systems, power structures, and vested economic interests. We need
to understand the transition through a political lens, as much as through
economic, technical or social ones, and much more research on the politics of
the transition is required.
The focus on mindsets also helps underline the importance of the inner
dimensions of social change, and the role of personal transformation as part
of the transition process. Meadows (1999:19) talks about a further and even
more powerful lever of systems change, which is the capacity to transcend
mindsets altogether, if only for a moment, to let go into not knowing and
to open up the spacious possibility of choosing new mindsets. It is in this
space of mastery over mindsets that people throw off addictions and bring
down empires and have impacts that last for millennia. Understanding
the role of mindfulness practices will be another fertile area of research in
understanding the transformation of self, business and society.
71
26/03/15 6:24 PM
References
Adams, R., Jeanrenaud, S., Bessant, J., Overy, P., Denyer, D. (2012): Innovating for
Sustainability: A Systematic Review of the Knowledge. NBS, Canada.
Bakan, J. (2003): The Corporation. A Documentary
Bertels, S., Papania, L., and Papania, D. (2010): Embedding Sustainability in Organizational
Culture. A Systematic Review of the Body of Knowledge. Canada: Network for Business
Sustainability (NBS).
Bogue, E. G. (1994). Leadership by Design: Strengthening Integrity in Higher Education.
Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. Jossey-Bass Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Botsman, R. & Rogers, R. (2010): Whats Mine is Yours. The Rise of Collaborative
Consumption. New York: Harper Collins.
Business in the Community (2010): Leadership Skills for a Sustainable Economy. http://
www.bitc.org.uk/our-resources/report/leadership-skills-sustainable-economy (accessed
4/1/15).
Elkington, J. (1999): Cannibals with Forks. The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business.
Oxford: Capstone.
Elkington, J. (2012): Zeronauts: Breaking the Sustainability Barrier. London: Routledge.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2011): Towards the Circular Economy. Economic and business
rationale for an accelerated transition. Ellen Macarthur Foundation.
Generation (2012): Sustainable Capitalism. London: Generation Investment Management
LLP. https://www.generationim.com/media/pdf-generation-sustainable-capitalism-v1
.pdf (accessed 4/1/15).
Gosling, J. and Mintzerberg (2003): The Five Minds of a Manager. Harvard Business Review.
Graham-Rowe, D. (2011): Sustainability skills and good business skills are increasingly
the same thing. Guardian Sustainable Business Blog. http://www.theguardian.com/
sustainable-business/blog/sustainability-skills-business-skills-same (Accessed 4/1/15).
Gray, B. & Stites, J. (2013): Sustainability through Partnerships. Capitalizing on Collaboration.
A Systematic Review of the Body of Knowledge. Canada: Network for Business
Sustainability (NBS).
Hansla, A., Gamble, A., Juliusson, A., Grling, T. (2008). The relationships between
awareness of consequences, environmental concern, and value orientations. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 28, 1-9.
Haque, U. (2011): New Capitalist Manifesto. Building a Disruptively Better Business, Harvard
Business Press.
IEMA (2011): Skills Map http://www.iema.net/skills (accessed 4/1/15).
IEMA (2014): Preparing for the Perfect Storm. Skills for a Sustainable Economy. Institute for
Environmental Management and Assessment.
Jackson, T. (2009): Prosperity without Growth. Economics for a Finite Planet. London:
Earthscan.
72
26/03/15 6:24 PM
Korten, D.C (2001): When Corporations Rule the World. USA: Kumarian Press, and
Berrett-Koehler.
Korten, D.C. (2010): Agenda for a New Economy. From Phantom Wealth to Real Wealth.
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. San Francisco.
Korten, D.C. (forthcoming 2015): Change the Story, Change the Future. A Living Economy for
a Living Earth. A Report to the Club of Rome. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Mackey, J. and Sisodia, R. (2013): Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of
Business. Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation.
Meadows, D. (1999): Leverage Points. Places to Intervene in a System. The Sustainability
Institute.
Murray, A. (2011): The Sustainable Self. London: Earthscan.
Porritt, J. (2007): Capitalism as if the World Matters. Oxon: Earthscan.
Porter, M. & Kramer, P. (2011): Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review. January February 2011.
Potocan, V. and Nedelko, Z. (2014), A New Socio-economic Order: Evidence About
Employees Values Influence on Corporate Social Responsibility. Syst. Res.
doi:10.1002/sres.2264.
Oxfam (2013): The cost of inequality: how wealth and income extremes hurt us all. Oxfam
Media Briefing. Ref 02/13 http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/cost-ofinequality-oxfam-mb180113.pdf (accessed 4/1/15).
Rockstrm, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, A., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E., Lenton, T.,
Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H.J., Nykvist, B., de Wit, C.A., Hughes, T.,
van der Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., Srlin, S., Snyder, P.K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U.,
Falkenmark, M., Karlberg, L., Corell, R.W., Fabry, V.J., Hansen, J., Walker, B.,
Liverman, D., Richardson, K., Crutzen. P., Foley, J.A. (2010): A Safe Operating Space
for Humanity. Nature 461, 472-475.
Scharmer, O. and Kaufer, K. (2013): Leading from the Emerging Future. From Ego-System to
Eco-System Economies. Applying Theory U to Transforming Business, Society and Self. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical
advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in
experimental social psychology, Vol. 25 (pp. 165). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of
human values? Journals of Social Issues, 50(4), 1945.
Schwartz, S. H.,Wolfgang, B. (1990) Toward a theory of the universal content and
structure of values: Extensions and cross-cultural replications. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 58, 878-891.
Strandberg, C. (2014): Social Value Business Guide. http://corostrandberg.com/wp-content/
uploads/2014/09/business-guide-to-social-value-creation-2014.pdf (accessed 4/1/15).
Sukhdev, P. (2012): Corporation 2020. Transforming Business for Tomorrows World.
Washington DC: Island Press.
73
26/03/15 6:24 PM
Townsend, M. & Zarnett, B. (2013): A Journey in Search of Capitalism 2.0.

Earthshine & Toronto Sustainability Speaker Series. http://www.earthshinesolutions.com/
docs/A-Journey-in-Search-of-CAP2_Clean-Slate_Oct_2013.pdf (accessed 16/1/15).
Volans, (2013): Breakthrough. Business Leaders, Market Revolutions. London: Volans.
Wallis, S. (2011): The Four Horsemen of Economics. YaleGlobal Online http://yaleglobal.
yale.edu/content/four-horsemen-economics (accessed 4/1/15).
Whiteman, G., Walker, B., Perego, P. (2013): Planetary Boundaries: Ecological Foundations
for Corporate Sustainability. Journal of Management Studies. 50, 307-336.
World Economic Forum (2014): Global Risks 2014. Ninth Edition. Insight Report. http://
www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GlobalRisks_Report_2014.pdf (accessed 4/1/15).
WWF (2012): Living Planet Report 2012. Biodiversity, biocapacity and better choices. Gland,
Switzerland: WWF International.
WWF (2014): Living Planet Report 2014. Species and Spaces, People and Places. Gland,
Switzerland: WWF International
UNEP (2010): Towards a Green Economy. Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty
Eradication. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme.
UNEP (2013): GEO-5 for Business. Impacts of a Changing Environment on the Corporate
Sector. United Nations Environment Programme.
74
26/03/15 6:24 PM
Appendix 1: the One Planet brand

Working with business, governments, communities and other organisations,
WWF has developed a number of solutions-oriented (and trademarked)
One Planet initiatives since 2002 to address the sustainability challenges.
Amongst others these include:
tt 2002
One Planet Living. Founded with BioRegional which provides ten

One Planet Living Principles to create easy, attractive, affordable lifestyles
for an average person to live sustainably
tt 2007
One Planet Leaders. A training course run jointly with IMD in

Switzerland from 2010, designed to inspire and equip leaders to drive
change and build businesses that reduce footprint and create value for
people and planet
tt 2007
One Planet Business. A system-change network with multiple

stakeholders to develop workable solutions to issues such as mobility,
food, housing, recognising that business can be a major driver in helping
to shape a sustainable global economy
tt 2007
One Planet Food. Aims to reduce the global environmental and

social impacts of food production and consumption, and works with
business and governments
tt 2009
One Planet Economy. A two-year EU FP7 funded project focused

on developing a footprint family of indicators (ecological, carbon and
water) to track the demands of human consumption on the planet
tt 2010
One Planet MBA. Run jointly with the Business School, University
of Exeter, UK aims to embed sustainability across the entire MBA
curriculum
WWF (2012: 106) has outlined a One Planet Perspective which highlights
five key dimensions and 16 priority policy actions aimed to increase positive
environmental, social and economic benefits:
1. Preserve natural capital.Significantly expand protected areas; halt the loss
of priority habitats, restore damaged ecosystems
2. Produce better. Reduce inputs and waste in production systems; manage
resources sustainably, scale-up renewable energy production
3. Consume more wisely. Change energy consumption patterns;
promote healthy consumption patterns; achieve low-footprint lifestyles
4. Redirect financial flows. Value nature; account for environmental
and social costs; support and reward conservation, sustainable resource
management and innovation
75
26/03/15 6:24 PM
5. Govern resources equitably. Share available resources; make fair and

ecologically informed choices; measure success beyond GDP; sustainable
population
Appendix 2: short history on the origins of the One Planet

MBA
Aims
The aim of the OP MBA is to develop a new generation of business leaders
equipped with the knowledge, skills and understanding required to create,
build and develop sustainable, profitable businesses capable of succeeding
in a fast changing international business landscape. It recognises that
environmental, social and financial changes are challenging traditional
business models, and that tomorrows business leaders across the globe must
recognise and embrace these challenges and be capable of developing more
sustainable business practices and processes.
One of the informing ideas of the OP MBA is that sustainability is
mainstreamed into every MBA subject area, rather than treated as a separate
or bolt on sustainability module. Sustainability is understood to embrace
environmental, social and economic challenges (rather than being considered
a green topic), and to provide a context, which stimulates innovative
and smart business models and solutions. Thus (to varying degrees) the
sustainability thread runs through and provides context for all its core and
elective modules: strategy, leadership, economics, innovation, supply chain,
operations, marketing, financing, and reporting, etc. It is also a programme
that supports participants seeking personal transformation and systemic
transformation.
History
The Business School, University of Exeter and WWF International have a
five year partnership to deliver the One Planet MBA (20112016), giving the
University of Exeter the exclusive right to use the One Planet MBA brand
within the UK during this time. The original concept note for the One Planet
MBA was developed in 2009, and the development of the programme
commenced in 2010 with an innovation cohort.
The history of the One Planet MBA is rooted in WWFs former One Planet
Leaders (OPL) programme, which offered a five-day training course for
76
26/03/15 6:24 PM
business executives, which ran between 2007 and 2013 in Switzerland (and
run in collaboration with IMD from 2010). This programme aimed to inspire
and enable managers to innovate at strategic and operational levels based on
an understanding of sustainability issues. It, in turn, evolved out of WWFs
bespoke in-house training programmes with companies such as Nokia, who
continued to provide support to the wider international initiative.
By the end of 2009 WWFs OPL programme had already graduated over 100
participants from companies such as Nokia, Canon, Lloyds TSB, Unilever
and Shell among others. It had also already developed an association
with the Business School and initially with the Department of Geography
at the University of Exeter, which provided speakers on the course, and
accreditation for its OPL programme. By that time WWF was learning that it
was successfully engaging and inspiring leaders to change practices within
their companies. Companies were sending people onto the programme on a
regular basis demonstrating their satisfaction with the course; and the alumni
were becoming an enthusiastic and active lobby group for change both within
and outside their organisations.
However, WWF also recognised that its OPL format made it hard to reach
large numbers of business leaders, and to cover every relevant business
subject. It thus developed ambitions to scale up the impact of this initiative,
and steps were taken in 2009 to develop a flagship One Planet MBA with
the Business School, University of Exeter to attempt to influence a radical
transformation of MBA curricula.
The title One Planet MBA was specifically chosen to make a statement, and to
make explicit a fundamental assumption that we only have one planets worth
of resources to provide for over 7 billion people. Increasing resource scarcities
and growing social inequalities made it imperative that business people
were educated in a manner that was different from the past. It was seen as
an opportunity to leverage the relationship with WWF International and its
business partners, to develop a distinctive and innovative educational model
that helped transform educational paradigms, priorities and pedagogies.
In 2011 co-founder Jean-Paul Jeanrenaud from WWF International (2011)
said:
Most MBAs are really geared towards training future leaders who will measure
business success in terms of profitability and maximizing shareholder value.
The One Planet MBA is attempting to change this business culture from the
inside out; not by teaching different skills about how to run a business, but more
through a shift in mindset. It starts from the standpoint and recognition that
business-as-usual is neither desirable nor feasible long-term. Money per se is not
evil, but it has to be directed to serve the wider good of humanity and the planet.
77
26/03/15 6:24 PM
Transforming the programme

A strategic decision was made to reform Exeters former MBA programme,
rather than add an additional OP MBA. The module descriptors and module
handbooks for each module of the MBA were reviewed, new learning
outcomes added, new materials and reading lists developed. The MBA
was launched in 2010 with a co-innovation year after several months of
relationship building, staff recruitment and curriculum development.
The Dean of the Business School continues to be important champion of
the new programme at the start of the process, and supported its progress
with the School, and University. A new Director of the One Planet MBA
was recruited at the outset, to manage the transition from the old to new
programme, including managing relationships with existing faculty. The OP
MBA is delivered in collaboration with WWF International, and WWF staff
teach on several of its modules, which brings credibility to the programme
on environmental and many business innovation issues. It is apparent that
the transformation of an existing programme requires a core group of faculty
who buy into the changes and who help support it politically within the
School.
The development of the OP MBA has required some new staff recruitment,
and often involves bringing in specialists to help support the teaching of
subjects, with a knowledge of sustainability issues. Many existing faculty have
been willing to adapt their materials and approaches, and have also learned
on the job, by selecting new case materials, undertaking new research
projects, setting sustainability-oriented assignments for the students.
Partnerships with business

The Business School and WWF have both had a long history of working
with business which has generated a wealth of knowledge and associations
with the corporate sector. WWF has been instrumental in founding
international sustainability market initiatives such as the Forest Stewardship
Council (FSC), Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) and the Roundtable on
Responsible Palm Oil (RSPO) with over 1,600 business and other partners.
It has worked on many transformational and challenge partnerships over
the years, with Lafarge, Nokia, Coca Cola, Unilever, IKEA, etc. It is involved
in working with companies to reduce CO2 emissions and toxic pollution, to
conserve biodiversity, transform supply chains, operations, and purchasing
decisions, and to govern resources better. The partnership with WWF also
gives the Business School access to companies in China working on climate
change initiatives through the WWF Climate Savers Network.
The OP MBA has developed relationships with 10 sponsorship companies:
Coca Cola Enterprises, IBM, Lafarge, Thomson Reuters, Nokia, Canon, The
78
26/03/15 6:24 PM
Co-Operative Group, IKEA, Lloyds Bank Group, and Atos. Several of these
corporate connections developed out of the WWF challenge partnerships, and
represent some of the most progressive businesses who see sustainability as
a means of value creation and competitive advantage. The partnerships are
leveraged to provide conceptual materials, speakers, and cases studies on
innovative and pioneering approaches in business.
Challenges
There are several challenges in creating a One Planet MBA in the context of
a transition to a sustainable economy. While it is highly valued as innovative
and distinctive, the programme is competing in a commoditised and hyper
competitive market, dominated by league tables which privilege traditional
criteria of success. Thus, a major challenge for the One Planet MBA lies in
creating a differentiated offering that increases it market appeal to students
and recruiters alike. Partnerships between organisations in co-designing and
co-delivering innovative programmes are potentially creative and powerful,
but not always easy to manage, because of different values, culture, models
and metrics of success. They demand collaborative skills and competencies,
and regular review of goals, objectives and roles to avoid slipping into
traditional models of service delivery.
Awards
The OP MBA has won a number of awards since 2012:
tt 2013:
Ranked in the top three worldwide, and first in the UK by Corporate

Knights
tt 2012:
Ranked in the top 50 worldwide by the Washington-based Aspen

Institute
tt 2012:
tt 2012:
Winner, AMBA Innovation award
Best new programme, Green Gown Awards
For more information on the One Planet MBA see: http://business-school.

exeter.ac.uk/opmba/.
79
26/03/15 6:24 PM
A 2x2 to Change the World

Jill Bamburg
Pinchot University, USA
The author has over 20 years of experience teaching management

to mid-career adults. In this article, she shares a framework she has
developed to help her students think about how they might want to
use their business skills to make a positive impact in the world. The
framework is a 2x2 matrix, built around two dimensions of a worldview. One axis distinguishes between those who believe a win-win
world is possible and those who believe a win-lose world is inevitable. The other axis tests attitudes toward the existing political
economic order, one viewing the current economic system as satisfactory, the other viewing an alternative economic system as required.
The 2x2 yields four quadrants: replicate, reform, replace and retreat.
The author offers a number of examples of successful approaches to
building a better world for each quadrant. She concludes that its
all good work and encourages students to determine their own best
path based on personality and passion.
Jill Bamburg is the President of Pinchot University, one of the pioneering
Sustainable MBA programs in the US. She is also the author ofGetting to
Scale: Growing Your Business without Selling Out(Berrett-Koehler, 2006). She is
a parent, a rower, a reader, a lover of art and music, and a baby boomer
beginning to think about life after work. Her passion is working with adult
students and helping them to become effective change agents, whose
professional work is totally aligned with their personal values.
80
BSL5_Jill Bamburg.indd 80
u
!
OO MBA students
OO Vocation
OO Change the
world
OO Worldviews
OO Economic
system
OO Economic
alternatives
President, Pinchot University, Suite

400, 220 S. Second Ave., Seattle,
WA 98110 USA
[email protected]
26/03/15 6:10 PM
a 2x2 to change the world
One of the most valuable tools I acquired in business school was the
2x2matrix.
With it, I was able to transcend the dreary black and white world of either/
or choices and move into the heady realm of two-dimensional space,
the four-quadrant world. And despite the 2x2s continuing appearance
of reductionism, by casting the x and y axes as continuums, I was able
to paint with enough shades of grey to satisfy my desire to illuminate
businessproblems.
I actually went further than that, and began using 2x2s to gain insight into
other kinds of problems. To offer one example from the realm of menu
planning, I could place the presence or absence of gluten on the x-axis and
the presence or absence of dairy on the y-axis, and develop a dinner menu
capable of addressing the dietary preferences of most (albeit not all) of my
dinner guests. At one point, I even developed a 2x2 party game where the
audience throws out random topics for each axis, and the contestants (in
most cases, I ran unopposed) put together amusing labels and stories to cover
each of the quadrants.
For the last 12 years or so, Ive been refining and presenting a 2x2 matrix with
a more serious purpose: the challenge of helping my MBA students figure
out what they want to be when they grow up or, to use Mary Olivers better
formulation, what it is they plan to do with [their] onewild and precious life.
A word about context: my MBA students are not typical MBA students.
For starters, theyre already grown up. They come to us as adult learners,
ranging in age from 22 to 68, with a median age of 32. Second, and far more
important, theyve already decided against the narrow vision of a traditional
business career dedicated to the proposition of maximising shareholder
value. They come to us already committed to building careers as change
agents with business their chosen vehicle for social change.
But they come to us divided on an essential question: should they try to
change the system from withinor should they pursue a more radical path?
Evolution or revolution? Incremental change or transformation? Which is
best? they want to know. Which will be most effectiveand which will be a
waste of time?
My answer is always the same: Its all good work.
By which I mean it is all work that needs to be done and we cannot know, in
advance, which approach will succeed in the end. Therefore, it is critical that
we, collectively, pursue both paths, according to our talents, temperament
and current placement within the larger system. By recognising that its all
good work, I have tried to reduce the amount of time spent in this particular
debate in order to spend more on the more important debate, the battle with
the mainstream over whether change is needed at all.
81
26/03/15 6:10 PM
jill bamburg
Enter the 2x2

To get to the next level of discussion with my students, I offer them the
following 2x2, one step at a time.
The vertical axis first:
Winwin world is
possible
Winlose world is
inevitable
82
26/03/15 6:10 PM
Technically, we dont know whether a winwin world is possiblewe have

never seen such a thingwhich leads directly to the opposite conclusion,
that a winlose worldthe only world we have ever knownis inevitable.
Although the truth of either proposition is unknowable, the consequences of
each belief are profound, as the matrix ultimately makes clear.
Horizontal axis next:
Current system
= the solution
Alternative system
= required
By the current system, I essentially mean the combination of capitalism

and democracy that Frances Fukiyama famously called the end of history.
Ironically, he and other defenders of the status quo would be at the far left of
the diagram, while the campers of the Occupy Wall Street movement would
be at the far right.
When we put the two axes together, we have the 2x2 frame for the emerging
quadrants (Fig. 1).
Figure 1 The complete 2x2 matrix.
Win-Win World
is Possible
REFORM
REPLACE
Alternative
System =
Required
Current
System =
Solution
REPLICATE
RETREAT
Win-Lose World
is Inevitable
Replicate
In discussing the matrix, I always begin with the bottom left quadrant, the
world as we know it. I believe that many of the people in this quadrant would
self-identify as conservatives. They believe that the current capitalism system
83
08/04/15 7:49 PM
jill bamburg
is the best economic structure the world has been able to devise to date, and
that the solution to the problem of winners and losers is to work on creating
more winners. Thus, the goal of those who choose to work in this quadrant
is to replicate the current system to extend its reach and make its benefits
available to more people.
More liberal practitioners may beg off on the ultimate merits of capitalism,
but still argue for the practicality, immediacy and importance of ending the
poverty of individuals, families and communities. Workers in this quadrant
place a lot of emphasis on entrepreneurshipparticularly microenterprise
and microcreditas vehicles for extending the benefits of capitalism to
those who have been excluded from previous waves of prosperity. Traditional
notions of community economic developmentbringing Big Business back
into communities abandoned by the last generation of Big Businessalso fall
into this quadrant.
There are many people and organisations doing good work in this quadrant.
A few that come to mind: Mohammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank,
Paul Polack and International Development Enterprises (IDE), the Skoll
Foundation and its work in social enterprise, even version 2.0 of the Base
of the Pyramid efforts. They may have a larger transformational agenda, but
they tend to work through market mechanisms to create more winners, one
individual, one enterprise, one community at a time.
Reform
Moving up one quadrant is the land of Reform, where we find corporate
CSR professionals and internal change agents of all stripes, government
regulators and liberal politicians, even mainstream environmental groups.
Whether these individuals actually believe that a winwin world is possible,
they certainly believe that a better world is possible and well worth working
towards.
They assume that our current economic structures are essentially benign, just
in need of reform.
About half of my students fall into this categoryalthough many question
their choice after the first quarter of our core curriculum, which calls into
question many of the fundamental tenets of capitalism. Those who pursue
this path point with justifiable pride to the scale of the impact of relatively
small decisionsmillions of tonnes of solid waste diverted from landfills,
millions of tonnes of CO2 not sent into the air, millions of gigawatts of energy
avoided, billions of gallons of water saved in their plants.
When waste is the enemy, the profit-maximising interests of shareholders
are aligned with the conservation values of environmentalists. Thus, the
84
26/03/15 6:10 PM
concept of eco-efficiency is a pretty easy sellassuming that the timelines

for the payoffs can be equally well aligned (a very big assumption in todays
short-term-focused financial markets). In all cases, the reform agenda relies
upon making the business case for change within the context of the current
system.
In many cases, advocates of the reform agenda have focused on reporting,
with the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), CDP (formerly the Carbon
Disclosure Project), the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)
and the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) being four
prominent examples. With KPMG reporting that 93% of the worlds 250
largest companies currently file corporate responsibility reports, the battle
over the necessity or desirability of reporting is overthe battle has now
shifted to the standards that can be used to evaluate performance.
Replace
This is the quadrant for revolutionaries and idealiststhose who believe
that the dominant economic paradigm is the problem and can imagine
alternatives that might work better. In many cases, these alternatives are local,
small scale, grassroots experiments. Some add up to grand notions like the
sharing economy or the creation of a local food economy as a substitute for
industrial agriculture. Others are designed to stay small and local, achieving
scale through replication based on example and inspiration.
About half of my students fall into this category, many of them betting
that the current system will collapse within their lifetime and wanting to
be in position with on-the-ground alternatives when the collapse occurs.
The smaller scale of their revolutionary vision sometimes strikes me as
inadequate to the challenge before usuntil I remember the wholesale
destruction wrought by the larger social experiments of the 20th century.
Small is not only beautiful, it is considerably less dangerous.
Within this quadrant are experiments with local currencies, co-housing,
regional food hubs, bike share systems, community tool libraries, and a
host of other on-the-ground alternatives to the institutions of the dominant
economic system. Many others use digital technology as substitutes for, or
enhancements of, more traditional ways of doing things. The new businesses
built around the Internet of Things hold the promise of enabling us to
move from the uniformity and waste of mass production into a world of
smaller scale, locally produced and more customised offerings. Some require
significant capital investment, reinforcing the capitalist tendency toward
concentration of wealth and resources; many others do not, potentially
supporting a more egalitarian arrangement.
85
26/03/15 6:10 PM
jill bamburg
Retreat
This quadrant is a permanent home for some, a temporary haven for many
more. Who among us has not sometimes wished to bury his or her head in
the sand and just get away from it all? This is the quadrant of both solace and
despair.
Here the belief is that greed and selfishness, winners and losers, dominance
and subordination are inevitable aspects of the human condition that have
now been firmlyand foreverembodied in our economic and political
institutions. There is no hope for change at the systemic level; there are
only individual lives that are either more or less satisfying. Those who opt to
Retreat are committed to taking care of themselves and their families in an
increasingly hostile world.
For some, this is the quadrant of the spirit, a place of transcendence and
renewal, a way of jumping off the economic treadmill and into the deeper
questions of existence. I find increasing numbers of students talking about
the necessity of a transformation of consciousness as the only way out of our
current dilemma. First enlightenment, then the laundry, as the Buddhists
would have it.
In reality, very few of usmyself and my students includedoccupy only one
of these quadrants. Most of us bounce around a bit. Some of us, quite a bit.
The quadrants have been useful in helping students to frame their
commitment to social change in terms of their own unique personalities,
and in some cases, in terms of their life journeys. Some have the belief that
the virtues of capitalism outweigh the vices and seek to extend the benefits
of free enterprise to those whose previous opportunities have been limited.
Some have the stomach for fighting the system from within. Some have the
risk profile for creating new things. And some are tired of fighting and seek a
place of refuge far from the struggle.
I usually close this lecture with the phrase: Its all good work. I do that
because I believe it, but also because I want to forestall arguments about
which approach is best. I have seen social reformers spend too much of their
precious time and energy fighting each other over the merits of revolution vs.
reform. To me, the appropriate choice is a matter of personality rather than
strategy.
Its all good work. It all needs to be done. And it cannot wait.
86
26/03/15 6:10 PM
Changing Directions in
BusinessEducation
Knowledge Sharing for Sustainability
Suzanne Benn, Tamsin Angus-Leppan, Melissa Edwards,
PaulBrown and Stuart White
University of Technology, Sydney
OO Business
schools
OO Embedding
sustainability
OO Interdisciplinary
curriculum
OO Sustainable
business
OO Boundary
objects
Business schools are lagging other sectors in recognising the growing importance of sustainability concerns in business decision making. Many educators blame the ambiguity of sustainability-related
concepts, lack of interdisciplinary knowledge on sustainability issues
and their little training in the teaching methods needed to support
knowledge development in business sustainability. This paper
presents findings from an exploratory study of educators at one
university where sustainability is incorporated in business and other
areas of the teaching curriculum and where a community of practice
has been developed to share sustainability-related material across
the disciplinary areas. Through the lens of the boundary objects that
facilitate knowledge sharing around environmental and social
aspects of corporate sustainability, the paper discusses the barriers
and opportunities to engaging students with the new business
models of corporate sustainability.
Professor Suzanne Benns work spans the sciences and social sciences. She
works with colleagues at UTS Business School and across UTS to promote
sustainability. She is a specialist in education for sustainability, sustainable
business and corporate responsibility.
Dr Angus-Leppan is a qualitative researcher specializing in organizational

sustainability at UTS Business School. Her research focuses on sensemaking
and corporate sustainability.
u
!
u
!
Melissa Edwards is a senior lecturer at the UTS Business School since 2005,
where she specialises in sustainability management and organisation theory.
Her research focuses on sustainability, social impact, complexity and
stakeholder theories.
BSL5_Suzanne Benn.indd 87
u
!
UTS Business School, Box 123,

Broadway, Sydney, NSW, 2007,
Australia
[email protected]

Australia
[email protected]

Australia
[email protected]
87
26/03/15 6:11 PM
suzanne benn et al.

Paul Brown is a lecturer in Accounting at UTS Business School since 2005,
specializing in governance, production economics and sustainability. His
research focus is how organisations can be structured and managed to be
sustainable.
With over thirty years experience in sustainability research, Professor Stuart

Whites work focuses on achieving sustainability outcomes for a range of
government, industry and community clients across Australia and
internationally.
88
u
!
u
!

Australia
[email protected]
Institute for Sustainable Futures,

UTS, Box 123, Broadway, Sydney,
NSW, 2007, Australia
[email protected]
26/03/15 6:11 PM
changing directions in businesseducation
Business is being pushed to change. Issues such as income inequities, food

security, ecosystem decline and climate change are confronting the current
economic system and associated business models. Many businesses are
responding. For example, in Australia institutional investorsespecially
superannuation fundscontinue to lead the way, increasingly concerned
with these emerging sustainability risks and the potential impact on
profitability and investment returns. Recent changes include those to the
ASX Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendations, affecting all
listed companies with a new requirement to disclose material exposure to
sustainability risks, and to report on the management of these risks. The
principles of the circular economy are receiving global interest and being
embraced by leading business organisations such as Unilever, Kingfisher
and Cisco that represent different business sectors. Other notable examples
include the increased engagement with external reporting regimes such as
the Global Reporting Initiative and the Carbon Disclosure Project.
But it appears that a substantial number of business schools are lagging
other sectors in this change. For example, Sundin and Wainwright (2010)
found evidence for a low level of integration of sustainability into the
accounting majors offered for 17 of 22 of the highest ranked universities
in Australia, and with only four offering standalone subjects assessable
as part of an Accounting major. Recognising the importance of business
schools in shaping the future of business, this paper identifies the barriers
and opportunities to business schools in embedding sustainability in their
mainstream curricula. Even as corporations increasingly acknowledge
notions of corporate accountability for environmental and social
sustainability, business schools remain focused on teaching according to
traditional business models based on concepts of competition. As a result,
emergent themes such as cooperative capitalism or new business models
such as those underpinning the BCorps movement are neglected in business
school curricula. MBA programmes have been accused of typically including
token electives on corporate social responsibility or sustainability, with little
evidence that such concepts are integrated across the curriculum (Mohamed,
2014). One recent survey of business school academics found that the
related topics of CSR, sustainability and sustainable development were
not embedded in any coherent way in business curricula, that while most
business school faculty members feel these subjects are common themes
throughout departmental curricula, few feel that they are important themes
and that overall, CSR, sustainability and sustainable development were not
well institutionalised, with best practice still to be defined (Doh and Tashman,
2014). Recommendations were for champions such as AACSB (Association
to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) and for the use of an integrated
framework in teaching these concepts (Doh and Tashman, 2014).
While other studies have taken a more positive view (e.g. Steketee, 2009),
the picture remains patchy. This point is well demonstrated in another study
89
26/03/15 6:11 PM
suzanne benn et al.
which analysed MBA programmes according to the Sustainability Phase

Model (Benn et al., 2014). This model classifies approaches to sustainability
in terms of Rejection; Non-Responsiveness; Compliance; Efficiency; Strategic
Proactivity; and the Sustaining or Ideal Organisation phases. The study
found that MBA programmes ranged from a business as usual approach
(Compliance Phase), to a calculative introduction of sustainability according
to market demand (Efficiency Phase), to a more systematic approach focused
on incorporating sustainability into core aspects of the MBA programme
(Strategic Proactivity Phase), to an MBA designed purposely around
sustainability, which can be classified as at the Ideal or Sustaining Phase
(Edwards and Benn, 2014).
Barriers identified to date point to a more systematic approach to integrating

sustainability and to foregrounding more progressive approaches to the
role of business include the ambiguity of sustainability-related concepts,
lack of interdisciplinary knowledge on sustainability issues and lack of
training in the teaching methods needed to support contemporary practice
in business sustainability (e.g. Benn and Dunphy, 2009; Doh and Tashman,
2014; Kawaga, 2007). Organisational factors such as the lack of interest
among members of the university, conflicting goals within the university,
time constraints, and the profit orientation of the university also contribute
90
26/03/15 6:11 PM
(Wang et al., 2010). A key problem appears to be lack of understanding

in business schools of the wide range of disciplinary principles and their
associated impacts that underpin sustainability and the dynamic nature of
these interconnections. This leads us to suggest that providing the means
for both educators and their business school students to cross disciplinary
boundaries and engage with knowledge from different disciplinary areas
would facilitate a systematic and integrated approach to sustainability as it is
translated into the curricula and that such an approach would enable students
to go beyond business as usual.
This paper presents findings from an exploratory study of educators at one
university where sustainability is incorporated in business and other areas
of the teaching curriculum and where a community of practice has been
developed to share sustainability-related material across the disciplinary
areas. Through the lens of the boundary objects in the form of concepts,
models, tools and activities that facilitate knowledge sharing around
environmental and social aspects of corporate sustainability, the paper
discusses the barriers and opportunities to engaging students with the new
business models of corporate sustainability.
Theoretical lens: boundary objects

In our research context of multiple boundaries across intersecting knowledge
communities, identifying appropriate boundary objects would seem to be a
way of integrating the dimensions of sustainability in a way that is coherent
and meaningful to diverse participants. Boundary objects are artifacts,
documents, terms, concepts and other forms of reification around which
communities of practice can organize their interconnections (Wenger, 1998:
105). They can be artefacts in the form of made things such as tools or visual
representations or discourses, terms, concepts, processes or technologies
(Star and Griesemer 1989; Wenger 2000). Basically, they have one objective
manifestation, either physical or conceptual, but this manifestation is
interpreted differently by different actors (Gal et al., 2004).
Boundary objects allow different actors or groups or stakeholders to work
together across disciplinary boundaries. They exist in different forms:
the repository, such as a website or a library or a collection or a database
where heterogeneity is modularised; the ideal type or general model and
standardised methods, protocols and forms, including training materials
which facilitate communication and the grouping of diverse content (Star &
Griesemer, 1989). They can be conceptual or material.
Boundary objects are claimed as a means of changing practice through
transforming knowledge across diverse or specialised knowledge or role base
91
26/03/15 6:11 PM
suzanne benn et al.
domains (Benn & Martin, 2010; Briers & Chua, 2004; Oswick & Robertson,
2009). As texts, boundary objects facilitate interaction across different workrelated worlds. Formalisation processes create boundary objects as texts, such
as minutes, diagrams, models, or charts. As texts, boundary objects also play
a role in recontextualisation or the transferring and translating of knowledge
(Oswick & Robertson, 2009). We argue boundary objects are particularly
appropriate to consider in relation to the networks of practice that might
form around sustainability education, as they allow for the tension between
coordination across heterogeneous groups of actors (discipline groups) and
the need for more depth and understanding in specific knowledge bases
In this paper we explore the boundary objects that might facilitate knowledge
sharing around environmental and social aspects of corporate sustainability,
across different tertiary education disciplines. The case is described next.
Research method and case description

The case described in this study is UTS Business School, a large business
school within the University of Technology (UTS), Sydney. A number of
different disciplinary areas feature sustainability teaching and research
programmes across UTS, including in the business school. The business
school is Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB)
accredited therefore needs to comply with AACSB Standard 9, requiring
that teaching programmes at all levels should address Social responsibility,
including sustainability, and ethical behaviour and approaches to
management. AACSB accreditation, according to Standard 9, involves
regular self-evaluation reports, complemented by a peer review process
which checks the means by which student attributes such as ability to apply
sustainability-related values in their workplace, are developed through the
programme. Considerable effort has gone into ensuring the prominence
of sustainability within the curricula. The business school has employed
senior academic staff specifically charged with the responsibility of engaging
with business school faculty as well as other areas across the university to
promote sustainability. A Working Party has been formed within the business
school to facilitate such an outcome. A number of specific subjects have
been developed that focus on managing for sustainability and corporate
social responsibility, that highlight new measures for assessing social value
and that highlight some core principles of ecological economics. Many
educators across UTS participate in a web-based community of practice
(www.sustainability.edu.au) specifically formed to share curriculum around
sustainability. Hence the UTS Business School teaching programme
acts as a paradigmatic case that can inform on strategies and barriers to
92
26/03/15 6:11 PM
integrating sustainability more effectively in business school programmes

(SeeFlyvbjerg,2006).
Data for the case was obtained from two sources. The first was a focus group
conducted with educators from environmental science, management and
accounting disciplines. The participating educators, a convenience sample,
were chosen because they are involved with the community of practice
formed around the sustainability website. As such, they are among the most
dedicated to teaching sustainability at the university, and therefore best able
to provide rich descriptions of their experience with teaching sustainability.
The focus group questions were selected to explore the boundary objects that
provide opportunity for teaching sustainability across teaching disciplines,
as well as to add to the literature on barriers to the introduction of emergent
sustainability themes. The website itself uses boundary objects to classify
teaching materials and sustainability issues that translate across teaching
disciplines, such as energy efficiency, climate and business sustainability.
The focus group was transcribed verbatim and an initial thematic analysis
undertaken.
The second source of data related to specific subjects taught within the
business school. We reviewed online data describing the various subject
objectives, content and teaching approaches and interviewed coordinators
of representative subjects core to teaching programmes from the different
disciplinary areas. Each subject area was written up as a specific case in
terms of approaches to sustainability.
Findings
Focus group findings
The focus group revealed a number of opportunities and barriers to teaching
sustainable business. Key themes emerging from the focus group are set out
below:
Tensions between empowerment and confrontation

Focus group participants discussed how it is difficult to teach sustainability
without sounding negative, as one participant suggested, if youre not
careful the message is constantly negative...heres all these environmental
issues...doom and gloom. Another participant suggested it is also difficult
not to appear to be preaching to students and most people dont like what
they see as being preached at. I think we could easily slide into that in any of
our areas actually...the thing of being seen as a doo-gooder.
93
26/03/15 6:11 PM
suzanne benn et al.
Another participant, a management lecturer, noted the problem that students

feel confronted and deflated when faced with sustainability issues at a time
when they want to feel empowered about their futures:
The reality is really confronting and really big and they want to feel empowered
by their education because they are paying for it and they want to go out and get a
good job and establish their careers and they are at the beginning of their lives.
A general finding from the focus group was that the educators dealt with
these tensions by appealing to student self-interest as a means of adding
relevance. As the environmental science educator described it:
I try to get them see things in that very broad spectrum to say that a bunch
of you, youre not going to end up being research scientists. Even though we
focus a lot on research where theres not many jobs. So I try to get them to think
across the whole technical right through to the managerial. A lot of them are
interested in management, cause they can see that is where they will really make
a difference in the environment.
Another management educator argued that the tendency for business schools
to focus on traditional models of organisational purpose and leadership
meant that to then talk about...
...things like virtues and authentic leadership, its really confronting for them
and for me and it puts me in a whole different place with them for the whole
subject and thats 12 weeks with a group of students that could go completely
pear-shaped.
Worldviews on business
The educators shared the view that there is little in the education system to
contextualise sustainable business or to enable students to engage with wider
public interest or with public policy-making, so students are not prepared
for the big picture view of business that sustainability thinking requires. As
one management educator said: Me, me, me, me as most important, me as
a leader and all this stuff about whats a good leader...? Theres not enough
public policy...in any of our education in my view.
Another participant, an environmental science educator, also commented
that students do not appear to recognise that business and government each
have responsibilities for sustaining the natural environment, that public
policy-making needs to recognise that mix and that both science and business
students will face that reality in their working lives. He talked about the
perception from students that government, not business, is responsible for
the environment:
People traditionally think of environmental management being government
responsibility. But when I point out the limits to the powers of the government,
the amount of land on private ownership, for example, that has high conservation
94
26/03/15 6:11 PM
value, for example, the fact that youve got to change peoples behaviours to
lead people to the point well theres got to be more than just a government
responsibility theres also individuals and corporations. Thats the way
Iintroduce it and build the idea that there is a need for it.
One management educator said the biggest barriers for colleagues are these
fixed mental models of not just what business but what the whole capitalist
system is all about and another added theyre very much focused on greed
is good still and that is what motivates students, suggesting that educators
attitudes are reinforced by students limited worldviews. Another participant
suggested that some colleagues hold outdated views of business and
sustainability and that they lack understanding of the science of specific areas
such as climate change and this is the major barrier to teaching.
Cases, models, websites and activities as boundary objects

forsharingknowledge
The environmental science educator used case studies from the sustainability
website to demonstrate how environmental science students can support
transformation in business. Talking about a particular case of a bank, which
performs highly in sustainability rankings, he said:
The data about financial savings, the reduction in waste, its the stuff that I know
as science students they can relate to much more clearly to the quantitative,
when I can demonstrate the quantitative outcomes. I like the fact that it also
demonstrates the power of particular individuals in an organisation to make
change, as initiators of change.
This is an example where a carefully designed boundary object in the

form of an archetypal sustainable business can bridge disciplinary
boundaries, enabling both science and business students to share some core
understandings yet use their specific knowledge bases to drill down into the
case.
Several of the participants referred to their use of boundary objects such as
sustainable business phase models as a means of showing students from
different disciplinary areas the range of sustainability approaches and what
that might mean for the HR managers, engineers and accountants who
in one way or another might be involved in implementing sustainability.
The circular economy was also mentioned as a model for business, which
enabled students and educators from different educational backgrounds
to share knowledge around some core principles but then to develop those
principles further within their specialist discipline. The Sustainability Phase
Model shown at Figure 1, for example, was used by educators from across the
business school and from environmental science as a means of highlighting
how business can be reimagined in line with sustainability.
95
26/03/15 6:11 PM
suzanne benn et al.
Figure 1 Sustainability Phase Model

Source: Benn et al., 2014, p. 22
Waves of Sustainability
1st
Opposition
Wave
Rejection
Ignorance
Non
responsiveness
Highly
Financial and
technological
Instrumental
factors have
perspective on
employees and primacy.
natural
environment.
More ignorant
than
Culture of
oppositional.
exploitation.
Opposition to
government
and green
activists.
Community
claims seen as
illegitimate.
Value
destroyers
Seeks business
as usual,
compliant
workforce.
Environmental
resources seen
as a free good.
Value
limiters
Risk
Compliance
2nd Wave
Competitive
Advantage
Transformation
Efficiency
Strategic
Pro-activity
The sustaining
corporation
Focuses on
HR systems
reducing risks of seen as means
sanctions for
to higher
failing to meet
productivity
minimum legal
and efficiency
and community Environmental
standards.
management
Little integration seen as a
between HR and source of
environmental
avoidable
functions.
cost for the
organisation.
Follows route of
compliance plus
proactive
measures to
maintain good
citizen image.
Value
conservers
3rd Wave
Cost
Focus on
As a sustaining
innovation
organisation,
the corporation
Seeks
adds value to
stakeholder
itself, to society
engagement to
and to the
innovate safe,
planet.
environmentally
friendly products Engages in
and processes.
renewal of
society and the
Advocates good
planet.
citizenship to
maximise profits
and increase
employee
attraction and
retention.
Value
creators
Sustainable
business
From Benn et al, 2014
A participant from the accounting discipline talked about the importance

of showing students the effect of business as usual to justify a need for
transformation of business. He noted the importance of identifying specific
boundary objects that would enable students to bridge worlds.
Nothing quite like showing people. Like when I showed the students this thing
with the workers, cause I actually set students up for this, cause you know
everyone took outsourcing as this great wonderful thing, especially accountants
like yeah! outsourcing is great yeah! Then I say to them what does that mean?
What does cost reduction mean in this context? Lets have a look and I show them
the video so they are on this semi-euphoric kind of greedy state of mind and then
like, you show them this absolute degradation of humanity just right in front of
them as a consequence of what they said and...sometimes the students are quite
shocked.
Another participant from management identified boundary objects in

the form of experiential activities, getting students to have an emotional
response to something through working through a simulated experience,
as an important teaching tool for sustainability. However a participant from
environmental science noted they would need support to run experiential
activities related to business, highlighting the need for these objects to be
co-developed across disciplinary boundaries:
96
26/03/15 6:11 PM
Ive done it in other contexts, doing experiential activities, but areas Ive been very
familiar with. I would need a lot of support to do one in this area. I think its a
great idea but Id need a lot of support to be able to do it properly. To make sure I
designed it properly so that they got the experience that I was aiming for.
Subject case study findings

Wicked problems as boundary objects
The available online material and the interviews with subject coordinators
demonstrate a wide variability in terms of how sustainability is incorporated
across the teaching programme in the business school. The leading example
of a holistic approach to integration is provided by an undergraduate
subject specifically designed around the purpose of bringing to bear highly
coordinated trans-disciplinary understandings on a wicked problem, such
as food security or climate change. In this sense, the wicked problem acts as
a boundary object. Wicked problems by definition (Rittel and Webber, 1973)
are problems that are difficult to solve because of the underpinning multiple,
interconnected issues. Those addressed in this subject, which is a core or
compulsory subject within the large undergraduate teaching programme, are
specifically selected so that they highlight the interconnectedness between
the different sustainability elements, then becoming the focus of the student
assessments, guest lectures as well as tutorials and the more formal lectures.
From a curriculum design perspective, this subject aims to make the student
aware of the various theoretical frameworks for critiquing the role of business
in society, while also taking a holistic approach which brings in perspectives
and thinking styles from other disciplines, such as design. An important
aspect of the integration is the drawing together of legal, accounting and
ethical concerns into the wicked problem, with input from experts in these
fields. The expectation is that students will gain the basis to develop the
critical capacity to examine traditional business practices and the innovative
potential to realise other business approaches and ways of looking at the
world.
Energy efficiency concepts as boundary objects

Another core subject in the programme in the Accounting discipline
and the stringent accreditation requirements placed by the Accounting
professional associations around professional ethics mean that there is a
long-term high level of compliance on ethics and ethical issues that pertain
to sustainability. The subject goes beyond compliance in the extent to which
it introduces concepts of energy efficiency in order to highlight reduction in
resource use. Energy efficiency concepts are introduced via an emphasis on
capital budgeting and student teams work on campus energy projects, thus
introducing students to the interdisciplinary aspects of energy and resource
use. In this subject it is the concept of energy efficiency which acts as a
97
26/03/15 6:11 PM
suzanne benn et al.
boundary object, enabling the bringing together of different sub-disciplinary

areas to a focus on an aspect of sustainability. The coordinator for the subject
is very active in sharing knowledge on the sustainability website, particularly
around linking marginal abatement cost curves to sustainability models.
Discussion
Our findings confirm the importance of identifying suitable boundary objects
to enable recognition of sustainability as a broad-based problem with social,
environmental, economic and governance implications. This can be done
through educators and students being able to access interdisciplinary materials
through such boundary objects as the sustainability website, various business
models or by using concepts such as the wicked problems that different
lecturers can access and contribute to from their particular knowledge base.
Boundary objects such as energy efficiency also link the university curricula
to professional practice and provide a real world context for students who
otherwise do not see the relevance of sustainability to business.
Our findings also highlight the importance of teaching so that students
recognise the context of business as existing in an institutional field in which
different types of organisations, such as business, government and NGOs,
all play a part. Indeed, an important aspect of teaching sustainability is that
it does provide students with an understanding of the complexity of current
business thinking which cannot be limited to or contained within specific
disciplinary boundaries.
Table 1Summary of boundary objects used by educators to enable boundaryspanning meaning making for students
Selected boundary objects Learning objective
Disciplinary and other

boundaries traversed in the
meaning making process
Case study of an
archetypal sustainable
business
To teach science students Bridging of science and

how they can support
business perspectives
the transformation
of businesses toward
sustainability
Sustainability phase
models
To expose students to
multiple perspectives on
sustainable business so
they are able to locate
their own worldview and
that of other actors, on a
sustainability continuum
98
Human Resources,
Accounting and Finance,
Economics, Engineering
among others
26/03/15 6:11 PM
Selected boundary objects Learning objective
Disciplinary and other

boundaries traversed in the
meaning making process
News report by an
investigative journalist
into the conditions of
workers in factories
supplying multinational
enterprises, accessible via
YouTube
To expose management
accounting students
to the complexity of
decision-making around
tradeoffs between
economic, social and
environmental impacts
Functional economic
with humanistic/ethical
perspectives
Wicked problems
To afford students the

opportunity to actively
engage with sustainability
issues in a structured
way to encourage transdisciplinary understating
and thinking
Legal, accounting, and

ethical concerns in the
context of complex
systems and ecological
concerns
The concept of energy

efficiency
The concept allows

Engineering and
accounting students, who management accounting
perspectives
are skilled in tackling
economic efficiency, to
see that accountants
have a role in promoting
sustainable business
While perhaps not branded as such, we also found that boundary objects
were used quite instrumentally by educators to enable boundary-spanning
meaning making for students. Table 1 provides a summary of the boundary
objects highlighted as useful through the study. Notably, the repertoire of
boundary objects ranges from concepts such as energy efficiency or wicked
problems, artefacts such as models, digital media such as videos, to activities
such as role-play. Each of the boundary objects identified were used as
provocations, to provide an occasion for students to see the need or possibility
for boundary-spanning perspectives.
Our case study also confirms that students will not be motivated in areas
that lie outside business as usual teaching programmes unless educators are
given the means to address barriers to teaching sustainability such as lack of
understanding of complex and interdisciplinary issues. For some educators
this may stem from inexperience with contemporary business practice and
certainly, as highlighted here, teachers need support to design experiential
activities that demonstrate to students the thinking and concepts behind
emergent models of business sustainability.
99
26/03/15 6:11 PM
suzanne benn et al.
Nor do students from other disciplinary areas such as the environmental

sciences appear to understand that business has the power to bring about
change or how their specialised training can support such a transformation.
As suggested here, sustainability problems can appear intractable and outside
the responsibilities of young students focused on starting careers. However,
an empowering education will provide students with the means to engage
critically with the profound challenges that lie beyond traditional ideas on the
role of business.
Conclusion
The aim of this study was to explore barriers and opportunities to engage
students with the new business models of corporate sustainability. We
found our educators faced a range of challenges, most evident in the limited
world-views held by many students. Encouraging students to think about
sustainability in an interdisciplinary way can itself provide a transformative
learning experience whereby their world-views, values and assumptions may
be challenged. When sustainability is introduced in a way that signifies how
it relates to business by drawing on other disciplines it inspires students to
learn and think outside of the box. Students engage positively with models
that incorporate interdisciplinary knowledge, such as the circular economy
and the sustainability phase model because they situate business thinking in
the context of the impacts and consequences of decision-making. Through
this learning process their conceptual framing of the role and purpose of
business is enriched and they are more likely to start working and living
more sustainably.
The findings suggest that carefully constructed and presented boundary
objects can be used instrumentally to facilitate boundary-spanning knowledge
sharing and creation. Given the perceived value of the identified boundary
objects, the study highlights the value of communities of practice and
mechanisms such as knowledge sharing websites in disseminating field
tested boundary objects to wider education communities. The findings also
suggest that further curriculum development needs to be done to introduce
business students to the science of sustainability and to systems thinking,
while for science students the need is for a better understanding of the
capacity of business as a driver for positive change. In short, the research
highlights the need for the complementarity of different disciplinary areas
across the university to be better recognised and deployed in the name of
sustainable futures.
100
26/03/15 6:11 PM
References
Benn S, and Dunphy D. (2008). Action research as an approach to integrating
sustainability into MBA programs: An exploratory study. Journal of Management
Education 33(3): 276295.
Benn, S., Dunphy, D and Griffiths, G. (2014) Organisational Change for Corporate
Sustainability, 3rd edition, London: Routledge.
Benn, S. & Martin, A. (2010) Learning and Change for Sustainability Reconsidered: A
Role for Boundary Objects, Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9, (3),
397-412.
Briers, M. & Chua, W. F. (2001). The role of actor-networks and boundary objects in
management accounting change: a field study of an implementation of activity-based
costing. Accounting Organizations and Society, 26(3): 237-269.
Doh, J. P. and P. Tashman (2014). Half a World Away: The Integration and Assimilation
of Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability, and Sustainable Development
in Business School Curricula. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management 21(3): 131-142.
Edwards, M. and Benn, S. (2014) The Business Case(s) for Holistic Sustainability
Management Education: A Framework and Phase Model. Professional Development
Workshop, Sustainability in Management Education Part 2: In Search of a
Multidisciplinary, Innovative and Integrated Approach through University Leadership,
Scholarship and Partnerships. Academy of Management Conference, Philadelphia, 2-8
August 2014.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006) Five Misunderstandings about Case Study Research, Qualitative
Inquiry 12 (2): 219- 245.
Gal, U., Yoo, Y., Boland, R.J. 2004. The Dynamics of Boundary Objects, Social
Infrastructures and Social Identities. Case Western Reserve University, USA. Sprouts:
Working Papers on Information Systems, 4(11). http://sprouts.aisnet.org/4-11
Kawaga F. (2007). Dissonance in students perceptions of sustainable development
and sustainability. Implications for curriculum change. International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education 8(3): 317338.
Mohamed, E. (2014), The future is green for business schools, Financial Times,
October 5 http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/c01a951c-166d-11e4-8210-00144feabdc0.
html#axzz3FFZFngJH accessed 23 October, 2014
Rittel, Horst W. J. and Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General theory of Planning.
Policy Sciences 4: 155169.
Star, S.L. and Griesemer, JR (1989). Institutional ecology, translations and boundary
objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeleys Museum of Vertebrate Zoology,
1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19: 387-420.
Steketee, D. (2009) A Million Decisions: Life on the (Sustainable Business) Frontier,
Journal of Management Education, 33 (3): 391-401
101
26/03/15 6:11 PM
suzanne benn et al.
Sundin, H. & Wainwright, L. (2010) Approaches to integrating social and environmental

accounting (SEA) into accounting majors in Australian universities. Social and
Environmental Accountability Journal, 30(2): 80-95
Oswick, C. & Robertson, M. (2009) Boundary objects reconsidered: From bridges and
anchors to barricades and mazes. Journal of Change Management, 9(2): 179-194
Wang, F., Dyball, M. C. & Wright, S. (2010) Sustainability in an Australian University:
Staff Perceptions, Sixth APIRA Conference, Sydney, Australia, July 12-13.
Wenger, E. 2000. Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems Organization. 7:
225-246.
102
26/03/15 6:11 PM
Action Research as a Transformative

Force in Management Education
Introducing the Collaboratory
Katrin Muff *
Business School Lausanne, Switzerland
OO Action research
OO Management
education
OO Business
schools
OO Vision 50+20
OO Business
sustainability
OO Doctorate in
business
administration
(DBA)
OO Business
education
OO The
Collaboratory
This article examines the potential for scalability of action research

in the domain of management education. It considers the individual,
the institutional as well as the systemic perspective of embracing
action research and provides telling examples in all three domains.
Using the guiding framework of the seven choice points of quality
action research (from clarifying objectives, working in partnership
with stakeholders, through to cultivating stakeholder reflexivity), the
article seeks to establish a link between existing best practices in
action research with applied transformational processes in management education. The widely recognised Vision 50+20 (www.50plus20.
org) sets the stage for the challenge at hand and is used as a framework to define the scope. The three roles defined in the Vision 50+20
call for compelling examples of action research. These roles cover
two existing responsibilities of business schools, educating globally
responsible leaders and research that enables business to serve the
common good; as well as an additionally defined role concerning the
transformation of economy and society. Last but not least, the author
seeks to inspire further research and discussion in this domain.
Katrin Muff serves as Dean of Business School Lausanne since 2008. Under
her leadership, the school embraced sustainability, responsibility and
entrepreneurship in a three pillar vision. Her international business
experience includes nearly a decade with Alcoa in Europe, the US and in
Russia. She worked for Iams Pet Food as Strategic Planning Director and has
co-founded a European incubator for early-seed start-ups. Muff researches in
the interdisciplinary domains of education, business sustainability and
leadership. She has co-founded the World Business School Council for
Sustainable Business and is actively engaged in GRLIs project 50+20, a vision
of management education for the world.
u
!
Rte de la Maladire 21, PO Box 73,

CH-1022, Chavannes, Switzerland
[email protected]
* The final, definitive version of this paper will be first published as a chapter in the forthcoming
publication The SAGE Handbook of Action Research (3rd edition), SAGE Publications
Ltd, and is reprinted in the Building Sustainable Legacies Journal with permission from
SAGE Publications Ltd.
BSL5_Katrin Muff.indd 103
103
26/03/15 6:12 PM
katrin muff
Broadening the use of action research in management

education: clarifying objectives
Looking back at the experience of the organisational and programme
transformations at Business School Lausanne (BSL), it occurs to me that
action research has been, in many ways, the underlying mode of inquiry wed
been working with even before we knew it. As such, action research may be
said to have revealed itself to me as a way to conceive of and further cultivate
our daily work.
At BSL we have experienced so many different, at first hidden, domains
of action research. In this section we will consider a number of these
to demonstrate the various applications of action research. This section
therefore illustrates what Bradbury-Huang (2013) refers to as the choice
points of quality in action research:
tt How
we have used action research to transform the BSL organisational

system as a whole
tt How
tt How
we include action research in helping companies in their

transformative sustainability journey
we built on the action research philosophy to co-create a new

Executive programme
tt How
to explicitly use action research as a leading future-relevant

methodology in newly designed doctoral programme
tt How
to use action research to support societal change through

stakeholder-engaged prototyping
Our first exposure to action research was back in my first year as Dean of
BSL, when I initiated the radical re-design of our MBA programme. My
coaching and consulting background had provided me with a worldview that
has resulted in a preferred way to approach the creation of a new programme.
It may be called a consultative collaborative approach. I called it stumbling
forward together. Professor Kassarjian of Babson College observed this
process from the outside and wrote a three-part case study on change
leadership about these initial years at BSL (Kassarjian, 2012).
When re-designing our MBA programme, our chief objective and desire
was to build a programme that was in line with the expectations of the
market. This meant that we needed to take a look outside to understand
what the requirements were. This was contrary to the existing belief of how
to construct a programme. A key element of success was the creation of
an ongoing safe space for exploring new ideas. We defined the needs of
the market by asking how senior executives in a variety of industry define
the skills, competencies and attitudes of the most valuable pearls in their
104
26/03/15 6:12 PM
action research as a transformative force in management education
organisations. Interviews with 30 CEOs and HR Directors provided us with

78 attributes and three clear priorities for the programme. The design team
consisting of existing faculty, external consultants and advisers worked
together to create a first prototype of the new programme which was tested
by a student cohort and further improved in the following two years. I have
outlined this process in detail (Muff, 2012).
After a further two years, we gathered again and considered the extensive
feedback of students and embraced new important design changes in the
programme. We are currently in the third ongoing re-design phase and
both students and professors have come to appreciate the ongoing dialogue
around how we can further improve the programme to reach our objective.
An important thing we learned when articulating these objectives is that the
quality in what we did, and in action research in general, is reflected in the
extent to which the action research explicitly addresses the objectives relevant
to the work and the choices made in meeting those (Bradbury-Huang,
2013). We learned that again and again, we needed to clarify our underlying
worldviews and perspectives to unveil subconscious intentions.
Partnership & participation: turning BSL into a

co-creative platform
As a privately owned, relatively small business school, BSL represents a
unique opportunity to advance the agenda of providing responsible and
sustainable education to future leaders in business and beyond. In the past
two years, we have used the evaluation and auditing process of the Economy
of the Common Good movement (ECG) to re-energise our transformational
process. The ECG originated in Austria (www.gemeinwohl-oekonomie.
org) and builds on the key constitutional values of dignity, solidarity,
ecological sustainability, social justice, and democracy, to create a matrix for
organisations to evaluate their contribution to society based on how these
values are translated for all relevant stakeholders.
To re-vitalise the transformative spirit, we chose to have students drive
the project and applied for a paid consulting project in the Executive
Diploma in Sustainable Business that we jointly operate with the University
of St Gallen. For 10 months, a team of four students led the process of
evaluating BSLs societal contribution through extensive engagement with
all stakeholder groups (students, parents, alumni, companies, the board, the
administration and the faculty). Once they had identified the blind spots,
the students invited representatives of all stakeholders to brainstorm how
we could overcome these blind spots. Nine so-called green-teams formed,
consisting of always a mix of stakeholders, often students, professors and
administrative staff. Over a period of 6 to 12 months, these teams worked
105
26/03/15 6:12 PM
katrin muff
to implement important changes at BSL, creating a dynamic and a spirit

of change unlike anything the organisation had ever experienced. The
entry-hall was redone, plastic cups eliminated, awareness videos shot and
most importantly, a new mission was developed and born that has since
propelled BSL to fully embrace the three-pillared vision simultaneously:
sustainabilityresponsibilityentrepreneurship.
In this stakeholder-driven process to define our mission, my fear was that
the end result would be a consensus-driven, watered-down, weak, pleasing
statement that wouldnt contain the seeds of provocation and rebellion that
we were starting to dare to express more fully. Interestingly, the opposite
happened. Once first drafts started to circulate and the debate about the
message was launched, some of the more conservative stakeholdersour
facultysurprised us all by fully embracing what we had in mind.
I remember very keenly a moment when a professor of marketing said in a
large circular discussion:
If you really want to be that radical and if you are not afraid of what this means
to your customers and market, then you need to be a lot more explicit and clear
about it. Express it loud and clear; at least this will enable those that get it to be
attracted to the school.
I am very proud of our mission which now reads: We provide a learning

platform for individuals and organizations to thrive by co-creating viable
business solutions for our planet and its people. It took months to find these
words. And in these months, not only friendships were built as a result of
such intense partnership and participation, but we also experienced the broad
spectrum of working with stakeholders in consultation all the way to truly
engaging with them as full co-researchers in our journey.
Significance & sustainability: creating a larger vision

Ever since the financial crisis in 2008, the same year I became Dean at BSL,
public voices questioning the relevance of business schools could no longer
be ignored. The 50+20 movement (www.50plus20.org) emerged from a side
event of the 2010 Academy of Management Annual Meeting in Montreal.
The conference was attended by more than 12,000 management scholars and
was held under the motto Daring to Care. A handful of Deans, Directors and
Professors got together to agree that it was high time that the business school
community would engage in the public discussion concerning business
and the economy in view of the sustainability challenges our planet and
its societies were facing. And, more importantly, that it was high time that
we developed a radical new vision for business schools and management
education as a whole. The story of what followed is well documented,
covering the collaborative visioning process and the launch activities at the
106
26/03/15 6:12 PM
RIO+20 Conference in June 2012 (e.g. Muff, 2013). The 50+20 vision, which
can be summarised as follows, became the guiding star for BSL:
Rather than train managers for organisations that operate within 20th
century logic, management educators need to answer the call of service to
become custodians which provide a service to society. The management
school of the future understands that transforming business, the economy
and society begins with its own internal transformation. Thus becoming an
example by being the change such an institution wishes to progress, Vision
50+20 envisions three fundamental roles in management education:
1. Educating and developing globally responsible leaders
2. Enabling business organisations to serve the common good
3. Engaging in the transformation of business and the economy
As a primary educational institution, our prime focus was to improve and
transform our educational programmes. In addition, however, the 50+20
vision made us realise that we could and should embrace our responsibility
in helping the transformation of organisations both in business and beyond
to embrace sustainability, thus serving society and the planet. Our greatest
challenge was to embrace the newly defined role of becoming a meeting place
107
26/03/15 6:12 PM
katrin muff
for citizens and concerned stakeholders to resolve burning societal issues.

Having been instrumental in developing the Collaboratory methodology
for 50+20 Vision, we decided to further develop and explore the range of
applications of the Collaboratory.
The Collaboratory method represents an interesting way to unite all three
roles defined by Vision 50+20. In the domain of education, the degree of
engagement in learning can be portrayed as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1The evolution of teaching and learning approaches in business schools
over time
Source: Muff, 2013
Degree of engagement in learning
The collaboratory (participatory learning)
Self-directed
Experimental learning (transformative & whole person learning)
Guided learning
Experiential learning (including reflected practice and fieldwork)
Immersed
Case study approach
Engaged
Mostly listening
Lecturing
The development over time - from the 19th century until today
Simply put, the Collaboratory offers the highest degree of engagement of

any educational tool known in business education to date. Interestingly,
the Collaboratory is not only an educational tool but also a stakeholderengagement methodology from applied research and potentially an action
research practice.
A similar logic applies when considering what it might take to transform
business schools. We differentiate between three orders of implementing
change as illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2Three orders of implementing change and learning for globally
responsible leadership
Source: Muff, 2013
The three orders of

implementing change
in learning
1st order change:
Bolt-on solutions
2nd order change:
Built-in solutions
3rd order change:
Platform solutions
108
Enabler 1:
Transformative
learning
Enabler 2:
Issue-centered
learning
Enabler 3:
Reflective practice
and fieldwork
Clearly distinct
isolated approaches
Clearly distinct
isolated approaches
Clearly distinct
isolated approaches
Combination of approaches
Combination of approaches
An integrated realization of the vision by using a collaboratory process
26/03/15 6:12 PM
First order change is represented by so-called bolt-on solutions which can

be adopted relatively easily without a deep institutional change. Second
order change represents solutions which are considered built-in and
which demand a profound inner transformation of an institution. Third
order change involves so-called platform solutions which are co-created by
relevant stakeholders on issues of concern. Such platform solutions exceed
the existing organisational thinking and the often existing competitive spirit
between institutions and aims at creating a space where collaboration can
reign in service of solving an issue or concern that is of greater interest.
When looking at the landscape of business schools, the biggest challenges
right now are not in the area of shifting to a third order change but to
recognise that a first order change has not yet really addressed the issue, no
matter how challenging it was to get it accomplished.
When shifting the perspective from the institutional transformation that
is required of a business school to consider what kind of support business
organisations require to be able to change themselves, a similar challenge
emerges. While the large majority of organisations are busy with first order
change, the challenge lies not only in embedding sustainability deeply in
the organisation as is defined by a second order change, but to adopt an
entirely new perspective on ones purpose and become a positive contributor
to solving burning societal and environmental issues in platform solutions
together with other relevant stakeholders (third order change). Differentiating
between these three ways of thinking and operating is also a useful
framework to help business organisations to understand the transformative
journey to serve the common good, helping them understand what business
sustainability actually meant. The term sustainability had been used (and
abused) increasingly in the past decade and had come to mean many things
to many people. Together with Thomas Dyllick from the University of St
Gallen, we developed a Business Sustainability Typology defining three
different types or stages for organisations to embed sustainability (Dyllick and
Muff, 2013). This typology consists of three types of Business Sustainability,
1.0, 2.0 and 3.0, which can be directly connected to the three orders of
change. To ensure a practical application of this conceptual idea for business,
we wrote a follow-on article to facilitate the translation of the concept to the
various organisational dimensions (Muff and Dyllick, 2014).
The above illustrations seek to demonstrate how an organisation of any
kind can achieve significance and sustainability by selecting a perspective
of meaning and relevance that goes beyond the immediate context of the
organisation in order to support the flourishing of persons, communities,
and the wider ecology (Bradbury-Huang, 2013).
109
26/03/15 6:12 PM
katrin muff
Actionability: co-creating future-relevant education

In the context of the 50+20 vision creation process, we felt it was important
to not only propose a conceptual vision, but to also offer a concrete solution
for one of the key aspects of the 50+20 vision, namely creating a sustainable
business course for mid-career professionals. Given BSLs unique ability
to implement new programmes swiftly, we decided to co-create such a
programme in Switzerland. In the design stage, we were looking for clarity
in defining the purpose and focus of the course, the learning outcomes
and creative pedagogical solutions to ensure that these objectives could be
achieved.
The first challenge was to identify all key stakeholders who had the relevant
knowledge and experience to contribute to such a unique light-house
course. We invited all relevant programme directors of fellow universities,
key consultants in the domain of business sustainability, coaches and
facilitators experienced in developing transformative leaders to two creative
brainstorming sessions which we hosted at BSL. Walls covered in paper, we
facilitated a carefully designed process that helped clarify the core design
principles of the programme (see Figs 3 and 4).
Figure 3 The three subject domains of the Diploma in Sustainable Business
Source: www.bsl-lausanne.ch
1. GLOBAL CHALLENGES
2. STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS
ate g
i c i m p li c
at i
bu
bu
on
e s s i m p a ct
challenges
bal
glo
str
sin
bu
on
on
at i
at i
i c i m p li c
i c i m p li c
ate g
ate g
s
3. BUSINESS IMPACT
challenges
bal
glo
str
str
challenges
bal
glo
sin
e s s i m p a ct
sin
e s s i m p a ct
The subject competence is divided in the three aspects: starting with global
challenges, from which we derive strategic implications on a societal/
industry level, to finally evaluate the business impact on an organisational
level. We developed nine modules rotating through these three aspects in
three consecutive rounds in order to ensure that students would end up
with a fluency to shift among these different perspectives. In addition, the
subject competence is complemented with leadership modules to ensure that
110
26/03/15 6:12 PM
students have the capability to implement change, and a 9-month hands-on

strategic consultancy project so that graduates have applied what they have
learned in a real company.
In fall 2012, we launched an innovation cohort which completed the 9-month
programmes just days before we headed to the RIO+20 conference. The
inclusion of the class in the programme design review and their constructive
contributions to amend and improve the programme proved so valuable, that
we have kept the co-creative spirit of programme design with every new class.
So far, we have amended the programme three times and have always found
important ways to further improve both elements and the overall structural
logic. We are now in the fourth edition and have found a way to integrate the
feedback of the cohorts into the ongoing design changes.
Figure 4 The three learning dimensions of the Diploma in Sustainable Business

The 3 Learning dimensions

2. LEADING CHANCE SKILLS
3. PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Implementation and change management

skills are critical to bring sustainability
to business. To ensure this, the Leading
Change dimension forms an integral part
of the program.
Sustainability projects are conducted in

a collaborative work space and from the
backbone of the program. These projects
are conducted in collaboration with
companies, communities or NGOs. project
Learning is integrated into all modules of
the program.
The 3 Perspectives
1. SUBJECT COMPETENCE
Exposure to the best current knowledge in
the global and business sustainability fields
provides the foundation for understanding
and managing the sustainability
challenges.
Global Challenges
Subject
competence
Leading
change
skills
Project
experience
Strategic Implications
Business Impact
The ongoing co-creative programme design of this programme is an example

of how action research can trigger and influence actionability as an emergent
unfolding, which as Bradbury-Huang (2013) suggests highlights the ways
in which: quality can be reflected in the extent to which the action research
provides new ideas that guide action in response to need.
111
26/03/15 6:12 PM
katrin muff
Appropriate methods & process: co-creating

future-relevant research
As shown, it is possible to design an educational programme in a co-creative
action research manner, with stakeholders in cycles of action and reflection.
Another challenge is how to reinvent the research domain in higher
education. Following the launch of the 50+20 vision, the community of
involved business schools challenged itself to come up with a prototype in
doctoral education with the idea to develop a research faculty for the future.
We started a series of meetings to discuss the objectives of an ideal doctoral
training and identified the need to not only develop research skills but to also
work on the person and leadership, coaching and consulting skills. After two
co-creative sessions which were similar in approach to that described above,
we had developed a skeleton of a programme. A key insight of these design
sessions was the understanding that we needed to develop future-relevant
faculty and consultants with the necessary skills to help organisations to
embed sustainability. We understood that we could achieve this by adopting
the philosophy and methodology of action research and other relevant skills
and competencies.
As no school had the ability to quickly implement a prototype of what we
had developed, we decided at BSL to revise our existing DBA programme
and to launch an innovation cohort consisting of interested existing and
newly enrolled students. As we didnt possess all the necessary competencies
to professionally accompany such a demanding programme, we created
an alliance with a global research network in sustainability and invited
leading global experts in the key areas of competence to form a programme
supervisory team. Building on the initial programme draft, we developed
the DBA programme structure (see Fig. 5) and invited the first cohort to
a one-week training session in Switzerland to provide training in action
research and company consulting. In this week, the faculty support team and
the cohort further refined the programme and co-defined the programme
deliverables, approach and required support.
112
26/03/15 6:12 PM
Figure 5 BSL Doctorate in Business Administration programme overview

Doctorate in Business Administration:

Program Overview
4 months
Timeline
DBA Program
support
provided
Application incl. Interview
DBA Process
steps
Year 1
Entry Exam
Sustainability
Fundamentals
Academic
Foundation
Academic
writing support
& thesis topic
definition
(Katrin Muff )
Year 2
Phase I
Case study research
(with 3 companies)
Year 3
Phase II
6-12 mth Action Research
(1 company in topic area)
Phase III
Synthesis
Consulting (Claude Siegenthaler, Kathy Miller, Thomas Dyllick, Katrin Muff )

Company Selection, Value Proposition, Project Acquisition, SCALA survey
Action Research (Hilary Bradbury-Huang and GOLDEN Topic Experts)
Methods, Practices, Mentoring, Documentation, Reviews, Topic support
Leadership Development (Claude Siegenthaler, Hilary Bradbuary-Huang)
Interdisciplinary AR Skils, Relflective Action, Peer-to-Peer Learning
1-2 Training Academy at BSL (3-4 days each), Webinars, Individual coaching
Graduation
requirements
(DBA outputs)
Formal
process
Fee structure
1 academic
paper
Preliminary
Acceptance
Admin. Fee
CHF 4800
3 case studies
1 topical paper on
action research
Leadership
profile
No final
defense
Full
Acceptance
Year 1 Program Fee
CHF 12000
Year 2 Program Fee Year 3 Program Fee

CHF 12000
CHF 12000
The interesting part of the journey is how the faculty and the students
advance together in frequent webinars and how the support faculty
co-develops the programme as we go embracing challenges such as building
bridges between a more classical case-study research in phase 1 with the
action research approach in phase 2. As a faculty support team, we are very
conscious to what degree the continuous development and adaptation of the
programme structure itself is emergent action research.
We have learned that principles of action research can be applied both in
the ongoing adaptation and co-creation of a programme. Additionally they
can be used as a research method and learning journey for the students in a
programme. Finding the appropriate methods and processes in such a journey is
a continuous challenge. This example seeks to serve as an illustration of how
to articulate and illustrate the action research process and related methods,
including the voices of participants in the research (Bradbury-Huang, 2013).
113
26/03/15 6:12 PM
katrin muff
Contribution to action research theory & practice: co-creating

future-relevant societal engagement
When implementing the third role of the 50+20 vision, namely embracing
societal engagement, we benefited from the Collaboratory philosophy and
methodology that we had drafted for the RIO+20 conference and which
has been very successfully used in many other applications ever since. The
spontaneous spreading of the Collaboratory methodology worldwide has
encouraged us to put together a practitioner handbook (The Collaboratory;
Muff, 2014) consisting of the various underlying action research philosophies
(open space, Theory U [see also Scharmer and Kauefer, in this volume], the
circle work, Appreciative Inquiry [see also Graham, in this volume], etc.)
and a wide variety of concrete applications in various domains (education,
business, citizen movements).
A Collaboratory can be described as the preferred place for stakeholders
to meet (Muff, 2013). The philosophy of the Collaboratory is diametrically
opposed to the thinking behind the lecture theatre and provides an open
space for a broad group of stakeholders to meet on equal terms, where the
teacher is replaced by a skilled facilitator. As such, the Collaboratory offers
an influential alternative for public debate and problem solving, inclusive
of views from business and management faculty, citizens, politicians,
entrepreneurs, people from various cultures and religions, the young and the
old. It is a combination of action learning and action research as practice for
large scale change endeavours.
At BSL, we use the Collaboratory as our way to engage with our local civil
society. We regularly organise issue-based Collaboratory events which we
hope initiate and trigger change initiatives locally. In 2012, we started with
a Collaboratory on the topic of basic income, the idea that every citizen
in need receive a basic revenue that allows her to survive. We invited all
concerned stakeholders, those for and against this, those who didnt know
and wanted to inform themselves, policy makers, unemployed youngsters,
artists with irregular income, managers and self-employed entrepreneurs,
and selected five experts among them who represented all key points of view.
We measured the position of all participants at the beginning and the end
of the event and were amazed to note a shift from 20% for, 80% undecided,
10% against the idea at the beginning of the session shifting to 70% for
the idea, 25% undecided and 5% against the idea at the end of the session.
Rarely had we seen such a powerful shift of not only awareness but revised
points of view. In 2013, we held a series of Collaboratories around the idea
of the Economy for the Common Good, an Austrian initiative that offers
an alternative economic perspective and a concrete tool for organisations to
measure their societal impact (Felber, 2013). The goal of this Collaboratory
was to establish the Economy for the Common Goods movement locally
in the Swiss French region. In 2014, we added two more Collaboratory
114
26/03/15 6:12 PM
initiatives, one on the hot issue of corruption and a student-led project

on reducing consumer food waste in Switzerland by 50% in 2017. These
Collaboratories have shaped our understanding of our role in the regional
society and how we use the convening power of our business school to
invite concerned citizens and stakeholders to meet and discuss quantumleap solutions by back-casting from a shared vision. Participants tell us that
it is impossible to explain what the experience is like unless you participate
in such a facilitated process. The Collaboratory book hopefully serves as
a tool to grow the use of this wonderful methodology beyond its manifold
applications today.
From an action research perspective, the interesting thing about the
Collaboratory lies in the fact that the research topic is defined together with
stakeholders and that the researcher assumes an active role in supporting
prototype solutions by ensuring rigour in the implementation process of
prototypes. The researcher takes an active part in the experiment and serves
as both a loyal and stringent observer on how the experiment unfolds noting
how assumptions, worldviews and perspectives shift in the course of the
development of a prototype, as well as by providing relevant pragmatic
research methodologies and tools that allow a rigorous observation of the
experiment against the initially expected outcome. As such, the researcher
puts himself at the service of solving a burning societal issue in real time,
allowing for a very direct positive impact for society. Such a researcher
operates in a very different mode than a conventional researcher who selfselects his research topic and focuses on past occurrences to understand the
phenomenon he is studying. Albert Einstein once said that you cannot solve
a problem with the same mind that created it framing precisely the challenge
and limitation of traditional research. Our interest in the Collaboratory as a
tool to solve future-relevant issues with co-creative stakeholder engagement
processes which as accompanied by forward-thinking action researchers is to
overcome this very limitation. We consider the Collaboratory as a place where
action learning meets action research. We are only starting this journey and
are looking for testimonials and feedback from any action researcher with
experience or an interest in furthering this field.
In summary, the Collaboratory represents not only an exciting new way to
combine education and research in the relevant action mode for future
solutions, but it offers also an opportunity of a third-order change in business
schools by advancing from bolt-on solutions (first-order change) to built-in
solutions (second-order change) to platform solutions (Muff, 2013). At such
a stage, a business school or university is
willing to see things differently, to change its perspective and assumption and
to open up to the experience of seeing its own worldview rather than seeing with
its worldview. Learning processes are thus created to facilitate the fundamental
recognition of a given paradigm, in order to enable paradigmatic reconstructions.
These are, by definition, transformative. The challenge we see for future
business schools is the transformation of the current model where a few selective
115
26/03/15 6:12 PM
katrin muff
owners of knowledge disseminate knowledge to the masses, to a collaborative

space of shared learning. This is indeed new ground for business schools and
involves innovation and creativity in its conception, design, implementation and
continuous improvement (Muff, 2013).
The manifold use and application of action research as the ideal mode of
research in such a collaborative space is expected to richly contribute to the
action research theory and knowledge, hopefully enriching and expanding the
vibrant community that engages with it.
Reflexivity: sharing learning among students

Bringing this home to the local student experience are Fred, Gulen and
Munif, all doctoral level candidates at BSL. Across 10 time zones, they settle
into their weekly Skype call updating each other on their progress with their
in-company research. Fred is a master of time management and adaptability.
As a busy Sales Director in charge of Europe and Asia for a US multinational,
he travels 80% of his time, dialling in from the strangest places. His issue
right now is to find a way to help the Head of Sustainability of a Swiss bank
to convince their Head of Communications to embrace the opportunity to do
a case study with him. Munif, originally from the Pacific Islands, now living
in Sydney Australia, is of great support to him. He has nearly a decade of
international consulting experience, building on a very successful corporate
career both in Europe and Australia.
Munif:
Fred, they are afraid of potential risks involved and what might be exposed of
them. It is important that the communication folks understand that nothing
will be published without their prior approval. Is there a way that you can have a
direct connection with these guys, even if just by phone or Skype?
Munif himself is very familiar with the challenges of long-distance consulting.

All of the companies he is working with are located in Denmark10 time
zones away. He has just co-authored an important document commissioned
by the Danish Government that envisions the inclusion of externalities in
corporate accountingthe topic of passion for Munif. He is in a good space
right now as this report not only provides him with additional exposure and
credibility but also serves as an acceleratorofhis cause.
Fred:
Thats a great idea, Munif, Ill see if I can directly talk to the communications
folks and find out what their issues are. Congratulations, by the way, on your
report. I am really impressed. Have you thought about how you can use it as a
lever for your discussions with your companies? Have they read it yet?
116
26/03/15 6:12 PM
Gulen, who commutes between Romania (work), Turkey (family) and the
UK (research) joins in: Munif, great job on the reportreally, hats off!
She is passionate about the well-being or social aspect of sustainability and
is working with three leading hotel groups in the UK and Scandinavia to
identify how to embrace well-being more fully in the hospitality industry.
Guys, I just got the survey results from two hotels. They are really telling a great
story and allow me to pin point both blind spots and areas of opportunities
for the hotels. I know that the hotels are very sensitive about being compared
among themselves, each fearing to look bad. I am thinking of waiting with my
comparative study until later in the process and first work with each of them
individually, so that we can build trust and they can get a feeling of where they
stand. I am planning to finalise this approach tomorrow.
Gulen rarely asks for advice, she really knows what she is doing and is very
well organised. She nonetheless enjoys being able to share her progress with
her colleagues. Putting ideas into words and speaking them out loud has
helped her tremendously to gain clarity.
Reflexivity is a key and choice point in doing good action research. Not only
Gulen, but also Fred and Munif are learning to appreciate the friendship
that has developed between them, but also that their peer learning is an
opportunity to continuously re-clarify their own roles, the context and the
underlying reason for their involvement with the companies that have engaged
in action research with them. Their weekly call is one example of what allows
them to take a selfcritical stance and to see how their perspective limits or
contributes to the creation of knowledge. It is also augmented by coaching
from their faculty team as well as the use of the Global Leadership Profile to
develop self-insight and aspirations with regard to first person action research.
The seven choice points of action research quality

Using the structure of the seven quality choice points of action research
(Bradbury, 2013), we highlighted a wide range of applications for action
research. At BSL, we have used the action research methodology as a
philosophy of co-creation at all levels: at the strategic level of BSL (section
3), as an organisational tool for transformation (section 4), as a means to
co-create new forms of education (section 5) as well as new forms of research
(section 6), to ultimately support the Collaboratory idea which serves as a
means to engage in resolving societal issues by combining a stakeholder
engagement process with action learning and action research (section 7).
117
26/03/15 6:12 PM
katrin muff
Figure 6 Connecting article sections with action research quality points

# Sub-section
AR choice point
Articulation of objectives
Broadening the use of action research
2 Turning BSL into a platform of co-creation
Partnership & participation
3 Creating a larger vision
Significance & sustainability
4 Co-creating future-relevant education
Actionability
Appropriate methods & process
Co-creating future-relevant research
6 Co-creating future-relevant societal

engagement
Contribution to AR
theory-practice
7 Sharing learning among students
Reflexivity
We may well only have seen the tip of the iceberg in the endless opportunities
of applying action research as a driver for future-relevant transformation
at all levels of change: the individual, the organisational and the societal
level. Further research is required to explore this emerging field of broad
application of action research and we welcome contributions, testimonials
and ideas of how to advance further.
Bibliography
Bradbury-Huang, H. (2013), The seven choice points in action research, for the BSL DBA
program, used in peer review at Action Research http://arj.sagepub.com
Dyllick, T., Muff, K. (2013), Clarifying the meaning of business sustainability: introducing
a typology from business-as-usual to true business sustainability, in review process at
the Journal for Organization & Development, SAGE Publication, a summary extract is
available on SSRN http://ssrn.com/abstract=2368735
Felber, C (2012), Die Gemeinwohl-konomie, Eine demokratische Alternative wchst,
updated and extended new edition, Zsolnay
Kassarjian, J.B. (2012), BSL, a business school in transition, cases A, B, C, epilogue,
teaching notes and teaching material, published by Babson College, available through
the Case Center http://www.thecasecentre.org/educators/search/results?s=6B8477EA
D2DB7F9FB69DE707B5F7A216
Muff, K. (2013). Rethinking management education for the world: A TEDx event in
Lausanne, June 2013 http://youtu.be/jvipxPqS_38
Muff K., Dyllick D., Drewell M., North J., Shrivastava P. & Haertle J. (2013): Management
Education for the World: A vision for business schools serving people and planet.
Northampton: Edward Elgar.
118
26/03/15 6:12 PM
Muff, K. (2012), Are business schools doing their job?, Journal of Management
Development, Vol 31, Issue 7, 642-662.
Muff, K. (2013), Developing globally responsible leaders in business schools, Journal of
Management Development, Vol. 32 Issue 5, pp.487-507
Muff, K. (ed.) (2014), The Collaboratory, Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield, UK.
Muff, K., Dyllick T., (2014), An organizational roadmap towards business sustainability,
available on SSRN http://ssrn.com/abstract=2442211
119
26/03/15 6:12 PM
Purpose at the Heart of Strategy

Creating a Sustainable Business while Solving
the Worlds Challenges
Gabi Zedlmayer
Vice President and Chief Progress Officer, HP
Companies that shift their thinking about sustainability from a sideline activity to one thats embedded in their business strategy ignite
new opportunities for growth. Often companies make this shift when
faced with an organisational crisis, such as risks to their supply chain
or a financial crisis. Rather than wait for crisis to strike, business
leaders should recognise that a purpose-driven strategy is their path
to long-term sustainable growth. Integrating sustainability into the
heart of a business inspires game-changing innovation, progressive
problem solving, and highly engaged and motivated employees. By
driving a collective shift to purpose-driven business strategy, we can
accelerate the transition to a more sustainable economy as we solve
societys toughest challenges.
Gabi Zedlmayer is Vice President and Chief Progress Officer at HP. She
drives HPs Living Progress initiatives, aligned with HPs business strategy,
that help improve the communities we serve. She leads a global team of
experts focused on solving social and environmental issues in collaboration
with non-profit organisations, governments, customers, and partners. Her
goal is to create solutions that improve communities and advance human,
economic and environmental progress.Zedlmayer serves as a member of the
board of directors of Hewlett-Packard GmbH Germany. She is also President
of the Womens Council of HypoVereinsbank UNICREDIT and a member of
the EU Commission e-skills leadership board.
120
BSL5_Gabi Zedlmayer.indd 120
OO Sustainability
OO Business
strategy
OO Purpose-driven
strategy
OO Living Progress
OO Sustainable
innovation
OO Information
technology
[email protected]
26/03/15 6:13 PM
purpose at the heart of strategy
Every generation has had an industry that changed the fabric of society. Over
the last 40 years, information technology (IT) has been that defining industry.
It has changed not just business processes and personal productivity, but the
very ways people communicate and collaborate as well.
Peoples increasing desire for anytime, anywhere access has been fed by
the emergence of mobile devices and enabled by cloud computing. This
shift to an always-connected world is creating an explosive growth in digital
contentwhat the IT industry calls big data (Fig. 1).
Figure 1The shift to an always-connected world is creating an explosive growth in
digital content
Big doesnt begin to describe the amount of data the world generates in a day.
In fact, Ernst & Young (EY, 2014) reports that the world will create as much data
in 10 minutes as in all of human history up until the year 2003. DOMO (James,
2014) estimates that every minute, Facebook users share nearly 2.5 million pieces
of content, and Twitter users tweet 277,000 times. Those numbers are only
going to multiply exponentially as new technologies, like immersive computing
and wearable devices, make generating and sharing content even more pervasive.
With an increasing global population and a rising middle class in emerging
economies like China, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, and Malaysia,
billions more people will be connecting in the coming decade, shifting the
centres of power in the world and further accelerating the data explosion.
All that data is collected, processed, stored, and managed in large-scale data
centres around the world, which collectively consume a tremendous amount
of energy. Today, data centres that power the public cloud use more energy
than the country of Japan (HP Labs, 2014), and may soon require more
energy than we can even produce each year.
121
26/03/15 6:13 PM
gabi zedlmayer
As a society, we are depleting our natural resources at an alarming rate.

According to the Global Footprint Network, each year we already
use
50% more resources than the Earth can regenerate annually;
HP Chairman and
and
its projected that by 2030 we will need the equivalent of two
CEO Meg Whitman
Earths
to support the planets population if current consumption
says, Business as
trends continue. We, of course, only have one Earth, which is why
usual is not
HP Chairman and CEO Meg Whitman says, Business as usual is
sustainable
not sustainable.
Clearly, we have to think and act differently in the way we conduct business.
And the time for action is now.
Sustainable business, sustainable world

Companies like Unilever and HP have embraced this opportunity to firmly
embed purpose into the heart of their business strategy. This integration is
essential not only for society, but for long-term business growth, fuelling the
transition to a sustainable economy.
What drives a company to adopt a purpose-driven strategy varies, but
generally there are two ways companies come to adopt such strategies. For
122
26/03/15 6:13 PM
some companies, sustainability-related products or services are the reason

they existthink alternative energy companies and businesses driving the
sharing economy. But other companies adopt this strategy out of urgency
and necessity, perhaps resulting from risks to their supply chain or financial
challenges.
For HP, it was largely driven by our company turnaround strategy. While
sustainability has been embedded in HPs DNA from the beginning, it wasnt
always completely intertwined with the business strategy. That changed
when we began looking at sustainability as an untapped business asset. Our
leadership recognised that to optimise its value, sustainability couldnt be
something we did alongside our businessit had to be core to our business
strategy. In this way, HP could drive sustainable growth while solving the
worlds toughest challenges.
In 2013, HP launched Living Progress (Fig. 2), which is our framework for
thinking about how we do business. To us it means creating a better future
for everyone through our actions and innovations. We do this by working
to develop the most resource-efficient IT products and services through the
most responsible value chain.
123
26/03/15 6:13 PM
gabi zedlmayer
Figure 2 Living Progress framework
Resource-efficient products and services

Putting purpose at the heart of strategy inspires companies to think
differently about innovation; to reach beyond incremental improvements
to create transformative solutions; to confront biases and constraints that
obscure possibilities; and to connect customer needs with human, economic,
and environmental impact. The result can be game-changing innovation that
creates new market opportunities.
solutions must not
just make
incremental
improvements; they
must truly solve the
challenges to enable
sustainable growth
While trends in mobility, social media, big data, and cloudwhat

we call the New Style of ITcreate tremendous opportunities for
technology companies like HP, our solutions must not just make
incremental improvements; they must truly solve the challenges
to enable sustainable growth. For example, the energy and space
constraints that threaten the future of data centres is not a problem
we can afford to simply slow down by making technology a little
smaller or a little more efficient. We must completely rethink the
way technology is delivered.
For HP, this type of innovation is imperative for the sustainability and
competitiveness of our own businessand for the stability and growth of the
global economy. Data fuels human and economic progress. We must find
new ways of meeting the explosive demand for data using less space and
energy resources to enable business to continue to function and thrive.
124
26/03/15 6:13 PM
Figure 3Innovations like HP Moonshot are needed to revolutionise the space and
energy economics of the data centre
This is our mindset as we work to revolutionise the space and energy

economics of the data centre. Today it shows up in innovations like HP
Moonshot servers (Fig. 3), which delivers right-size computing for the right
workloads. For example, for big data applications, the HP Moonshot solution
would utilize up to 90% less power, use 97% less space, and cost 78% less
than a traditional server environment.1 And the HP Apollo 8000 System,
a liquid-cooled supercomputer that can help organisations eliminate up to
3,800 tonnes of carbon dioxide waste from data centres per year.2 Moreover,
we are focused on a transformative innovation we call The Machine that will
redefine how we think about computing in this big data eracreating new
solutions that are orders of magnitude faster, that use the optimal amount of
energy for the task, and that are built at a fraction of the size.
This is the kind of creative innovation and progressive problem solving that
comes from a purpose-driven strategy. For HP, we know the greatest impact
we can have on driving a sustainable economy is through our product use
reducing the carbon impact of our products, replacing outdated, inefficient
processes with more sustainable technology, and providing the underserved
people of our world with access to resources that improve their lives and
livelihoods. But we also know that just as important as what we do, is how
we do it.
1 HP Internal testing, compared to a traditional 2U/2P rack server.
2 HP internal estimate comparing HP Apollo 8000 to an air-cooled data centre with 3
megawatts of IT. A standard sustainability formula was used to derive CO2 savings in
tonnes using the kWh savings based on real-world data centre analysis.
125
26/03/15 6:13 PM
gabi zedlmayer
Most responsible value chain

companies must
take responsibility
across their entire
value chain and
help drive human,
economic and
environmental
progress
To make a sustainable impact and continue fuelling our worlds

economy, we believe companies must take responsibility across
their entire value chain and help drive human, economic, and
environmental progress.
With one of the most expansive supply chains in the IT industry,
we work diligently to improve the resiliency and reduce the risks,
while protecting the health and well-being of the workers that
support that entire chain.
Since more than half of our final assembly manufacturers are

located in China, this has been an area of great focus at HP. Like
other global businesses operating in China, a majority of our work was
focused in coastal cities, like Shanghai and Beijing. More and more workers
from the countryside were forced to commute to the coast for work, and we
were aware of the stress commuting was having on these workers and their
families. In addition, we recognised that consolidating our manufacturing
facilities in a single geographic area was exposing us to greater risk,
particularly in terms of labour shortages. For these reasons, HP worked with
the Chinese Government to establish a manufacturing centre in Chongqing
in central China, nearer to many of the workers homes.
This strategy, which we called Go West, can help lessen stress on workers by
keeping people closer to their families, according to a New York Times video
report. In addition, housing facilities for the workers, which resemble a
typical US university, feature amenities such as a cafeteria serving free food,
Internet lounges, a gymnasium, a pharmacy, and a hair salonall of which
contribute to a better quality of life.3
It also created new jobs in Chongqing, which helped open the door for other
businesses and commerce to enter the region. The new facility helped us
improve our operating margin and drive value back to our business.
At the same time, we helped establish a new freight train network from
Chongqing to Germany, along the Trans-Eurasian Railway, to create easier
access between central China and Europe. This alternative rail solution
reduces CO2e emissions by more than 90% compared with air freight and
cuts costs by over 60%. The route is also 10 days faster than ocean transport.
Looking holistically at our supply chain in China, we were able to create an
innovative solution that improves workers lives, reduces environmental
impact, and helps drive a more sustainable economy. This is Living Progress
at work. And the journey doesnt end there. We continue to look for ways to
3 New York Times Video Report: http://www.nytimes.com/video/business/100000001974026/
the-ieconomy-factory-upgrade.html
126
26/03/15 6:13 PM
improve the lives of workers across our supply chain and raise the bar for
the industry. In 2013, we introduced the HP Student and Dispatch Worker4
Guidance Standard for Supplier Facilities in the Peoples Republic of China.
And in 2014, HP became the first company in the IT industry to require direct
employment of foreign migrant workers in its supply chain, addressing the
vulnerabilities that these workers face in outsourced employment relationships.
Engaging employees
Aligning strategy around a common purpose can also help engage and excite
employees. In 2014, the HP Company Foundation5 launched the Matter
to a Million employee engagement programme with Kiva, a non-profit
organisation working to alleviate poverty by connecting people through micro
lending. Through the Matter to a Million programme every HP employee
received a US$25 credit to loan to a small business owner through Kiva. This
five-year collaboration with Kiva gives HP employees multiple opportunities
to contribute and be active participants in driving economic progress in
global communities.
The response and enthusiasm has been staggering. In the first nine months,
HP employees and the HP Company Foundation have supported more than
US$5.8 million in microloans to entrepreneurs around the world, and some
HP employees are choosing to drive additional impact by contributing their
own funds directly to the Kiva programme.
Conclusion
Its easy to feel overwhelmed and discouraged by the tough social, economic
and environmental challenges facing our world, but HP believes these
challenges present opportunities for creativity and innovation. A new
sustainable economy that advances human, economic, and environmental
progress is not only possible, its essential, and businesses must step up and
drive this transformation.
Our journey to create a better future began with putting purpose at the heart
of our strategy. As we continue to execute on our turnaround and prepare to
separate into two Fortune 50 companies, having a clearly articulated vision of
4 Dispatch workers are temporary labourers provided by agencies.
5 Hewlett-Packard Company is the sole contributor to the Hewlett-Packard Company
Foundation and has funded the Foundation throughout the last 35 years.
127
26/03/15 6:13 PM
gabi zedlmayer
A new sustainable
economy that
advances human,
economic and
environmental
progress is not only
possible, its
essential, and
businesses must
step up and drive
this transformation
citizenship thats intertwined with our innovation, operations, and

social investment provides us with an essential roadmap. Were
realising this vision through innovations like Moonshot, Apollo,
and The Machine that focus the creativity and talents of our
employees on developing solutions that build a sustainable future
for our business and for the global economy.
In her book, A Better World, Inc. (Korngold, 2014), Alice Korngold

tells why global companies are uniquely suited to solve the
worlds problems and succeeding where governments and nongovernmental organisations have not. Korngold argues that
only global companies have the combination of human capital,
technology, international scope, and incentives of the marketplace to
build a better world, and she demonstrates through corporate case
studies how companies are profiting by solving the worlds toughest challenges.
At HP, we realise this possibility every day through the commitment, passion,
and actions of our people united behind a common purpose to create a better
future for everyone. We see this happening at other companies, like Unilever,
Nike, and Interface, that put purpose at the heart of strategy, and as a result
are transforming their industries and the world.
By adopting a purpose-driven strategy and integrating sustainability across
their entire value chain, companies can capture return on capital today and
build the leadership and business value for their future. These investments
help companies create a competitive advantage, build stability, and provide
assurances to stakeholders that they are well positioned for the challenges of
the 21st century, all of which help accelerate a sustainable economy.
References
EY, (2014) Big data: Changing the way businesses compete and operate, April 2014, page
24 (http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/EY_-_Big_data:_changing_the_way_
businesses_operate/$FILE/EY-Insights-on-GRC-Big-data.pdf)
James, J., (2014) Data Never Sleeps 2.0, April 23, 2014 (http://www.domo.com/
blog/2014/04/data-never-sleeps-2-0/)
HP Labs (2014), HP Labs on the Data Explosion, HP Matter: The Enterprise Issue,
Issue No. 1, June 2014 (https://ssl.www8.hp.com/hpmatter/issue-no-1-june-2014/
hp-labs-data-dilemma)
Global Footprint Network, World footprint: Do we fit on the planet, http://www.
footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/world_footprint/
Korngold, A. (2014), A Better World, Inc., Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY.
q
128
26/03/15 6:13 PM
B U I L D I N G S U S TA I N A B L E L E G A C I E S
THE NEW FRONTIER OF SOCIETAL VALUE CO-CREATION
REFRAMING THE GAME: THE TRANSITION TO A NEW SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY
A SPECIAL ISSUE OF BUILDING SUSTAINABLE LEGACIES
A must-read for business leaders, scholars, government officials, and every citizen
who cares about sustainability as a core societal value.
Dan Esty, Professor, Yale University; author of Green to Gold: How Smart Companies use
Environmental Strategy to Innovate, Create Value, and Build Competitive Advantage
Opening up the heart of what business is really all about, this journal puts
people and planet first what greater business approach is there?
Polly Higgins, Barrister; Chairwoman, Eradicating Ecocide Global Initiative; CEO, Earth
Community Trust; author of Eradicating Ecocide, Earth is our Business and I Dare You to
Be Great
By engaging the worlds of business, academia and policy makers, Reframing
the Game has the outreach to help shape our approach to future challenges.
It is asking the right questions to the right people, and in so doing it is
helping us move closer to the right responses.
Janez Potonik, Co-chair of UN International Resource Panel
This journal is especially meaningful, as it comes at a time when an
increasing number of developing and emerging countries are expressing
strong commitments in the transition to sustainable economies. It will
serve as a point of reference for achieving a sustainable, low-carbon future.
Yvo De Boer, Director-General of the Global Green Growth Institute
Capitalism is fast approaching the tipping point into a new sustainable economy that will allow people and
the planet to prosper. Pieces of a jigsaw are coming together and bringing into focus a picture of a new,
vibrant, attractive and sustainable economic operating system. This quiet revolution is underway - if we
could only allow it to flourish.
This Special Issue of Building Sustainable Legacies brings together key voices in business and academia
that show us how to accelerate towards this tipping point by exploring the role that business in society,
responsible education, leadership techniques and legal reform will have in shaping the new sustainable
economy.
Including contributions from Paul Polman, Katrin Muff, Beate Sjfjell and Gabriele Zedlmayer, this
outstanding collection proposes leading insights and innovative solutions to the challenge of creating new
economies that work for people and the planet.
SUPPORTED BY
BSL5_finalv2.indd 13
26/03/2015 10:46
TH

Building Sustainable Legacies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Building Sustainable Legacies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Building Sustainable Legacies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNDERSTANDING CHALLENGES NEW SOLUTIONS

DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS BUSINESS EXAMPLES

REFRAMING THE GAME: THE TRANSITION

ISSN 2053-8898 (PRINT) ISSN 2053-8901 (ONLINE)

Writing from the future

1. Understand sustainability challenges

Featuring thought leaders of the future

Print subscriptions are available for Building Sustainable Legacies.

Building Sustainable Legacies

the new frontier of societal value co-creation

General Editor Katrin Muff,

Publisher Anna Comerford, Greenleaf Publishing, UK

Dr Kathy Miller, Miller Consulting, USA

the Game: The Transition to a New Sustainable Economy,

Editorial: Sustainable Economy Special Edition

Redefining Business Purpose: Driving Societal and Systems Transformation

Doing Business in a Well-Being Economy

The Role of Business Law in the Jigsaw Puzzle of Sustainability

Exploring a One Planet Mindset and its Relevance in a

Changing Directions in BusinessEducation:

Action Research as a Transformative Force in Management Education:

Purpose at the Heart of Strategy: Creating a Sustainable

2015 Greenleaf Publishing Limited.

print ISSN 2053-8898 online ISSN 2053-8901

About Greenleaf Publishing

About Business School Lausanne

welcome to this special edition of the

If what we are left with is a new and

to enable more conscious choices by

awareness of the real

1 For further information on the Sustain-

able Economy Project please visit www

by the current dysfunctional

tt Extending the debate on key issues,

like how we get capital to move from

Building Sustainable Legacies 5 March 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Building Sustainable Legacies 5 March 2015

the right mindset. Jeanrenaud and her

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

President and Chief Progress Officer,

Building Sustainable Legacies 5 March 2015

Redefining Business Purpose

Building Sustainable Legacies 5 March 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Building Sustainable Legacies 5 March 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

redefining business purpose

The Unilever Sustainable Living Plan

Building Sustainable Legacies 5 March 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Building Sustainable Legacies 5 March 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

redefining business purpose

Making 2015 a year of change

Illustration: Klaus Elle

Building Sustainable Legacies 5 March 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Then in December, the COP 21 Climate Change Conference in Paris holds

Partnerships and collaboration will be key

Editorial: Sustainable Economy Special Edition

Redefining Business Purpose: Driving Societal and Systems Transformation

Doing Business in a Well-Being Economy

The Role of Business Law in the Jigsaw Puzzle of Sustainability

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015

Greenleaf Publishing 2015