volume 33 issue 1 2010 people &tstrategythe hjou

The Journal of The Human Resource Planning Society

Volume 33 Issue 1 2010

People StrategyStrategy&&

Special Issue: Transitioning to the Green EconomySpecial Issue Editor: Jeana Wirtenberg

PERSPECTIVESWhy Leading Sustainability Matters More Than Ever

FOCUS ON SUSTAINABILITY

Missing an Opportunity: HR Leadership and SustainabilityJoel Harmon/Kent Fairfield/Jeana Wirtenberg

Greening the Future with Energy and Jobs at PSEGZachary Narrett

Building a Green City on a Blue Lake: A Model for Building a Local Sustainable EconomyAnte Glavas/Peter Senge/David L. Cooperrider

Are You a Leader or a Laggard? HR’s Role in Creating a Sustainability CultureRobert Sroufe/Jay Liebowitz/Nagaraj Sivasubramaniam

Sierra Nevada Brewing Company’s Thirty-Year Journey Toward SustainabilityAngela Casler/Michael J. Gundlach/Bonnie Persons/Suzanne Zivnuska

Human Values and Sustainability: Can Green Swim Upstream?Daniel F. Twomey/Rosemarie Feuerbach Twomey/Gerard Farias/Meric Ozgur

www.kornferry.com

People Strategy&

articles departments

Volume 33 Issue 1 2010

4 FromtheExecutiveEditorEd Gubman

5 FromtheSpecialIssueEditorTheOpportunityofOurLifetimeJeana Wirtenberg

7 Perspectives:Point/CounterpointWhyLeadingSustainabilityMattersMoreThanEverDaniel Goleman

Counterpoints:Christoph LueneburgerJohn R. EhrenfeldPeter SengeMiriam HawleyDaniel C. Esty/Sandra LauterbachSophie ConstanceShari Aaron

61 BookReviewsReviewed this issue:

Ecological Intelligence: How Knowing the Hidden Impacts of What We Buy Can Change Everything By Daniel Goleman

Green Careers for Dummies By Carol McClelland

The Green Collar Economy: How One Solution Can Fix Our Two Biggest Problems By Van Jones, with Ariane Conrad

The Necessary Revolution: How Individuals and Organizations Are Working Together to Create a Sustainable World By Peter Senge, et al

Sustainability by Design: A Subversive Strategy for Transforming Our Consumer Culture By John R. Ehrenfeld

16

22

26

34

44

52

MissinganOpportunity:HRLeadershipandSustainabilityJoel Harmon/Kent Fairfield/Jeana Wirtenberg

GreeningtheFuturewithEnergyandJobsatPSEGZachary Narrett

BuildingaGreenCityonaBlueLake:AModelforBuildingaLocalSustainableEconomyAnte Glavas/Peter Senge/David L. Cooperrider

AreYouaLeaderoraLaggard?HR’sRoleinCreatingaSustainabilityCultureRobert Sroufe/Jay Liebowitz/Nagaraj Sivasubramaniam

SierraNevadaBrewingCompany’sThirty-YearJourneyTowardSustainabilityAngela Casler/Michael J. Gundlach/Bonnie Persons/ Suzanne Zivnuska

HumanValuesandSustainability:CanGreenSwimUpstream?Daniel F. Twomey/Rosemarie Feuerbach Twomey/Gerard Farias/ Meric Ozgur

People & Strategy is published by:The Human Resource Planning Society401 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2200Chicago, IL 60611Phone: (800) 337-9517Fax: (312) 673-6944ISSN: 0199-8986

©Copyright 2010 by The Human Resource Planning Society. All rights reserved. Permission must be obtained from the editors to reproduce any article in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system.

People&StrategySubscription33-Series (2010) Rate: $150/year

HRPSMembershipRates(includes subscription to People & Strategy)

• Individual: $495• EnterpriseMembership: – First five members: $5,000 – Up to 10 members: $7,500 – Up to 15 members: $10,000

AdvertisingHRPS will accept advertisements of educational value to the HRPS mem-bership, including books, publications, videotapes, audiotapes and software, as approved by the Publications Committee. For information on rates and schedules call (800) 337-9517.

SubmissionsArticle Submission Guidelines are available online at www.hrps.org.

EditorialCorrespondenceAddress editorial correspondence to:

TheresaWojtalewiczHRPS—People & Strategy 401 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2200 Chicago, IL 60611 Phone: (800) 337-9517Fax: (312) 673-6944E-mail: [email protected]

People Strategy&

ExecutiveEditorEd Gubman, Founder and Principal, Strategic Talent Solutions

ManagingEditorTheresa Wojtalewicz, HRPS

AssociateArticlesEditorsHRStrategy&PlanningAmy Kates, Principal, Downey Kates Associates

LeadershipDevelopmentGreg Kesler, Managing Partner, Competitive Human Resources Strategies

TalentManagementSusan Gebelein, President, Savannah Consulting

OrganizationalEffectivenessJeana Wirtenberg, Director, External Relations & Services, Institute for Sustainable EnterpriseFairleigh Dickinson University

BuildingaStrategicHRFunctionSteven Steckler, Director, HR Integration for M&A, Microsoft Corporation

Editors-at-LargeLee Konczak, Senior Lecturer in Organizational Behavior & Leadership Development, Olin Business School, Washington University

Kathy Malloy, Principal, ChangeWorks International

EditorEmeritusRichard Vosburgh, President, RMV Solutions LLC

PerspectivesEditorAnna Tavis, VP, Global Head of Talent Management and Organizational Development, AIG

The HumanResourcePlanningSociety is a unique and dynamic association of human resource and business executives. We are committed to improving organizational performance by creating a global network of individuals to function as business partners in the application of strategic human resource management practices.

Now in its fourth decade of service, the Society is a vital force in addressing and providing current perspectives on complex and challenging human resource and business issues. HRPS is a non-profit organization representing a mix of leading-edge thinkers and practitioners in business, industry, consulting and academia around the world.

The Society continuously seeks to build recognition from business leaders and the HR community for the critical role of HR as a strategic business partner in achieving higher levels of organizational success. In support of this mission, the Society:

• Serves as a global forum for presenting the latest thinking and information on the HR implications of key business issues and strategic HR practices.

• Offers a broad range of comprehensive publications and professional development programs with distinguished human resource scholars, practitioners and business leaders.

• Builds networks of diverse individuals to exchange leading-edge HR ideas, information and experiences.

The Society also has engaged in collaborative partner relationships with several quality organizations to provide valuable services to HRPS members. The current HRPS Member Partners are:

• Center for Advanced HR Studies (CAHRS), Cornell University

• Center for Creative Leadership (CCL)

• Center for Effective Organizations (CEO), University of Southern California

• Institute for Corporate Productivity (i4cp)

• The Walker Group

2 PEOPLE & STRATEGY

BookReviewEditorsJohn Bausch, Principal, Strategic Talent Solutions

Patsy Svare, Principal, The Chatfield Group

ResearchEditorJay Jamrog, Executive Director, Institute for Corporate Productivity

AsiaPacificEditorArthur Yeung, Professor, China Europe International Business School

EuropeanEditorYochanan Altman, Professor, International HRM, London Metropolitan University

HRPSExecutiveCommitteePresident&CEOWalter J. Cleaver, HRPS

ChairpersonoftheBoardKathleen Ross, International Partnership for Microbicides

TreasurerKevin Rubens, Aon Consulting

SecretaryLynn Tetrault, AstraZeneca

ExecutiveCommitteeMembersJohn Boudreau, University of Southern California

Mary Eckenrod, Research in Motion

Lawrence E. Milan, ING U.S. Financial Services

19000 MacArthur Boulevard, Floor 8, Irvine, CA 92612Creative Direction: Paul Kokinakes I [email protected] Direction: Stacy Messerschmidt I 949.809.6780stacy@ kokinakesdesign.com

Client: Drucker Centennial adFile Description: “Tell me what you’re going to do”Publication: Leader to LeaderInsertion Date: November 15, 2009Run Date: December 2009

Ad Size: 8.5” x 11”Bleed Size: 8.75 x 11.25”Color: KMech/Printout : 100%

‘‘Don’t tell me you had a wonderful meeting

with me.’’ “Tell me what you’re going to do on Monday that’s different.”This is the challenge that Peter Drucker liked to present to his consulting clients – and it may well be more important now than ever. Indeed, in today’s high-stakes environment, it is crucial for you to quickly turn great ideas into real results. Drucker Unpacked, a new management training tool from the Drucker Institute at Claremont Graduate University, is designed to help you and your colleagues soak in decades of wisdom from the most trusted name in the field and immediately convert these principles into practice. Please visit our website (www.DruckerUnpacked.com) or call our offices today (Ryan Forsthoff at 770-355-1344) to learn more about this cost-effective, self-facilitated training system and to find out how to bring Drucker Unpacked’s “Business in Action” kits or our full “Drucker Management Path” curriculum to your team!

Leader to Leader ad.indd 2 11/2/09 10:17 AM

4 PEOPLE & STRATEGY

from the executive editor

ness can become more sustainable and the role HR should play in guiding this transfor-mation. We are very fortunate to have her thought leadership on this essential topic.

Happy Reading,

Ed Gubman

Green Economy. In between these two issues, Jeana edited The Sustainable Enterprise Fieldbook (Greenleaf Publishing/AMACOM 2008) with William G. Russell and David Lipsky, and has become one of the world’s leaders in research, consulting and speaking on business, HR and sustainability.

My big thanks go to Jeana for putting togeth-er this thought-provoking issue, full of intriguing and necessary insights, research, case studies and book reviews on how busi-

HRPS and People & Strategy have been addressing sustainability for quite a while now. In 2007 we pub-

lished our first special issue on the topic: Building the Triple Bottom Line—HR’s Con-tribution. The lead author on the first article in that issue, “HR’s Role in Building a Sus-tainable Enterprise,” was Jeana Wirtenberg.

Today Jeana is People & Strategy’s editor for organizational effectiveness and the editor for this special issue—Transitioning to the

For more than 30 years, The Human Resource Planning Society has been a place for executives, practitioners, academics and consultants to connect with colleagues who make bottom-line decisions about people and business results.

In our dynamic business climate, things continue to change…even words. “HR Planning” had different connotations in 1977 than it does today, and HRPS is taking the next step to recognize the overwhelming importance that Talent plays as the great strategic and competitive differentiator for organizations.

• Complete details will be shared at an annual meeting of membership at the HRPS 33rd Annual Global Conference.

• Details will also be available on the Web site, www.hrps.org, after the launch at the conference. Keep an eye on the Web site at the end of April for more details.

• The July 2010 issue of People & Strategy will also feature this information in full detail.

This spring, The Human Resource Planning Society (HRPS) becomes “HR People & Strategy” (still HRPS).

HRPS to Announce New Name

VOLUME 33/ISSUE 1 — 2010 5

ability,” the authors ask, “Can green swim upstream?” They suggest that a fundamental shift in values is necessary, and invite HR to generate and lead an enterprise-wide dia-logue in which people identify sustainable and non-sustainable values in their organiza-tions and search for ways to close the gaps between them, providing a path forward.

I would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to the outstanding Special Issue Editorial Board; without whose hard work this journal would not have been possible. Special kudos go to Dianne Clarke-Kudless, President, Enterprise Services, LLC; Iona Harding, Consulting Principal, RES-Partners; Jennifer Leigh, Professor, Nazareth University; Linda M. Kelley, Principal, Transitioning to Green, LLC; Gordon Rands, Professor, Western Illi-nois University and founder of ONE (Organizations and the Natural Environ-ment); Pamela Sammarco, President & CEO, Green Training Associates; James Stoner, Pro-fessor, Fordham University; and Randy Williams, Managing Director, Redmond, Williams & Associates, LLC. Each of them spent many hours generously and thought-fully reviewing articles, commenting and supporting this journal. I extend my personal appreciation to Executive Editor Ed Gub-man, who gave me the opportunity to embark on this labor of love and provided valuable guidance throughout the process.

We hope we have achieved our goal of simul-taneously advancing the field of human resources and helping define HR’s role in effecting the transition to the green economy. Working together we can create a sustainable future—for our businesses and our world. There is no reasonable alternative, as there is no business in a society that fails. We have an awesome opportunity. Let’s rise to the occa-sion together.

All the best on your journey to sustainability,

Jeana Wirtenberg

erating a groundswell of interest and fascinating commentary, is reviewed in our book review section.

We follow Perspectives with an article based on a survey of our own Human Resource Planning Society members, conducted in col-laboration with i4cp. This research leads the authors to conclude that HR leaders must step up and play a stronger role in moving organizations toward sustainability. The time is ripe for HR to play a more strategic role in organizations, and today’s challenges provide opportunities for HR to realize the contribu-tion it long has sought to make.

Next, we take a look into a traditional util-ity that is addressing the twin challenges of shifting to the green economy and creating much-needed jobs. The story of PSEG, one of the oldest and largest energy utilities in the United States, is inspiring and infor-mative and provides best practices others can follow.

A case study, “Building a Green City on a Blue Lake,” relates the story of a transforma-tion of a major U.S. city. This fascinating project, building a sustainable economy in Cleveland, offers learnings that can be applied to any system undergoing a whole systems change.

Our second piece of empirical research explores how different firms are integrating sustainability initiatives. The data make a persuasive case that leading and facilitating sustainability initiatives and creating a sus-tainability culture are the critical tasks confronting Human Resource profession-als today.

Our third case study shows—through the 30-year history of Sierra Nevada Brewing Company—how sustainability can be deeply embedded in a company’s DNA by intention-ally recruiting a pool of talent committed to sustainability and developing it over the entire life of the company.

We close by raising profoundly significant questions. In “Human Values and Sustain-

We publish this Special Issue “Tran-sitioning to the Green Economy” at a time when our organizations

are undergoing a profound transformation. Business leaders are sounding an urgent call to action. Scientific studies point to alarming trends in global warming and climate change, species extinction and biodiversity loss, and freshwater shortages. The United States is working to reduce the economic and security risks caused by our country’s dependence on oil and carbon-based energy. There is a growing recognition by the rest of the world that our consumption patterns are no longer sustainable.

The green economy is being hailed as a much-needed antidote, focused on economic activities and business models that reduce or reverse environmental impacts, promote eco-nomic growth and improve social well-being. Transitioning to the green economy is the centerpiece of President Obama’s job-cre-ation strategy.

Given this urgency, we invited thought lead-e r s , p rac t i t i one r s , a cademic s and community-based organizations to contrib-ute rigorous research, in-depth case studies and empirically grounded policy recommen-dations and frameworks suggesting new directions. We received extraordinary and diverse inputs and present a rare combina-tion of leading-edge thinking, research and case studies.

The journal opens with a provocative Per-spectives piece by Dan Goleman, followed by multidisciplinary responses from eight sustainability thought leaders from around the world. Goleman argues that if busi-nesses were more transparent about the ecological impacts of their activities, the bal-ance would shift toward sustainability. This arguably simple proposition generated pas-sionate responses from luminaries John Ehrenfeld, Peter Senge, Miriam Hawley and Dan Esty/Sandra Lauterbach, as well as three colleagues with a more global perspec-tive, Christoph Lueneburger, Sophie Constance and Shari Aaron. Goleman’s book Ecological Intelligence, which is gen-

The Opportunity of Our Lifetimefrom the special issue editor


perspectives – pointAnna Tavis, Perspectives Editor

Sustainability has become a key driver of business growth and innovation. So argues C.K. Prahalad, the University of

Michigan-based thought leader, in the pages of the Harvard Business Review [September 2009]. Writing with Ram Nidumolu and M.R. Rangaswami, Prahalad contends that the tradeoff between sustainable products and financial costs is a false choice, one that fails to see how the pursuit of sustainability can lower costs, raise revenue and drive growth through innovation.

A concrete sign of this happened July 14, 2009, when Wal-Mart announced it will work with an independent, academic con-sortium to develop a product-rating sustainability index that the retailer will eventually post next to the prices of products in its stores. Other companies, like BestBuy, also are showing interest, and Wal-Mart hopes Target, Costco and other retailers will adopt the index as well.

If so, one day shoppers will instantly see not only that one item is cheaper than the other, but also which has ingredients that do less environmental damage, generate hazardous by-products, require toxic compounds to make, or contain chemicals suspected of being carcinogens. This, in turn, could make winners of those companies that are most nimble in innovating more sustainable alter-natives, and losers of those that fail to do so.

The sustainability index is meant to set an industry-wide standard for ecological trans-parency. And it will no doubt be a game changer, not just for strategy, but also for people decisions. The dawning of ecological transparency in the marketplace propels sus-tainability leadership to the center of strategic planning. The position leaps from a “nice-to-have” to a “must-have,” putting a new

premium on the ability of executives to lead sustainability initiatives.

The announcement put on notice the more than 100,000 Wal-Mart suppliers that they must be prepared to analyze and divulge the ecological impacts of their products in the rating index. Companies that do not do this preparation will become “irrelevant,” losing their space on Wal-Mart’s and Sam’s Club’s shelves. Coincidentally, China—home to the bulk of Walmart’s supply chain—is devoting five percent of its stimulus budget to innova-tions in sustainable development.

All these forces for sustainability operate at the B2B level, between retailers and their sup-pliers. But a parallel force is emerging in the consumer marketplace, where a working

notify their Facebook or Twitter friends why they just switched shampoos. Some major retailers are already in conversation with GoodGuide about posting its ratings next to product prices—getting a jump on the sus-tainability index that Wal-Mart announced.

These methods for ecological transparency are disruptive technologies in retailing and manufacturing. For one, such ratings lower to zero the mental effort (what economists call the “information cost”) needed to evalu-ate a product’s ecological impacts. This will make the ecological impacts of products a stronger element of their marketability, along with price and value.

Until now, anyone who wanted to learn the carbon footprint or chemical risks for a prod-

Why Leading Sustainability Matters More Than EverDaniel Goleman, Psychologist, Author and Lecturer

model for a sustainability index already exists in GoodGuide.com. This information system, hatched at the University of Califor-nia at Berkeley, aggregates more than 200 databases on the environmental, health and social impacts of a given product, and sum-marizes all that for shoppers in a single score on a 10-point scale. GoodGuide offers an instant comparison of the ecological impacts of competing products, and allows users to

uct has had to track down a Web site that had the data (if there was one at all), and remem-ber it while shopping for the item in question. Market surveys find that approximately 10 percent of consumers, at best, ever bother. Nearly a quarter of shoppers say they couldn’t care less. The real action zeroes in on the two-thirds of shoppers who say such data would influence their choices if it were easy to get. And Wal-Mart cites surveys showing that

As sustainability proves key to strategy, HR becomes crucial to execution by seeing that the right people are in the critical positions. The big question: What competencies are needed to be effective in leading a company’s sustainability initiative?

8 PEOPLE & STRATEGY

those shoppers born since the 1980s increas-ingly are motivated to vote with their dollars for a cleaner, safer and cooler planet.

This development resolves for corporations the long-standing internal debates over sustain-ability, where voices for social responsibility say practices must change and those for fiscal responsibility counter there is, at best, a lim-

perspectives – point

heat water to use its detergent products as a huge negative for global warming. As such, they developed cold-water detergents as more sustainable alternatives.

As sustainability proves a key to strategy, HR becomes crucial to execution by seeing that the right people are in the critical posi-tions. The big question: what competencies

are needed to be effective in leading a com-pany’s sustainability initiative? Some answers come from a global study of executives lead-ing sustainability at companies in dozens of countries, done through intensive inter-views by a worldwide team of 17 partners at Egon Zehnder International, the executive recruiting firm.

The EZI team, led by Christoph Lueneburger, used systematic interviewing to assess the unique competencies displayed by sustain-ability leaders who had scored successes, and compared them to executives in comparable positions who had struck out or just tread water. Those who succeeded showed strengths in two categories of competencies: social intelligence abilities and business skills.

From the perspective of the social intelligence competencies found among highly effective leaders, the specific people skills that typify the best sustainability leaders are telling: the abilities to persuade and influence, and to cooperate as a team player. That makes sense in terms of the organizational chart. Execu-tives leading sustainability are not in a command position, but rather they must exert their influence laterally by convincing others

in positions of power to take the sustainabil-ity agenda seriously and put it into action.

These findings bring into focus what HR should look for in promoting or recruiting sustainability leadership. The challenges will be both recruiting people with the right skill set for leading sustainability, and sharpening the competencies of those already in the position. An executive’s persuasion and coop-eration abilities can be honed, as executive coaches will attest.

Business savvy is equally crucial. At every step of the way, leaders must be able to make a strong business case for sustainability if their arguments are to be persuasive.

So what about all those newly minted gradu-ates of “green business” programs? It’s well and good that they understand the nuts and bolts of sustainability. But that alone will not be sufficient for them to become effective sustainability leaders. They’ll also need those tried and true leadership competencies for getting people motivated, focused and work-ing together. And, as Wal-Mart’s Andy Ruben told me, “Graduates of green business pro-grams need first of all to be good at business.”

Editor’s Note: Daniel Goleman’s latest book is Ecological Intelligence: How Knowing the Hidden Impacts of What We Buy Can Change Everything. His conversations with thought leaders on ecological transparency can be heard at: http://www.morethansound.net/ecological-awareness.php. The book is being reviewed in this issue on p. 61

Daniel Goleman, Ph.D., covered behavioral sciences and the brain for The New York Times for 12 years. He has taught at Harvard University, where he received his Ph.D., and was senior editor at Psychology Today. His books include Emotional Intelligence, Working with Emotional Intelligence, Vital Lies, Simple Truth, The Medita-tive Mind, and, as co-author, The Consumer’s Guide to Psychotherapy.

ited business case. “Smart companies now treat sustainability as innovation’s new fron-tier,” the Prahalad group writes in the Harvard Business Review.

Andy Ruben, who has led Wal-Mart’s sus-tainability initiative and now runs its private brands division, sees great advantage for companies able to create value via ecologi-cal innovations throughout the supply chain. “This is the largest strategic opportu-nity companies will see for the next 50 years,” Ruben told me. “This is the most exciting time to be in business, with more opportunity to create change in the world than ever.”

That reinvention of industry’s most basic plat-forms, processes and chemical palette can be expedited by another new class of information system, designed to spot innovative opportu-nities in the supply chain. One prototype is Earthster, supply chain management software that uses product life cycle assessments to highlight the most negative ecological impacts—the points where a positive change will boost a product’s sustainability rating the most. Procter & Gamble deployed this very strategy that spotted the customer’s need to

From the perspective of the social intelligence competencies found among highly effective leaders, the specific people skills that typify the best sustainability leaders are telling: the abilities to persuade and influence, and to cooperate as a team player.


perspectives – counterpoints

➤

Caveat Venditor: How Sustainability Is Shifting the Balance Of PowerChristoph Lueneburger, Head, Global Sustainability Practice, Egon Zehnder

We are in the early days of a massive trans-formation of commerce, brought about by sustainability. Daniel Goleman has sketched this revolution along two dimensions. First, he describes how competent leaders with strong commercial orientation will advance this agenda inside corporations. Second, in what Goleman describes as a “parallel force in the consumer marketplace,” consumers are rapidly becoming more sophisticated in their purchasing decisions. Our research and work with global clients aligns with Goleman’s analysis, but—as a counterpoint demands—I will counter that the consumer is the primary driver rather than a parallel force in this transformation.

In his book Ecological Intelligence, Goleman introduces “radical transparency” as the enabler of the sustainability revolution. As he previously summarizes, radical transparency

As radical transparency reaches even the most casual shopper at the point of purchase, the pursuit of sustainability will shift from a choice companies make to their license to operate, which masses of consumers won’t hesitate to revoke.

Much as nutritional labeling enables informed choices about food (and the extinc-tion of some substances, like trans fats), this consumer revolution will pull even the most recalcitrant companies into the 21st century or else render them irrelevant.

The motto for what’s ahead is caveat venditor —let the seller beware—and in the genera-tional shift to leaders and employees who understand this transformation, companies face some difficult people challenges. At a recent roundtable discussion we conducted with sustainability executives from leading companies, a Chief Sustainability Officer recounted a recent meeting with his CEO. After listening to a detailed presentation, the CEO countered, “Too much information. Tell me the one thing we have to do to get this right.” Without hesitation the CSO respond-ed: “Hire the right people.”

He was not talking merely about hiring a few executives for a sustainability function, but about a substantive culture change that will require the right people with the right com-petencies across the entire organization. He also was pointing implicitly to a phenomenon

CEOs that recognize the immense commercial power of the consumer revolution are begin-ning to seek new leaders to profitably map the path rather than wait for it to happen or, worse, rely on a regulatory compass to chart their course. Those who champion this shift in their own ranks have embraced two lessons that are simple but not easy. First: the customer really is always right. Second (and conse-quently): sustainability, ultimately, is about the sustainability of their own companies.

Christoph Lueneburger leads the Sustainability Practice at Egon Zehnder International and serves on the Duke University SustainabilityCouncil.

Sustainability Rests in the System, Not the ProductJohn R. Ehrenfeld, MIT Faculty (Emeritus), and Author, Sustainability by Design: A Subversive Strategy for Transforming our Consumer Culture

Daniel Goleman is on-target in suggesting that new skills will be critical for companies in the sustainability game. HR needs to be especially careful when selecting and supporting person-nel tasked to lead efforts in this domain. Further, what have been conventional perfor-mance criteria will need to be expanded to include factors related to sustainability. This is where, I believe, Goleman goes astray.

The first part of his article describes emerging sustainability indices and suggests that shop-pers will be able to use them to select items that best satisfy their intentions toward sus-tainability. The story is not quite so simple and direct. Unlike price, which can be easily played off against some set of satisfying factors, sus-tainability metrics cannot. Sustainability is not a single-valued function; rather, sustain-ability is a holistic property of a system. A system, like the economic or environmental system, exhibits sustainability when it pro-

is the result of convenient access to objective information about products that enables consumers to make uncomplicated decisions about complex issues. As radical transpar-ency reaches even the most casual shopper at the point of purchase, the pursuit of sustain-ability will shift from a choice companies make to their license to operate, which mass-es of consumers won’t hesitate to revoke.

we, too, have observed: the existence of a “blocking generation” of senior business managers who see that sustainability can’t be ignored but don’t yet relate to it instinctively the way the next generation will. As Goleman observes, the challenge for HR is to help change the mindset of those executives, which is hard. But they will be helped by a change in generations, which is certain.

10 PEOPLE & STRATEGY


duces desirable qualities, like flourishing or security, over long periods. Sustainability is the result of the interaction of many relation-ships, each of which may be understandable when looked at in isolation. But it is the inter-meshing of these relationships that matters, and in all-important cases, the tangled web that emerges cannot be described by a set of abstractions, formulas or indices.

Buyer Beware: The Pathway to Collapse Could Be Paved with the Most Sophisticated Consumer MetricsPeter Senge, MIT and SoL; Author of The Fifth Discipline and The Necessary Revolution

I agree wholeheartedly with Daniel Goleman that product sustainability indices like Good-Guide.com and the one that Wal-Mart’s and other retailers are working to develop are potential game changers in creating a more sustainable industrial system. But they are only first steps. We all must be careful not to be seduced by “being less bad,” and continu-ing to destroy our inherited social and natural capital just a little less rapidly.

The first thing everyone must understand is that most all of these metrics track relative impacts: how one product fares relative to another competing product. But is the prod-uct good? That’s a much tougher question to answer.

The bottom line is that nature does not care about the relative impact of one product com-pared to another. Nature cares about our total impact in absolute terms. Relative rank-ings may not only fail to convey our impact in destroying ecosystems, depleting water or soil nutrients or destabilizing global climate, they can distort the speed and scope of chang-es actually needed.

To illustrate, consider the real (i.e., absolute) changes needed to avoid the dangers of climate change. The growing consensus among climate scientists is that we need to stabilize green-house gas concentrations in the atmosphere at not much above where they are today—which means we need a 70-80 percent reduction in emissions (given the rate of C02 sequestered by the biomass) within three or four decades.2

can’t measure it, you can’t manage it—doesn’t apply to sustainability. The challenge is to attain it and get the system right.

The real winners in the future will be those firms that truly understand this, and are hon-est and clear in their presentations of their products and services. The shortcomings of sustainability indices will become evident in the future, and firms uncritically adopting them may well lose whatever glitter they have acquired. This situation may be one where the early adopters—the hares—will eventually lose out to the tortoises.

Dr. John R. Ehrenfeld currently serves as executive director of the Interna-tional Society for Industrial Ecology.

Sustainability is the result of the interaction of many relationships, each of which may be understandable when looked at in isolation. But it is the intermeshing of these relationships that matters, and in all-important cases, the tangled web that emerges cannot be described by a set of abstractions, formulas or indices.

That is where the indices to which Goleman refers go astray. They make a valiant effort at capturing the impact of diverse factors on environmental sustainability, and to a lesser degree, social responsibility. Product life cycle assessment systems, like Earthster, have been used for nearly 25 years without much effect on the environment. Even if one combines hundreds of separate factors as is done in the GoodGuide system, the result cannot be correlated with any positive image of sustain-ability. These measures can be useful in the other direction, pointing to products that may create smaller negative effects than oth-ers. Even so, the outcome on the world we live in is not likely to be satisfying. As Gole-man writes, these indices may be disruptive and, and as a result, would demand highly skilled, innovative personnel to maintain cor-porate leadership.

The significance for HR departments is to real-ize that they will need personnel with more than analytic skills along with the kind of per-suasive powers to which Goleman points.

Systems thinking is the key to sustainability. Today’s mess can be blamed on the failure to understand the system within which we are embedded.1 Unfortunately, systems thinking is given only lip service in most disciplines, espe-cially in MBA programs. HR personnel tend to come from single discipline roots, making sustainability more challenging for them. The usual mantra that guides operations—if you

1. Senge, P. M., B. Smith, et al. (2008). The necessary revolution: How individuals and organizations are working together to create a sustainable world. New York: Doubleday.

2 To see why the changes need to be this strong, try the freeware simulator based on the latest in climate science developed at MIT: www.climateinteractive.org.



➤

What does this mean, for example, for the average mileage for cars? Given continued historic growth in cars on the road, a lot. An 80 percent reduction in emissions would require a five-fold increase in fuel econo-my—for the U.S. fleet, an average of about 100 mpg. But, if the global fleet of automo-biles keeps pace with GDP and grows at about 3 percent annually (some expect new car sales to rise far faster with standards of living growing far faster than 3 percent per annum in China and India), the number of cars on the road will double every 20 years, which means a four-fold increase by 2050. So the average fuel economy would need to be 400 mpg to meet the emissions tar-get. (That figure would have to double again if cars on the road double in another two decades.)

This is what happens when relative improve-ments in eco-efficiency or ecological footprints for individual products collide with unending growth. None of this is revealed by sustainability rating systems that focus only on relative performance of one product compared with another.

Daniel Goleman is correct that sustainability matters more than ever and that when the customer demand starts to lead the changes, a new chapter in the journey will have started.

Peter Senge is a senior lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is also founding chair of the Society for Organizational Learning (SoL).

Why Leading Sustainability Matters More than EverMiriam Hawley, CEO, Enlignment, Inc.

When I read the opening line of “Why Lead-ing Sustainability Matters More than Ever,” Daniel Goleman’s commentary on the research of several thought leaders, I cheered inside. Here was an author I admired quoting from the influential Harvard Business Review, saying what I hope for and coach for—lead-ership from a sustainability perspective.

As I read further about Wal-Mart’s com-mitment to develop a product-rating sustainability index that will help consumers choose products that cause the least environ-mental damage, I paused.

While “sustainability has become a key driv-er of business growth and innovation,” there is an underlying context and conversation

ability is possible only where sufficiency thrives. We need a way to gauge what is sus-tainable in our personal lives, our business and community lives, and as global citizens. We could say that when sufficiency is cause, sustainability is effect.

While having a measure of ecological trans-parency is critical, there are other questions we need to ask. It may be less expensive to buy more, but do we need more? What is the impact on the communities whose land is used to build these massive structures? What is the cost to farmers’ markets and neighborhood stores that offer just enough and no more? What about our growing need for sustainable packaging and fair wages for workers?

What is enough? What is enough food, love, sex, money, time or business, clothing, hous-ing or support? The answer requires contemplation and can be difficult to discern.

According to Lynne Twist, global activist and author of The Soul of Money, we must “con-front not only the financial crisis, but also all other crises which stem from the same root—scarcity.” She asserts that we are in a trance fueled by the three toxic lies of scarcity: there is not enough; more is better; that’s just the way it is.

Becoming leaders of sustainability initiatives involves nothing short of a paradigm shift: from not enough to enough, from greed to gratitude, from scarcity to sufficiency, from dominion over nature to partnership with the natural world. For the earth and all species to flourish, we must completely rework, or even create for the first time, our ideas about what is enough.

So what is sufficiency? Buckminster Fuller, one of the world’s greatest futurists and a global thinker, taught that the distinction of sufficiency is not an amount, but an exquisite experience of “enough,” like satisfaction. Suf-ficiency is a shift in mindset, a declaration that we have enough and we are enough.

Sufficiency is not a point on the scarcity and abundance continuum (which are two sides of

The bottom line is that nature does not care about the relative impact of one product compared to another. Nature cares about our total impact in absolute terms.

But we are, at best, at the beginning of the beginning. Until consumer-facing ratings track the absolute changes needed—not just relative ratings—and the implications of unending business growth, and HR profes-sionals help managers develop the capabilities to do so, the new chapter will turn out to be part of the same old story.

that must be addressed for sustainability to be possible, let alone flourish. The context is Sufficiency and the conversation is What is Enough?

In my last decade as a professional and activ-ist, I have discovered that sufficiency is present when nothing is wasted, and sustain-



issues and sharing best practices help build competencies and a sustainability-oriented culture. Some companies, such as Clif Bar, encourage commitment and enthusiasm by educating employees on work- and home-related issues.

• Increase accountability – Using its “Session E” process, GE formally reviews the environmental performance of all business units. Plant managers—not environmental managers—provide the updates, and GE uses reviews to hold managers accountable for continuous improvement. Several companies have i n t e g r a t e d s u s t a i n a b i l i t y i n t o compensation. For example, Shell calculates bonuses based on a performance evaluation scorecard, which includes a sustainable development component.

• Track and report metrics – Environmental management systems can track metrics and improve decision making. At Herman Miller, each designer can access a database that categorizes materials’ environmental impacts. This enables smart decision making throughout the company. Linking environmental efforts with business metrics, such as cost savings or revenue

Becoming leaders of sustainability initiatives involves nothing short of a paradigm shift: from not enough to enough, from greed to gratitude, from scarcity to sufficiency, from dominion over nature to partnership with the natural world.

the same coin) or a destination. Sufficiency is a lively, ongoing process, practice and conver-sation discovered in the context of community.

The dilemma is that Wal-Mart encourages us on one hand to be conscious consumers and on the other to consume more than we need. The size of Wal-Mart stores alone exemplifies “more is better and that’s just the way it is.” Is it? The bottom line is that we can’t achieve sustainability without considering sufficiency.

Nancy Miriam Hawley, LICSW, is a co-founder of Enlignment, Inc., a coaching, consulting and training company.

Making Sustainability Part of Everyone’s JobDaniel C. Esty, Chairman, Esty Environmental Partners, Hillhouse Professor of Environmental Law and Policy, Yale University and Director, Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy and the Center for Business & Environment at Yale; and Sandra Lauterbach, Managing Consultant, Esty Environmental Partners

Over the last decade, we have seen a dra-matic increase in the number of companies that view sustainability as a “key driver of business growth and innovation” as Daniel Goleman discusses in “Why Leading Sustain-ability Matters More Than Ever.”

As sustainability consultants for leading cor-porations, we argue that sustainability should be “an essential component of business strat-egy.” But in reality, companies that align business and sustainability strategies are rare. Many executives see sustainability as non-core to the business, forcing sustainability officers to rely on persuasion skills, as EZI identified. To connect sustainability and busi-ness advantage, companies need to drive change throughout the enterprise. In this response, we offer examples of leading com-panies who are tackling this challenge.

The importance of integrating sustainability into strategy will only intensify as stakehold-ers, including supply chain partners, pressure companies to reduce environmental foot-prints. Companies also need to address resource constraints, rising energy prices, more stringent regulations and changing con-sumer expectations—all of which pose business risks and opportunities.

We agree that an effective sustainability strat-egy begins with recruiting executives with skills to “persuade and influence.” The right leadership is essential.

Yet reducing a company’s footprint, using sustainability to drive innovation and rede-signing products and processes require the commitment of the entire organization. With the logic of sustainability growing daily, the stakes are too great to leave these issues to a select few or to informal processes.

In the new sustainability context, integration and execution matter. By implementing pro-cesses, systems and metrics, executives can ensure that all employees have the capabili-ties and incentives to capitalize on emerging opportunities. How do sustainability leaders accomplish this?

• Include sustainability in planning processes – Dow ensures that business managers include sustainability goals and plans in their annual planning cycle. Sustainability and business plans are better aligned because the business unit develops and owns both.

• Educate employees on strategy and issues – Training employees on environmental

growth, and reporting these metrics also can drive change.

As new business realities and opportunities emerge, the stakes are higher to integrate sus-ta inabi l i ty thinking throughout an organization. The right leadership—and the right processes and systems—can move the



➤

entire company toward creating business value from sustainability.

Daniel C. Esty is the Hillhouse Profes-sor of Environmental Law and Policy at Yale University. Sandra Lauterbach is a managing consultant with Esty Environmental Partners.

Sustainability Leadership & The Real Value of Brands—At the CoreSophie Constance, Societal Business, Melbourne, Australia

Daniel Goleman focuses on the attributes needed for sustainability leadership. This means not only inculcating the values needed to drive a sustainability culture, but making sustainability an integral part of your busi-ness and core brand value. Alignment of Sustainability/CSR with your core business strategy creates organizational, brand and business value. This also engages your employees with the brand and has the poten-tial to unleash their value as human capital. It is the efficient lynchpin to aligning your internal and external stakeholders and busi-ness into a cohesive whole, creating a more significant impact.

A “core brand” (or “core organizational brand”) must stem from the main business strategies and focus on the total corporate image as a synthesis of all its products and services. This follows the assumption that consumers will select a product or service based on their perceptions of trust in—and the credibility of—that business, as it has been incorporated into the core brand.

Several examples of global companies help illustrate the point. Marks and Spencer (M&S), a major British retailer, has gone through a transformation to become a company demonstrating a holistic integra-

a string of social and environmental tar-gets. It was the first major campaign wherein a retailer concentrated on the way products are sourced and made. Its success reflects the consumer trend for a more ethical way of living, combined with a healthier lifestyle.

The process begins with a thorough employee-engagement strategy that mobilizes shoppers and their expectations through the employees’ experiences. Fifteen months after launching their “Plan A” program, M&S said it achieved 17 out of the 100 targets it set for itself, results were positive across the board and focus groups showed consumers were behind it. 'Look behind the Label' is considered the most successful and well-embedded concept of a responsible retailer: In a poll by The Times in London, (March 2008), Marks & Spencer was nominated the “the greenest supermarket” and the one most popular with socially and environmentally aware consumers.

When Unilever streamlined its global opera-tions in 2004, it identified a unifying purpose of vitality for its employees and products. “Feel good, look good and get more out of

delivered the ‘execution’ or expression of this core brand message via an interactive guide on their Web site—showing their environ-mental impacts at every stage of the lifecycle of their products—from concept to consump-tion, e.g., sustainable fisheries created with the Marine Stewardship Council.

Further to the notion of ecological transpar-ency that Dan Goleman proposes, the way to enable it more effectively is through refocus-ing on citizenship. People should not be defined primarily just as “consumers.” People are first and foremost citizens who happen to consume. Employees are citizens, too. This citizenship frame creates a better link to engaging with ecological transparency across the entire value-chain process, as employees with a citizenship perspective can advance the organization’s purpose by influencing all its stakeholders.

Sophie Constance is the director of Societal Business-Corporate Social Leadership.

Alignment of Sustainability/Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) with your core business strategy creates organizational, brand and business value. …It is the efficient lynchpin to bring internal and external stakeholders and the business into a cohesive whole, creating a more significant impact.

tion of values, embedded in their business operations—both internally with staff and externally through their supply chains. In 2007, they launched a high-profile ‘Look Behind the Label’ advertising campaign— “Plan A,” under which they committed to

life” was its core brand message. Unilever was one of the first to use the Global Reporting Index (GRI) framework that sets out the prin-ciples and indicators organizations can use to measure and report their economic, environ-mental and social performance. They



Sustainability: Harnessing the Collective Innovation of All EmployeesShari Aaron, Author and Expert in Sustainability and Market Research

Daniel Goleman makes a very strong case that we are finally coming to a point of convergence where data can be harnessed to support the transition to a more sustainable economy. We see governments moving toward new regula-tions and citizen consumers seeking out products made in a less toxic, more just and earth-friendly fashion. According to McKinsey, 95 percent of CEOs report that businesses must address the social and environmental pressures of society (McKinsey & Co., July 2007), and evidence shows that employees will drive com-panies’ efforts to address sustainability (MIT Sloan Management Review, Sept. 2009).

Increasingly, companies understand that they can strengthen their competitive advantage and reach new heights through innovation and sustainability. Increased collaboration and cooperation among all sectors will accel-erate the pace by which companies can achieve sustainability.

My experiences help me understand why sus-tainability is one of the hardest issues for business and society. Sustainability calls on business leaders to rethink so many aspects of their businesses and re-evaluate current systems. It implores us to have a sense of moral courage and unwavering conviction. This applies directly to employees who, given our recent financial crisis, face such difficult working environments today. So while it may very well be true, as Daniel Goleman states, that certain employees will have a greater ability to bring forth more sustainable solu-tions for their companies, I firmly believe that we need to support and encourage all employ-ees to get engaged.

The time is now to empower more employees who work inside corporations to champion sustainability. We could be facing a brain drain where the best and brightest seek alter-native career paths away from the corporate

sector. We are seeing an unprecedented inter-est in careers that involve social good, particularly those from the younger genera-tion that Daniel Goleman cites in his article. One of the most popular student clubs at Harvard in 2009 is Social Entrepreneurship. It rivals the ranks of those who join the finance and investment student clubs.

Over the past few years I have been conduct-ing research regarding employees and sustainability. My 2008 Corporate Employee Sustainability Study reveals that 75 percent of employees report that their firms are not investing in sustainability training. This research reveals that many employees want training, as only one in 10 employees feel they have the tools and training needed to help their workplaces become more sustainable. In 2009, for Climb the Green Ladder: Make Your Company and Career More Sustainable, my co-author Amy Fetzer and I interviewed 80 sustainability leaders and hundreds of employees who brought successful sustain-ability strategies to their workplaces. I was amazed by what creative, smart and coura-geous employees at many organizations—in government, academia, non-profit and busi-ness sectors—were able to achieve. Many employees try to live responsibly in their home lives by recycling, composting, buying fair trade and organic, and flying, driving or buy-ing less. They explain that it can be uncomfortable and distressing to feel that during their work lives, they are contributing to wasteful, disrespectful or environmentally damaging behavior—often on a scale that dwarfs one’s personal life. Many say they want to do something to impact their com-pany or organization’s unsustainable practices, but often don’t know where to start.

Companies such as HP and Wal-Mart have active, well-branded employee-engagement programs where they work to bring education and awareness about sustainability to their employees. The theory is to train employees to think like sustainability champions and empower them to find practical, business-building solutions for their workplaces.

The research for Climb the Green Ladder uncovers the six key principles that underpin

all successful sustainability strategies so that employees can benefit from this knowledge. These include:1. Get the mindset2. Make the business case3. Get your colleagues on your side4. Have two-way conversations5. Work together6. Make it part of the culture

Kristen Thomas from the Phelps Group, Mar-tin Blake from Royal Mail, and Coral Rose from Wal-Mart are all clear examples who bring these six principles to life. Kristen Thomas was concerned about the mound of disposable dishes that was piling up at her firm’s holiday party. Her investigation into how to solve this issue led to a tidal wave that greened her company and won new business. Martin Blake helped to show Royal Mail how to save £20 million a year and wipe up to 100,000 tons off its carbon footprint. Coral Rose wanted to help Wal-Mart develop new products and was instrumental in per-suading this corporation, now the largest buyer of organic cotton, to first introduce organic clothing.

I have seen firsthand that employees—in any industry and with any job title—can make a difference. The more we learn and share with each other, the more we inspire others to action. So while I agree with Daniel Goleman that some people may be inclined to be more effective in championing sustainability strat-egies, I vote for using an all-hands-on-deck approach to allow all employees to engage in the process. The more we provide the tools and training and inspire them to action, the quicker we can accelerate the pace to viable solutions. HR departments, focused on employee career development, can champion employee training on sustainability and har-ness the collective innovation of their employees.

Shari Aaron, executive director, Climb The Green Ladder, is a market researcher, sustainability consultant, author and strategic thinker

How aligned is your organization?

The Center for Creative Leadership

can accelerate your business results

by aligning your talent, culture and

leadership strategy for:

• Greater accountability

and commitment.

• Improved individual and team

collaboration across divisions

and geographies.

• Enhanced employee and

management performance.

• Accelerated results at all levels.

Accelerate Your Results Through

Leadership by Visiting Us at

www.accelerateleadership.org

CCL287_PeopleStrategy_Ad(8.5x11)FINAL.indd 1 3/11/10 4:52:52 PM

Missing an Opportunity:HR Leadership and SustainabilityJoel Harmon, Kent D. Fairfield, and Jeana Wirtenberg, Institute for Sustainable Enterprise, Fairleigh Dickinson University

The authors extend their appreciation to Mark Vickers, Jay Jamrog and i4cp for their support in the design and administration of this research and to HRPS for access to the survey participants.


Extent of Sustainability ManagementTo better understand the context in which the HR leaders in our survey operate, we first examined the extent of sustainability imple-menta t ion in the i r o rgan i za t ions . Respondents in our survey agreed that their organizations are making moderate progress in creating the internal conditions crucial to enabling sustainability to take root (Ameri-can Management Association, 2007; Berns et al, 2009; Wirtenberg, Harmon, Russell, & Fairfield, 2007). A majority said that their organizations have, to a great extent, deeply ingrained sustainability values, made sustain-ability central to their strategy, and aligned performance standards and management sys-tems to support a sustainability strategy (58 percent, 64 percent and 53 percent respectively). Further, nearly 45 percent said their organizations are, to a great extent, effectively engaging a broad range of exter-nal stakeholders on sustainability issues. However, the average scores for these foun-dational and enabling elements are quite modest (averaging from 3.1 to 3.6 on a five-point scale) , indicat ing that many organizations lack these qualities.

Also consistent with prior studies, respon-dents said their organizations are acting only modestly to actually execute sustainability strategies. They reported a below-midpoint average degree of implementation and, accordingly, tended to disagree that benefits are yet accruing from such implementation. However, 27 percent of our HR executives reported being in firms that are implementing sustainability to a great extent.

The specific sustainability practices imple-mented most are related to worker health and safety, energy and waste efficiency and civic volunteerism (averages of 3.8, 3.2 and 3.0, respectively). The least-implemented prac-tices relate to infusing sustainability criteria into talent and performance management systems, including recruitment, selection and compensation (averages of 2.0 and 1.9, respectively). This is especially disconcerting, given the strong evidence for how environ-mentally and socially responsible business practices can serve to improve business per-formance by attracting, retaining and engaging the best talent, especially among the younger population (Kaye & Jordan-Evans, 2005; Willard, 2009; Wirtenberg, 2010, forthcoming).

Larger-sized organizations, as well as those that have gained ground on competitors over the last three years in revenue and profitabil-ity, are significantly further along on sustainability than smaller or less successful ones. The bigger and more successful organi-zations reported having in place more of the enabling conditions, implementing more practices and deriving more benefits from sustainability initiatives.

HR Leaders’ Competencies and Strategic Influence One of our primary goals for this study was to extend the findings of Lawler and Bou-dreau (2009) and Ulrich et al. (2009) into the area of sustainability strategy. They found that HR leaders generally still have not acquired the competencies and influence to be seen as “strategic architects.” In their

HR leaders and scholars acknowledge that the HR function too often has been shunted aside when strategic

issues are identified and addressed. Recent studies show little change in the last decade in this peripheral status (Lawler & Boudreau, 2009; Ulrich, Brockbank, & Johnson, 2009). For the transformational change to sustain-ability management, there is little research on whether HR executives can seize a place in the discussion and exert powerful influence. The types of people and change-management challenges associated with developing and executing sustainability strategies would appear to offer HR leaders a great opportu-nity to enhance their strategic roles. However, results from our study suggest they are not yet capitalizing on that opportunity, even as their organizations progress toward sustainability.

A good sustainability strategy must first be a good business strategy that fits an organiza-tion’s unique value-chain opportunities and threats, while providing a competitive advan-tage (Porter & Kramer, 2006; Siegel, 2009). What is distinctive about a sustainability strategy is that strategic thinking and action become more holistic, balanced and complex. Planning takes on more short- and long-term balance (Slawinsky & Bansal, 2009). A larger, more diverse array of external stakeholders becomes deeply engaged, so that the organiza-tion can better discover opportunities and anticipate challenges. For instance, a large retailer has to consider not only the design and cost of its imported merchandise but also the labor practices of its suppliers, the carbon footprint of its products, the benefit of having its brand associated with “green” values, and the potential for public relations embarrass-ments due to government actions or civic watchdogs.

Sustainability is becoming a central part of core business strategy for many leading

organizations. But how successful are human resource leaders at helping their organizations

design and implement sustainability management? That seems to depend on how far along an

organization is on the sustainability journey. We asked HR and non-HR executives and managers

to report on their HR professionals’ competence and influence over sustainability strategy. With

most organizations progressing toward sustainability, HR leaders are too. But is it enough?

➤


views, to become stronger strategic partners, HR leaders must understand trends and their impacts on strategic-business opportunities and risks. They must know the needs of key external stakeholders, such as customers, communities, regulators and investors, and be advocates for taking these needs into account in formulating strategy. The most valued HR leaders can translate trends and needs into strategic HR investments and activities, including training programs, talent and performance management systems, and leadership knowledge and behaviors. They also are able to help structure the organiza-tion for success, develop appropriate metrics, facilitate coordination across organization functions, and work across external bound-aries to foster cooperative relationships with external stakeholders.

Sustainability Knowledge, Influence and Competencies of HR LeadersAs shown in Table 1, HR leaders did not rate themselves and their peers very highly on various types of knowledge and influence relating to developing sustainability strategy. They came close to agreeing that HR leaders understand the potential impacts of sustain-ability issues on corporate brand, talent management, and strategic opportunities and risks (mean response 3.8 on a five-point

TABLE1:PERCEPTIONS OF HR LEADERS’ ROLE

To what extent do you agree that HR leaders in your organization? HR Execs

HR Mgrs

Non-HR Execs

Non-HR Mgrs

Total

Understand the potential impact of environmental and social responsibility on our corporate brand and ability to attract, retain and engage talent.

3.80a 3.50a 2.95b 2.64b 3.38

Are strong advocates for taking a balanced short-term and long-term view in developing our business strategy.

3.65a 3.38ab 3.00b 2.44c 3.25

Understand sustainability (social and environmental) trends and their potential impact on this organization’s strategic business opportunities and risks.

3.52a 3.39a 2.98a 2.38b 3.19

Understand the needs of all our key external non-investor stakeholders (e.g., communities, customers, government agencies).

3.25a 3.31a 2.80a 2.44b 3.05

Are strong advocates for making the appropriate sustainability issues central to our business strategy.

3.29a 3.14ab 2.73bc 2.42c 3.00

Are strong advocates for the needs of all our key external stakeholders being taken into account in formulating our strategy.

3.09a 3.25ab 2.65bc 2.38c 2.93

Helping non-HR leaders see the connection between environmental and social responsibility and talent management.

3.18a 3.09a 2.38b 2.13b 2.84

Understand and help our non-HR leaders see how HR investments can drive a sustainability strategy. 3.04a 2.84ab 2.35bc 2.22c 2.73

N 99 40 64 45 248

Scoring of Responses: Strongly disagree = 1; Disagree = 2; Neutral = 3; Agree = 4; Strongly agree = 5.

Means in the same row that do not share the same subscripts differ at p < .05 on the Tukey-b measure of between-group differences.

TABLE2:PERCEIVED COMPETENCE OF HR LEADERS

Most HR leaders in your organization are extremely competent at:

HR Execs

HR Mgrs

Non-HR Execs

Non-HR Mgrs

Total

Clearly articulating what leadership knowledge and behavior align with sustainability.

3.10a 2.97ab 2.50bc 2.36c 2.83

Designing and delivering training programs to support sustainability.

3.08a 2.97a 2.63ab 2.29b 2.83

Helping to structure the organization for sustainability.

2.99a 3.05a 2.58ab 2.36b 2.82

Crafting a sustainability story that can be shared inside and outside the organization.

2.95a 2.92a 2.35b 2.29b 2.73

Designing and facilitating organizational change management programs to meet sustainability transformation challenges.

2.98a 2.86a 2.53ab 1.98b 2.69

Translating strategic sustainability directions into strategic HR activities.

2.96a 2.89a 2.33b 2.13b 2.69

Coaching leaders to make sure that leadership mindsets and behaviors are congruent with the intent of your organization’s sustainability strategy.

3.02a 2.72ab 2.43bc 2.11c 2.68

Formulating and implementing measures and rewards to support sustainability.

2.93a 2.91a 2.40ab 2.07b 2.68

Facilitating institutional coordination of functional business areas around sustainability.

2.79a 2.81a 2.53ab 2.20b 2.65

Working across external boundaries to foster cooperative relationships with external stakeholders (e.g., suppliers, customers, agencies, community groups).

2.86a 2.91a 2.40ab 2.02b 2.65

Turning sustainability leadership expectations into clear executive competencies and performance standards.

2.99a 3.05a 2.58ab 2.36b 2.60

Designing and delivering sustainability criteria for recruitment and promotion.

2.81a 2.75a 2.40ab 2.07b 2.59

N 99 40 64 45 248

Scoring of Responses: Strongly disagree = 1; Disagree = 2; Neutral = 3; Agree = 4; Strongly agree = 5.

Means in the same row that do not share the same subscripts differ at p < .05 on the Tukey-b measure of between-group differences.


➤

scale) and are fairly strong advocates for tak-ing a balanced short- and long-term view in strategy development. However, they were essentially neutral about how much they are helping non-HR executives see connections between sustainability and talent manage-ment; and how HR investments could drive sustainability strategy, or advocating for con-sideration of external stakeholder needs. Although other HR managers (those below the director level) tended to agree with the assessments of HR executives, the ratings by executives and managers outside HR are sig-nificantly lower, almost across the board— with their ratings of HR leaders on these qualities ranging from Neutral to Disagree.

As shown in Table 2, HR leaders rated them-selves and their peers even lower on various types of competencies relating to implement-ing sustainability strategy. Their ratings passed Neutral only in articulating leadership knowledge and behaviors to align with sus-tainability, and developing training programs to support sustainability. Just below Neutral are ratings for such key competencies as helping structure the organization for sustain-ability, devising clear executive competencies and performance standards, designing and facilitating transformative change-manage-ment programs, and translating strategic sustainability directions into strategic HR activities. Again, the ratings of HR leaders’ competencies by those outside HR are sig-nificantly lower in almost all facets—in many cases closer to Disagree than Neutral.

Individual HR Leader Efforts Toward Sustainability These results reflect the overall activities orga-nizations and their cohorts of HR leaders are taking. We also wanted to drill down at the personal level to assess why HR executives do or don’t devote individual efforts to bring about such strategic change in their organiza-tions. Given the modest progress toward implementing sustainability shown by the organizations in our survey, we’re not sur-prised that both HR leaders and others were virtually midway between disagreeing and agreeing with the statement, “A great deal of my effort is dedicated to issues related to the long-term sustainability of my organization.”

Research on managing major change has sug-gested that supportive leadership behavior depends on (a) alignment of executives’ per-

sonal values, (b) perceptions of what is in their own interests, including incentives or deterrents, and (c) available resources and their own abilities instrumental to bring about change (Detert & Pollock, 2008). We found that each of these factors is a signifi-cant predictor of how much effort HR leaders dedicate to sustainability issues (together explaining more than 42 percent of the vari-ance in their responses).

First, HR leaders attach high importance to such global sustainability issues as clean energy and water, safe food sources, afford-able quality healthcare, corruption and human rights abuses, poverty and climate change (means from 4.1 to 4.7 on a five-point scale). This suggests a high congruence between their own personal values and goals beyond only financial ones. HR leaders who rated global issues the highest devoted more effort to sustainability in their firms.

In acting on their own interests, HR leaders do not see much risk of embarrassment for providing vocal support. At the same time, they do not perceive many concrete incentives or other payoffs to offset the added burdens of sustainability activities to their workloads (Table 3). Similarly, they are mostly neutral in assessing such sustainability-related resources and abilities as their access to human and financial capital, alliance building and agen-da-setting influence with other executives. Those HR leaders who reported the greatest personal incentives, resources and abilities exert the greatest sustainability efforts.

We found a rather strong correlation between the degree to which HR executives are spend-ing a great deal of effort on sustainability issues and the extent to which their companies are implementing a sustainability strategy (r = .50). The more that companies are imple-

menting sustainability, the more HR executives perceived they are listened to, incentivized, resourced with financial and human capital, and effective at building alli-ances around sustainability (r = 56, .51, .46, and .45, respectively). Further, HR executives operating in organizations that have made sustainability central to their strategies large-ly saw themselves as significantly more influential, competent, committed and enabled to contribute to corporate sustain-ability efforts, than those in organizations for which sustainability is more peripheral. Even this segment of HR executives, however, rated their own roles, competencies and actions between “to a moderate extent” and “to a great extent” on average (between 3.0 and 3.9, with just one exception). In short, while HR executives overall are only moderately active in embracing sustainability, those HR leaders in corporate environments more ded-icated to sustainability exhibit significantly greater sustainability effort and effectiveness.

Discussion and Implications for PracticeOur results showing only modest overall progress toward implementing sustainability strategies are quite consistent with prior stud-ies, particularly regarding North American firms, from which most of our respondents came. Our set of organizations appears to be no more or less progressive than most in this region. Encouraging, however, is the large percent of respondents reporting that their organizations have, to a great extent, engen-dered sustainability values and made sustainability central to their strategic con-versations, which Wirtenberg et al. (2007) identified as foundational to executing sus-tainability strategies.

MethodsWe deployed an online survey, in 2009, by sending it to members of the Human Resource Planning Society and to human resource professionals in a research network of the Institute for Corporate Productivity. We constructed survey items based on prior work by American Management Association (2007), Lawler & Boudreau (2009), Ulrich et al. (2009), and Wirtenberg et al (2007). We received a total of 322 surveys, some partially completed, and 66 percent reported working in HR. Of those reporting their level of responsibilities, 99 were HR directors or above and considered at the “executive” level, while 40 were HR managers or below. A similar distinction was made to stratify non-HR respondents. Respondents from the United States constituted 65 percent of the sample and Canada 15 percent, with the rest mostly from Asia and Western Europe. For analysis, large companies were those report-ing more than $250 million in revenue, small companies reported less than that. We compared sets of groups using t-tests and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).


cultivate greater ability to enlist others in the cause, including issues of organization struc-ture and talent management to support sustainability strategy. Particularly helpful will be further research that examines in-depth the practices of HR leaders that have become influential over sustainability strate-gy so we can be sure what is likely to be most effective. Given the strong personal affinity for global sustainability issues expressed by survey respondents, the need for HR leaders to step up and play a stronger role in moving their organizations toward sustainability seems greater than ever.

ReferencesAmerican Management Association. (2007). Creating a sustainable future: A global study of current trends and possibilities 2007–2017. New York: American Manage-ment Association.

Berns, M., A. Townend, Z. Khayat, B. Balagopal, M. Reeves, M. Hopkis & N. Kruschwitz (2009). The business of sustainability: Findings and insights from the first annual Business of Sustainability Survey and the Global Thought Leaders’ Research Project. North Hollywood, CA: MIT Sloan Management Review.

Detert, J. R., & Pollock, T. G. (2008). Values, interests, and the capacity to act: Understanding professionals’ respons-es to market-based improvement initiatives in highly institutionalized organizations. Journal of Applied Behav-ioral Science, 44, 186-214.

Kaye, B., & Jordan-Evans, S. (2005). Love ‘em or leave ‘em: Getting good people to stay. 3rd Ed. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Talent management may be the lead lever-age point for HR leaders, given the strong business case connecting sustainability practices and reputation to employee recruitment, retention, engagement and per-formance improvement. Sadly, some of the lowest scores for HR leaders related to help-ing other executives see the links between sustainability strategy and HR invest-ments—connecting sustainability strategy to talent and performance management systems, and working across boundaries inside and outside the organizations. This is true even in organizations most deeply involved in sustainability.

Our results on individual inclination to act suggest what elements need to be in place to encourage more vigorous action for organi-zations to advance their sustainability agendas. The findings indicate that HR execs are strongly sympathetic to most global issues, but they don’t see many incentives to act in these directions within their organiza-tions. They also are only moderately able to call on alliances, human and financial capital, and their influence with seniors and peers to help make it happen.

An organization that is serious about sustain-ability (and an HR function that is too) should consider making sure that recognition and rewards are meted out for good sustain-ability work and the essential human and financial capital is available. HR execs should

Also consistent with prior studies is the asso-ciation we found between larger and stronger competitive performers and greater sustain-ability. Although we might be tempted to infer that more extensive sustainability activ-ities enabled those companies to improve their competitive position, it’s just as likely that larger and more financially successful firms command more resources to invest in vigorous sustainability initiatives.

The findings from our study reveal both dis-couraging and encouraging elements concerning HR leaders’ roles in supporting corporate sustainability strategy. We noted that a sustainability strategy must be a fun-damentally sound business strategy, albeit more challenging in some respects. Discour-aging are our findings that HR leaders’ average competency, influence and credibil-ity shortcomings in developing and implementing sustainability strategy closely mirror the deficiencies found in recent stud-ies on involvement in overall business strategy (Lawler & Boudreau, 2009; Ulrich et al., 2009). The challenge becomes even greater if the organization has not already incorporated sustainability into its business strategy. If sustainability is not central to an organization’s core business strategy and HR is not already impacting its business strategy, then HR has to overcome these dual obstacles to become more of a driving force behind sustainability.

Thus, we are not surprised to find HR leaders to be stronger and more successful sustain-ability advocates where sustainability is more strategically central and greater implementa-tion is occurring. Such organization contexts provide a better platform for HR leaders to develop greater credibility and play a much more valuable role in sustainability manage-ment, as well as in overall corporate strategy. We must ask, to what extent HR executives are just waiting reactively for their organiza-tions to catch up on sustainability strategies versus being more out-front in propelling them along the way, capitalizing on issues ideally suited to HR leadership to gain a stronger strategic voice?

Encouraging is the recognition that the challenging process of effectively executing sustainability strategy—which comes down to people systems, education and training, change management, and employee and stakeholder engagement—falls squarely in the “sweet spot” of the HR function. Here-in lies an opportunity for HR executives to provide powerful leadership and influence.

TABLE3: ExTENT OF EFFORT FOR LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY

Mean Total Mean HR Execs

Extent of Effort for Sustainability

A great deal of my effort is dedicated to issues related to the long-term sustainability of my organization.

3.06 3.07

Actions in One’s Own Interests

I see concrete incentives to me and my colleagues for devoting more energy and resources to sustainability-related activities.

2.88 3.00

Putting more time and attention on sustainability issues just adds to the workload for me and my unit. (Reverse scored; higher score more positive)

2.96 2.82

I run the risk of looking bad or being embarrassed if I am too vocal in pushing sustainability issues. (Reverse scored; higher score more positive)

3.55 3.66

Available Resources and Personal Abilities

I am effective at building alliances to advance sustainability activities.

3.26 3.39

My seniors and my peers tend to listen to me when I advance an agenda for sustainability activities.

3.22 3.27

I have access to the financial and human capital needed to advance sustainability activities.

2.95 3.24

N 251 99

Strongly disagree = 1; Disagree = 2; Neutral = 3; Agree = 4; Strongly agree = 5.


Lawler, E.E. & J.W. Boudreau (2009). What makes HR a strategic partner? People & Strategy, 32, (1), 14-22.

Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, December, 78–92.

Siegel, D.S (2009). Green management matters only if it yields more green: An economic/strategic perspective. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 5-16.

Slawinsky, N. & Bansal, P. (2009, August). The role of time in business sustainability. Paper presented at the meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago.

Willard, R. (2009). The sustainability champion's guide-book: How to transform your company. BC, Canada: New Society Publishers.

Wirtenberg, J., Harmon, J., Russell, W. G., & Fairfield, K. (2007). HR’s role in building a sustainable enterprise. Human Resource Planning, 30(1), 10–20.

Wirtenberg, J. (2010, forthcoming). Unleashing talent in service of a sustainable future. The Talent Management Handbook. New York: McGraw Hill.

Ulrich, Brockbank, & Johnson, 2009. The role of strategy architect in the strategic HR organization. People & Strategy, 32(1), 24-31.

Don’t be the hurdle.Research shows that high-performance organizations excel in five domains of human capital. To learn more, download our free white paper at

i4cp.com/hpo

Dr. Joel Harmon is a professor of management in the Silberman College of Business at Fairleigh Dickinson University, a distinguished faculty fellow of its Center for Human Resource Management and executive director of its Institute for Sustainable Enterprise. Harmon earned his masters in environmental sciences from Rensselaer Polytechnic University and his doctorate in organization strategy from the State University of New York at Albany. He specializes in corporate sustainability, focusing on linkages between people, learning practices and business performance. He has published extensively in a variety of leading academic and practitioner journals, receiving awards for his papers.

Kent Fairfield, Ph.D., M.B.A., is assistant professor of management at the Silberman College of Business at Fairleigh Dickinson University. He founded Kent Fairfield Associ-ates, consulting on teams, leadership development, and change management. Fairfield earned an M.A. and Ph.D. in organizational psychology from Columbia University and an MBA in finance from the Harvard Business School.

Jeana Wirtenberg, Ph.D. is co-founder and director, Institute for Sustainable Enterprise (ISE) in the Silberman College of Business at Fairleigh Dickinson University, and presi-dent of Jeana Wirtenberg & Associates, LLC. She is lead editor of The Sustainable Enterprise Fieldbook: When It All Comes Together. She is a designer and lead author on the worldwide study Creating a Sustainable Future: A Global Study of Current Trends and Possibilities 2007–2017 (AMA, 2007). She is president & CEO of Transitioning to Green, LLC and the Transitioning to Green Foundation whose mission is helping orga-nizations and individuals successfully transform themselves into the new green economy.

Greening the Future with Energy and Jobs at PSEGZachary Narrett, Public Service Enterprise Group, Inc.


➤

As PSEG Chairman and CEO Ralph Izzo said, “Today, society faces immense challenges to forge a path of growth

that protects the environment, improves energy security and provides good jobs and livelihoods for people. We are well suited to execute proj-ects to help meet these challenges and thus promote a sustainable future not only for our-selves, but the larger society.”

How best to pursue and balance these objec-tives? Alignment is a key. PSEG has found that its efforts can be more effective by being part of an overall strategy based on opera-tional excellence, financial strength and disciplined investment. The company stresses the importance of aligning activities around this strategy to realize its vision of being a recognized leader for people providing safe, reliable, economic and green energy.

SustainabilityAt PSEG, environmental responsibility goes along with core commitments to customers, employees and shareholders—all with a view to sustainability. Corporate citizenship is of a piece with award-winning reliability and a continuing record of paying dividends for 103 consecutive years.

PSEG is not a newcomer to efforts to be greener. For more than 15 years, the company has pursued a low-carbon business strategy. Recently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Climate Leaders program honored PSEG for meeting or exceeding voluntary carbon reduction targets. The company reduced its carbon dioxide emissions rate 31 percent from 2000 to 2008. For the past two years, PSEG has been named to the Dow Jones Sustainability Index and the Carbon Disclosure Leadership Index.

Looking ahead, PSEG has set a new target to reduce its 2005 carbon footprint 25 percent by 2025. PSEG is emphasizing a three-pronged approach to address climate change: focusing first on energy efficiency; second on renew-able energy; and third on clean central station generation, including nuclear. At the same time, the company continues to make signifi-cant infrastructure investments—whether in pipes and wires or power plants—associated with providing reliable energy around the clock and throughout the year.

The ChallengeFor these efforts ultimately to bear fruit, utilities such as PSEG need to prepare the future energy workforce. When the economy rebounds and Baby Boomers start reaching retirement age in droves, the industry could be left with a lack of skilled replacement workers. Indeed, a demographic gap will be the prelude to a growing skills gap unless companies intensify their focus on workforce development and training. The rising demand for green workers calls for a heightened emphasis on workforce development as well.

WorkforcePSEG has been working on these challenges for some time, based on the recognition that employees are the single most important determinant of the company’s success. “I am confident our industry will be able to find and develop the talent we need by keeping work-force development front and center,” said Izzo. “Increasingly, people want careers that connect to their values. If your goal is to work with skilled, dedicated people on some of the greatest challenges of our time, the utility field is a great place to be.”

To prepare the diverse and highly skilled work-force of the future, PSEG has been investing in innovative programs that open the doors wider to good careers in the utility industry. For example, the company’s Energy Utility Tech-nology degree program is helping to create a pool of technically skilled and educated work-ers to fill critical entry-level positions. During the past two years, PSEG has added courses in green energy to the program to help students learn about the evolving world of energy and the opportunities linked to it.

PSEG also has a strong focus on career growth and development for its existing workforce. Among other programs, PSEG has a Supervisory Academy and Leadership Academy to support front-line workforce and leadership development and knowledge transfer.

ResultsThe Energy Utility Technology Degree ProgramBegun on a pilot basis in 2003, the Energy Utility Technology degree program has grown to include five community colleges and a four-year state college. The program enables qualified students to combine class-r o o m s t u d i e s w i t h t e c h n i c a l apprentice-level training at PSEG’s Edison Training and Development Center. Students enrolled in the program must complete two paid internships at the company’s field loca-tions. Also, to help prepare them, students receive training in safety, resume writing, interviewing and employability skills. The program added a math requirement when it became clear that many students needed to significantly improve their quantitative skills.

Vision, Strategy and Alignment

Can a 107-year-old energy utility help shape a new, more sustainable energy future? PSEG’s

experience strongly suggests the answer is yes. The company has a range of energy efficiency

and renewable energy initiatives that create jobs, reduce carbon emissions and provide

more megawatts of clean energy. It is also creating jobs through accelerated infrastructure

investments to improve reliability further, while providing an economic stimulus.


Supervisory and Leadership AcademiesWorkforce development at PSEG involves efforts to build a stronger companywide net-work of first-line supervisors and mid-level managers. The PSEG Supervisory Academy is a four-week program geared to provide first-line supervisors with tools and skills relevant to leading work teams and achieving business results. More than 235 first-line supervisors have completed the program since its estab-lishment in 2007, contributing to observable enhancements in performance in this key function.

The Leadership Academy is a nine-day pro-gram focused on developing participants’ financial decisionmaking, presentation and leadership skills. There have been at least five promotions among 40 participants to date. Action learning projects sponsored through the program have achieved quantifiable results, as reported by managers.

Knowledge Transfer The increasing public focus on green jobs at times can overshadow the importance of the traditional energy workforce. However, tra-ditional energy functions—central station power, transmission and distribution—still will be crucial in a green economy and will become more green-focused as technology progresses. Nuclear power stations already provide the nation’s most abundant source of emissions-free electricity. Moreover, PSEG strives to infuse clean and efficient processes that minimize negative impact on the envi-ronment into all areas of its business, rather than create two silos of workers—green and non-green.

Therefore, energy companies must ensure that knowledge is transferred between the green and traditional workforce, and between new and more experienced employees. This is particularly vital, given the wave of retire-ments expected during the next decade.

To facilitate knowledge transfer, PSEG has begun to reinvent retirement, offering retire-ment-eligible employees the opportunity to continue working at reduced hours. Through this program, employees looking for either phased retirement or part-time work still are able to contribute their valuable experience and help train and develop new workers. With the goal of building on such programs, PSEG has put in place a knowledge transfer and retention process.

As of September 2009, PSEG had hired 89 graduates of the Energy Utility Technology degree program, and another 110 students were enrolled. More than half of the program’s graduates who have become full-time employ-ees at PSEG are minorities. The program has been recognized as a model, including by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Com-mission, which honored PSEG with its Freedom to Compete award for promoting access and inclusion in the workplace.

Green Jobs and InvestmentsPSEG’s focus on workforce development increasingly is being felt at the grassroots. The company’s ability to develop green jobs has grown in tandem with regulatory approvals that have allowed specific utility investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy programs in New Jersey.

With a green light from its regulators, the company’s New Jersey energy delivery utility has more than $200 million in energy effi-ciency programs targeted to the needs of low-income residential customers in urban areas, as well as businesses, municipalities and cash-strapped hospitals.

PSEG is working closely with several commu-nity-based agencies to recruit and train job candidates for positions as energy assistants to help conduct home energy audits and implement energy-efficiency measures at cus-tomers’ homes. The company is partnering with the New Jersey Department of Labor on this initiative to spur green economic devel-opment and job creation at the local level.

Renewable energy is another key component of PSEG’s green activities. The utility is

investing more than $600 million in solar energy development in New Jersey. This effort is creating jobs, in addition to strength-ening New Jersey’s position in the emerging clean energy industry.

PSEG’s various partnerships and green pro-grams are building awareness among the younger generation that energy is more than a job, but a career—one that appeals to their desire to contribute to a greener future for the world and themselves.

Workforce Development PartnershipsPSEG’s experience suggests that strong part-nerships are a key to preparing the future energy workforce. The complexity of this challenge demands thoughtful collaboration among interested parties, including govern-ment, industry, labor, non-profit community organizations and educational institutions. Partnerships can help ensure that job training and educational programs are closely aligned with business needs, resulting in more quali-fied job candidates—and a stronger workforce development pipeline. PSEG is building stronger workforce development partner-ships on the national, state and local levels.

To help galvanize such efforts, Izzo has served as chairman of the Center for Energy Work-force Development (CEWD). Formed in March 2006, CEWD is the first partnership among utilities, their associations, contrac-tors and unions to focus on building a skilled workforce pipeline that will meet future industry needs. PSEG also is partnering with groups like the Labor and Management Pub-lic Affairs Committee (LAMPAC) of the Edison Electric Institute to encourage appro-priate national responses to workforce development issues.

States long have served as laboratories of innovation. PSEG has taken the lead in estab-lishing a statewide partnership, the New Jersey Energy Workforce Consortium (NJEWC), to help address the employment needs of the industry. PSEG is also working with the Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, New Jersey.

About PSEGPublicServiceEnterpriseGroup,Inc.(PSEG) is a publicly traded diversified energy company.YearFounded: 1903Headquarters: Newark, NJRevenues: $12.4 Billion (2009)Employees: 10,000NYSETickerSymbol: PEG


Continuing EffortsPSEG is striving to build on its workforce development focus. The Energy Utility Tech-nology degree program has grown not only in a new, green direction, but also by being extended to PSEG’s fossil-fueled and nuclear power generation business. In 2008, the pro-gram was expanded to include Salem County Community College in southern New Jersey, with a view to the future workforce needs of PSEG’s nuclear generating stations in the same county. In conjunction with the Nuclear Energy Institute, this particular program is developing a nationwide common curricu-lum to serve the needs of students interested in careers in nuclear energy.

PSEG also has strong partnerships with sec-ondary schools to help put energy on the “radar screen” of students who are beginning to think more seriously about careers. In 2008, PSEG teamed with the Essex County

Vocational Technical school system in north-ern New Jersey to create a Green Energy Academy dedicated to preparing students for the green workforce. The Green Energy Acad-emy is proving to be a popular offering that attracts students and engages them in active learning. PSEG is looking at opportunities to develop similar programs with other high schools in New Jersey.

For all the progress being made through such initiatives, the work of preparing students for the energy jobs of tomorrow is only begin-ning. Issues related to skills development remain daunting across the country. More-over, green job creation is only in its earliest stages of development in the United States. Much of the supply chain associated with the green manufacturing sector (for solar panels or wind turbines, for example) is now being imported from other countries that have given greater priority to this area.

To provide the economic foundation for a leading green energy economy, PSEG has been urging Congress to pass climate legisla-tion. “PSEG is pursuing many carbon reduction initiatives, and we stand ready to do more,” said Izzo. “While the actions of companies and individuals are necessary and important, strong climate policies at the national level are essential to successfully address this challenge.”

Zachary Narrett has 25 years of expe-rience in corporate communications and has been a senior writer with PSEG since 2001. He has taught undergradu-ate and graduate courses in writing and history, and has served as a board member and chair of the New Jersey Council for the Humanities. He received a Ph.D. in history from Har-vard University in 1984.

personalityscience

advancingofthe

Hogan pioneered the use of personality testing to predict job performance

more than three decades ago. In the years since, our research has set the

global standard, ensuring that our products and services are second to

none. There simply is no more reliable and useful source than Hogan for

excellence in employee selection, development and leadership practices.

T H E S C I E N C E O F P E R S O N A L I T Y

®

W W W . H O G A N A S S E S S M E N T S . C O M


Building a Green City on a Blue LakeA Model for Building a Local Sustainable EconomyAnte Glavas, University of Notre DamePeter Senge, M.I.T. and SoL (Society for Organizational Learning)David L. Cooperrider, Case Western Reserve University


Still, most of the action remains frag-mented. Most initiatives are either within a specific sector or a small area

of a city, resulting in the absence of systemic approaches to change. Perhaps systemic change is difficult to approach because the scale of change that is needed is so massive. But even those who do see the whole picture do not know where to start. For example, do you:

• Produce electric cars but still power those cars using electricity created through fossil fuel?

• Focus on energy efficiency of buildings without investing significantly in alternative sources of energy?

• Create alternative energy sources without having a grid and effective infrastructure set up for distribution?

• Tackle infrastructure issues without having a skilled workforce that can work in the plants that produce energy?

• Train workers not knowing if there will be guaranteed jobs?

And how will any of these plans work if con-sumers are not educated? Can green economic revitalization strategies effectively address embedded poverty in the inner city?

This is no chicken-and-egg conundrum. All these problems are interrelated. Neither necessarily comes before the other. All need to be addressed more or less at the same time to achieve synergies. But how do cities take on such a massive task when they often have difficulty even getting a few politicians to sit around a table and agree on minor issues?

What we are facing is in large part a process issue. Although we still have far to go in terms of creating resources—technology, funds, people—the greatest challenge that regions face is not knowing where to start.

In particular, we see a particular role for busi-nesses willing and able to work in partnership with local governments. But the challenge is so huge that individual companies naturally feel they cannot make a difference and, as a result, most are simply waiting. At best, some companies are positioning themselves to take advantage of a green economy if it happens, but few see themselves as actively working to bring about the scope of change needed.

The opportunities we outline here started with a small group of organizations. They were vital to creating “make it happen” lead-ership—as shown in Exhibit 1—for the transformation of the economy (Senge et al., 2008). The case of Cleveland’s “Green City on a Blue Lake” initiative provides lessons that can be applied to other cities and orga-nizations undergoing large scale, whole systems change.

➤

Cleveland – BackgroundAlthough Cleveland has a population of a bit fewer than half a million, the greater North-east Ohio area is comprised of four-million people. The surrounding areas tend to be more affluent while the city is struggling with unemployment and poverty. Unemployment has varied between 6.8 and 10.2 percent in the last year, while poverty is at 30.5 percent for the city and 41.5 percent for children (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 2009).

Cleveland is symbolic as a location for build-ing a local, sustainable economy. It was a pillar in the early industrial revolution in America. The Rockefellers and Carnegies began their dynasties in Cleveland. Standard Oil was first headquartered there, sparking the surge of the oil industry. The city played a prominent role in the creation of the auto industry. Steel and railroad-related industries were central to the region. But most impor-tantly, its geographic position was what made it an industrial hub. Because of its location on

The Challenges of Whole Systems Change

Despite media attention on federal efforts to transition to a green economy, the real change

happening is a quiet revolution taking places among U.S. cities. More than 973 mayors have

signed on to the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. The U.S. Conference of Mayors

projected that 4.2 million green jobs will be created in the coming decades (The United States

Conference of Mayors and the Mayors Climate Protection Center, 2008).

ExHIBIT1: LEADERSHIP COMPANIES CREATE “PULL” FOR CHANGE (SENGE ET AL, 2008: 211)


Lake Erie, once the Erie Canal was built, New York was connected to the Great Lakes through Cleveland. Furthermore, the Cuyahoga River, which runs south from Lake Erie through Cleveland, gave rise to factories that created a 100-mile-long industrial cor-ridor that was crucial in the times of specialization in industry. One factory would create a part and then transport it down the river to other factories to continue assembly.

However, as industry polluted the Cuyahoga River, the river caught on fire several times. What was once the proud symbol of the city became a symbol of the ill effects of the indus-trial age, a burning river. Cleveland went from being one of the richest cities to one of the poorest. It is fitting that a prominent proj-ect to shepherd the green industrial revolution is located in Cleveland.

“Behind the Scenes” of the Cleveland ModelBeing one of the poorest big cities in the United States, private and public sector lead-ers in Cleveland knew they had to do something. At the same time, the region had some of the most innovative organizations in sustainability, many of which are part of E4S, one of the largest and best organized sustain-abil ity networks (Entrepreneurs for Sustainability). With 6,000 active businesses and entrepreneurs, E4S is a building block for business collaboration. Cleveland is also one of the few cities to have a sustainability office in the mayor’s office that helps to transform

the public sector. In addition, the city has strengths such as access to fresh water through Lake Erie, one of the best local food economies in the United States, world-class foundations including the Cleveland Founda-tion—the world’s largest private foundation, 26 universities, leading healthcare institu-tions such as the Cleveland Clinic, and many established enterprises focused on green products and services such as Eaton Corpora-tion, Forest City Enterprises, Parker Hannifin, Timken, Key Bank, Sherwin Williams, Lubrizol, Progressive Insurance, GOJO, RPM, NorTech, and Fairmount Minerals.

However, as with other cities, it was not clear how to go about spurring the local economy as a whole. Investment capital is very limited. Government policies offer a mix of positive and negative incentives. Inner city poverty in Cleveland is among the highest in the United States. Population and corporations increas-ingly are moving to surrounding areas and thus depleting the tax base of the city. At the same time, the Fowler Center for Sustainable Value, based at Case Western Reserve Univer-sity in Cleveland, is involved in addressing complex sustainability issues in other regions around the world. Thus, Mayor Frank Jack-son approached the Fowler Center to cooperate in planning the future of the city based on a sustainable economy.

StructureA three-day Appreciative Inquiry Summit took place from August 12-14, 2009, in the

Cleveland Convention Center. The Summit had three major goals: (1) design a strategic plan for the city; (2) design tangible ready-for-market initiatives and prototypes; (3) build an infrastructure, a web of relationships and social capital necessary to carry out the work. The Summit differed from typical plan-ning or town hall meetings in that it was task-oriented. Participants could not leave the Summit without having designed specific prototypes and initiatives that could be implemented immediately following the Summit.

More than 700 people representing all major stakeholder groups took part. Elected offi-cials, CEOs, heads of foundations and others took part fully for the three days. The mayor was there the entire time and chaired much of the meeting. Diverse stakeholders were there such as children, community represen-tatives, shop-floor workers and engineers. In addition, representatives of the White House and other cities around the United States and Europe were present to study the process. Senior leaders from IBM, Ford, Microsoft and Wal-Mart participated.

ProcessThe Summit process is outlined in Exhibit 2. Details about participants, pre-Summit research, the agenda and workbook used at the Summit, outcomes, future plans as well as other information can be found on the City of Cleveland’s Web site: www.city.cleveland.oh.us/CityofCleveland/Home/Community/ThingsToDo/AISummit. For more details about the theory and functioning of the Summit process, see the Appreciative Inquiry Handbook (Cooper-rider, Whitney, & Stavros, 2005).

The overall Summit process can be broken down into three phases: Pre-Summit, Summit and Post-Summit.

Pre-Summit. The first milestone was conven-ing a meeting to design the summit that took place February 11-12, 2009. The Mayor’s office together with the input of the Fowler Center and key local stakeholders invited 50 representatives of community organizations, business, government and foundations. Dur-ing the Design Team meeting, the main elements of the Summit were decided upon such as date, title, objectives, who should attend, marketing strategies, research needed prior to the Summit, and plans to ensure proper post-summit momentum. The follow-ing six months, the Design Team split into

ExHIBIT2: PROCESS TIMELINE


task groups that focused on preparation of the Summit, such as engaging and inviting stakeholders, building a positive image about the Summit in the community, and conduct-ing research/input into the Summit. The Fowler Center, together with the Mayor’s office, prepared the agenda and facilitation of the Summit as well as the logistics.

Summit. The actual Summit took place from August 12-14, 2009, for three full days. It was a working meeting split into four segments: (1) Discovery: Identifying and agreeing on Cleveland’s strengths; (2) Dream: Creating a vision for Cleveland in 2019 based on a mas-sive scaling up of the strengths identified in the Discovery phase; (3) Design: The second half of the summit was broken up into 20 working groups that designed 28 initiatives allowing them to realize the visions created in the Dream phase—these initiatives range from more strategic issues to very tangible prototypes; (4) Deploy: A detailed action plan was created for all 28 initiatives with responsibilities, tasks and timelines.

Post-Summit. The Post-Summit process is currently taking place and can last indefi-nitely, with the most important milestone being another Summit one year from now, in fall 2010. During this year, all the initial stages of prototypes that were designed at the Summit are to be implemented. The Post-Summit infrastructure was designed during the actual Summit and consists of social net-working/collaboration technology (e.g. NING site that each of the initiative groups could use to continue work), resources that foundations committed, and a “governing” structure.

The governing structure is the most complex and consists of three different forms. The first is a self-governing structure for each of the initiatives. At the Summit, each group created its own internal self-governing structure. For those groups that need nurturing or addi-tional hands-on support, the Mayor’s office and the Fowler center are providing support. Second, there is top-down support. In order to provide guidance and support, the Mayor created an advisory group of 60 key com-munity leaders and also converted the City Office of Sustainability into a cabinet posi-tion. Finally, there is a steering committee that is comprised of representatives of each of the initiative groups. The purpose of the steering committee is to (a) provide joint coordination among the initiatives and (b) to plan the Summit in 2010.

Success Criteria A few key elements distinguish the methodol-ogy used from other typical change processes. These represent lessons from many past proj-ects that we believe can be applied to any change process in a system, whether it is a city or a company.

(1) Whole System. The Summit was not top-down or bottom-up; it engaged the whole system. As opposed to other methodologies that are based on aggregations of small groups, the process actually works better as the size of the group increases. When repre-sentatives of the whole system are in one room together, breakthrough innovation can be achieved (Cooperrider et al., 2005). Just as important, many of the people who need to carry out the innovation are also in the room. Change is decided on the spot and can be carried out immediately upon closing of the Summit. A committee of leaders in the city worked for months to identify who needed to be at the Summit, because it is extremely important that certain participants are pres-ent. After this time, teams of people diligently spent time in outreach.

words, they focus on defining the problem and then finding a way to fix it. However, as Porter (1995) posited, the greatest pitfall cit-ies have in designing their futures is that they take a deficit-based approach in which they analyze where they would like to be and then what they need to do to get there. However, often those visions have no solid business logic based on their capacity and competitive advantage. In Cleveland, we took a strength-based approach. We searched for the best in our people, organizations and the region by seeking what gives “life” to the system (Cooperrider & Whitney, 2000).

Prior to the Summit, a well-known consulting firm, together with 50 people—some of whom were part of the Design Team, while others were recruited based on the input they could give to the research—engaged in ana-lytical research to identify potential strengths.1 At the Summit, using the analytical research as input, participants agreed on the core strengths of the city. Such a process helped in avoiding hidden agendas (e.g., an individual or organization pushing their vision), but more importantly, it started the whole pro-cess in a place of hope and aspiration. As

The large focus on business ensured that the Summit would be based on sound business logic in which building a sustainable economy could be profitable for all of the key stakeholders.

Numerous details went into planning the invites. For example, when a company was invited, they had to send not only a C-level executive, but also someone who could be a point person and an engineer or worker who understood the technical side of the business. The very rough breakdown of participants was 40 percent business, 40 percent non-profit/community/academia, 20 percent other (e.g. children, foundations, media national and international participants). The large focus on business ensured that the Sum-mit would be based on sound business logic in which building a sustainable economy could be profitable for all of the key stake-holders.

(2) Strengths-based Approach. Most method-ologies are deficit-based approaches. In other

opposed to other processes that begin with negative emotions from analyzing what doesn’t work, we analyzed what worked and how to scale it up. The energy in the room was contagious, and it was the first time many participants noted that they have ever been able to work together positively in Cleveland.

(3) Letting Go of Control. There is often a desire for command and control that actu-ally gets in the way of success (Hock, 1999). Rather, what leads to breakthrough success is enabling multiple sectors and multiple levels to work together simultaneously (Cooper-rider, Fry, & Piderit, 2007). The Mayor and his whole cabinet did their best to prepare the groundwork for the Summit; but then once they entered the Summit, they let go and allowed participants to truly design the future

1. The report that the group created can be found on www.city.cleveland.oh.us/CityofCleveland/Home/Community/ThingsToDo/AISummit/Forms-Publications, and is titled, “Sustainable Cleveland 2019: Pre-Summit Briefing Paper” ➤


of the city. It took great courage, not only from the City government, but also the other sustainability organizations that had worked for years forging sustainability initiatives and their vision for the region. Many of the local sustainability experts knew what could be best for the city and could have questioned why we needed a Summit when it was clear to them what Cleveland needed to do. How-ever, their letting go of control resulted in a shared ownership regarding the plans for the future. Prior to the Summit, there was a lot of advocacy, in which local experts tried to convince others what the city needed. The aim of the Summit was a collective platform of tangible actions.

(4) Building Social Capital. On the one hand, change efforts are doomed to failure without building social capital (Kotter, 1995). On the other hand, according to many sociologists, our country generally has experienced a long-term decline in social capital (Putnam, 2000). Cleveland was an example of fragmented clans, lack of collaboration and prevailing attitudes of negativity and skepticism toward everything in the city. But a tipping point took place during the design team meeting in Feb-ruary when the leading organizations began planning out the Summit. As many partici-pants noted, it was when organizations actually came together to do something instead of just talking about doing something that the energy shifted.

Following the Design Team meeting, there were no false promises declaring victory (Kotter, 1995), just hard work. Gradually, Design Team members began engaging others until about 200 people became involved in various aspects of the Summit. It helped that most did not have a huge time-consuming role to play because the city and the Fowler Center primarily took care of logistics and planning. But there was opportunity to give input and influence. For example, many people helped with aspects of the Summit, such as providing input on stakeholders who should be invited, giving input into the pre-summit research, helping with commu-nication, etc. All of this engagement helped build the social capital we needed.

OutcomesThe summit identified a series of upward vir-tuous cycles that can be established—how one good thing can lead to another. Through virtuous cycles like this, participants in the Cleveland Summit began to see how the city could become an icon for establishing green

economies. Specifically, coming out of the Summit, initiatives to create a local sustain-able economy by 2019 included the following:

• new metrics of success based on human flourishing rather than only GDP;

• creating a zero-waste city by 2019;

• urban communities with reduced travel and innovative transportation such as the first “solarail”;

• six initiatives for local food that would result in 10,000 new farmers making up 20 percent of the $10 billion food economy, while using vacant land space in the inner city and creating jobs for the unemployed;

• advanced energy generat ion and distribution, including the first freshwater wind farm in the world, a 400MW combined heat & power plant, and an industrial water management collection and reuse system;

• a d v a n c e d e n e r g y r e s e a r c h a n d commercialization through the creation of the Laboratories for Advanced Energy Commercialization (LAEC), pronounced “lake”;

• advanced manufacturing and materials through the creation of a Global Center for Sustainable Design & Manufacturing to foster industrial symbiosis between sectors;

• a communications campaign focused around directly engaging 1.6 million in Cleveland and surrounding areas in these sustainability efforts;

• green retrofitting with the goals that all buildings achieve at least a 50 percent energy reduction, 50 percent of buildings’ area able to have net zero emissions, and an additional 25 percent of the buildings to be net energy producers, while all new construction is to meet LEED standards or equivalent;

• educational reform by having an integrated curriculum developed by local universities for the public school system focusing on personal mastery needed for sustainability;

• health with a focus on well-care instead of sick-care;

• creating a Regional Sustainability Fund to raise $100 million to support the initiatives; and

• a self-organizing governing structure in which the city government is more an enabler/facilitator rather than the top-down authority.

Together, the vision that was presented dur-ing the Summit has a goal to create 250,000 jobs in the long-term. In the short-term, these groups are working on creating many quick-wins necessary to keep momentum (Kotter, 1995) such as the creation of a Regional Sus-tainability Fund.

Perhaps the greatest contribution is an under-lying thread found through all of the initiatives—a shift in consciousness. Almost every presentation at the Summit focused on some sort of shift in how we educate children, the manner in which media addresses these issues, how we interact with our family and friends, and how we change our workplace cultures.

This collaborative structure is the true foun-dation of the new sustainable economy in Cleveland. At the heart of every initiative is a collaborative approach to designing the new economy. Participants are open to joining initiative groups at any point, and the infor-mation is shared in an open-source manner through the Summit Web site. It is what Eisler (2005) calls a partnership economy. The Summit is creating new metrics for progress, as well as new rules and regulations that fos-ter, rather than hinder, economic innovation. The greatest contribution of the Summit may prove to be how these outcomes are imple-mented through a collaborative, self- governing system.

A brief summary of the initiatives can be found on: www.city.cleveland.oh.us/Cityof Cleveland/Home/Community/ThingsToDo/AISummit/workgroupsandoutcomes

Role of BusinessThe federal government commissioned the National Academy of Sciences to analyze how to build local critical infrastructure sys-tems necessary for the sustainable future of the United States (National Research Council of the National Academies, 2009). Their comprehensive report came out with one major conclusion: The only way that we will succeed is if we have a approach in which all key stakeholders such as business, govern-ment, academia and non-profit organizations co-design the solutions. The Cleveland pro-cess can serve as a model for how stakeholders can come together to do this.

In Cleveland, it was the city government and a university that initially came together. However, starting with the design team meeting, businesses played a prominent


role—small- and medium-size businesses as well as larger businesses. Respected entrepre-neurs were among the strongest voices in the room. Given the central role that business leadership must play in any entrepreneurial process of economic revitalization, we think that the methods shared here can guide small groups of business leaders in other cities along a viable, collaborative path. This starts with convening a few business- and non-business stakeholders to plan out a design team meeting. In the initial stages, it is not necessary to have the formal support of the entire business community via a Chamber of Commerce or similarly established groups. While connection to the business mainstream is important, it can be limiting to start with established groups who have been exclu-sively business-oriented in the past and not sufficiently inclusive of other sectors.

The participants at the design team meeting initially take part as individuals who contrib-ute their experience and expertise to the work of the meeting. Only as the design team expands and you move toward more elabo-rated plans for a larger gathering, like the Summit, do you need the formal sponsorship of business. Our hope is that the Cleveland process can provide an example and a road-map for how a few businesses can come together with other sectors in support of change in an entire city. As the collaborative process expands, issues that were deemed too large to tackle, such as infrastructure, can be addressed. The beauty of a collaborative pro-cess is that it is not on the shoulders of any one group to do all the work, provided that you establish clear governance and manage-ment structures.

Integrating the Five DisciplinesCleveland, as a whole, is building a learning organization. None of us know all the solu-tions of how to create a local sustainable economy. That is why it is necessary to create a learning organization that can discover continually as it is co-creating.

The Summit covered what Senge (1990) termed the five learning organization princi-ples or practices: systems thinking, team learning, shared vision, mental models and personal mastery.

• Day I – Through framing given by David Cooperrider, Peter Senge and other speakers, the participants used systems

thinking to challenge their own mental models of Cleveland and industrial society more broadly. Once they challenged these unquestioned assumptions, participants interviewed each other to explore new mental models of how a sustainable society would look and what they would mean personally, both in terms of their deepest aspirations and their own counter-productive attachments and assumptions.

• Day II – Participants came together in small groups to share new mental models and work to create shared visions. Plenary work was then conducted to build a shared collective vision of the city in 2019.

• Day II and III – The rest of the Summit was focused on putting shared vision into action in working teams. David Cooperrider gave each of the action groups principles for team learning that are based on the IDEO methodology (Kelley, 2005).

Personal mastery is arguably one area that was not covered explicitly in the Summit, but was implicit in most of the work. It is also one area where human resources managers can play the most important role. Without a shift in consciousness in individuals, none of the new systems will be implemented.

Through our organizations we can create programs in which individuals are enrolled, such as Wal-Mart’s PSP – Personal Sustain-ability Programs (Wal-Mart, 2009). Hundreds of thousands of employees have joined PSP by committing to at least one specific per-sonal sustainability goal. Not only is this creating a broad shift in thinking, it is also a very sound business strategy. The PSP pro-grams have become one of the greatest motivation tools in the company. When employees are asked what they are most proud of at Wal-Mart, most cite “sustainabil-ity” as the number one thing. ➤


Implications for Change Leaders and HR Professionals Although the roadmap in Exhibit 3 is specific to the Cleveland Summit, it can provide insight into leading large-scale strategic-change processes in general within an organization or community. As in Exhibit 3, the key elements to get the process off the ground are (1) identifying the organizers, (2) engaging a few key stakeholders, (3) finding seed funding, and (4) planning a steering com-mittee meeting. A large Summit may seem like a daunting task, but when it’s broken down into a few component steps, a few individuals and organizations can spark the entire pro-cess. For the readers of this journal, we have tried to provide insight into how you can play a catalyst role in such change processes.

There are also important lessons for HR professionals focused on job creation, career planning, recruitment, selection and retention:

• Job creation: An estimated 250,000 jobs may be created out of the work initiated through the Cleveland Summit. Not only is

this a huge opportunity for new job growth, it also requires human resource leaders to adequately plan for this new type of worker who will manage and work in manufacturing and service businesses related to green technology (see U.S. Council of Mayors report, 2008). In particular, creating new jobs can allow companies to tap into inner city human resources that can be a high value-for-money workforce in terms of entrepreneurship, loyalty and dedication (Porter, 1995).

• Career planning: With the increasing age of our workforce and the continuing trend towards down-sizing, more workers can be educated to transition their careers to green economy opportunities (U.S. Council of Mayors, ibid). Many workers will not need training in a completely new set of skills. For example, advanced energy manufacturing still will need to use many of the same skills employed in current manufacturing.

• Recruitment and Selection: Unlike other sectors, where there is a higher supply of workers than there is demand, the green

sector is growing so fast that there are many shortages of skilled workers. Proactive recruitment and training strategies are needed. For example, in Cleveland, companies are partnering with Cuyahoga Community College to train thousands of potential workers and to create a huge recruiting base among the students. Furthermore, studies have shown that companies that supply green jobs are more attractive to potential employees (Turban and Greening, 1997). In today’s world where many people are looking for meaningful jobs, companies contributing to the environment and community can be attractive employers.

• Engagement and Retention: Workers who feel their work is meaningful tend to be more engaged, creative, loyal and stay at the company longer (Glavas & Piderit, 2010). This, too, is an important argument for businesses. Many businesses operate in industries where there have been long-term trends of declining loyalty, with all the consequent costs for recruitment and retention.

ExHIBIT3: CLEVELAND SUMMIT ROADMAP


Every company in Cleveland potentially will feel the effects of the shift to a local, sustain-able economy. Companies that adequately prepare for this transition will capitalize, but companies who lead in creating sustainable enterprises will profit the most. In the Cleve-land Summit process, companies designed initiatives that would allow them to grow. This was not seen as a hidden agenda, but a desired one. As a result, almost every initia-tive area had positive benefits for the businesses involved.

However, the greatest lessons learned from the process were in how it happened. We don’t think that traditional management models will work in building a green econo-my. We don’t have time. Change needs to happen quickly, and it needs to grow expo-nentially. The severity of the issues we face around food, water, energy and waste and toxicity can’t wait for slow, incremental change. In this environment, we need pro-cesses that engage the whole , are strengths-based and require managers to let go of control.

ReferencesCleveland Plain Dealer (2009). Data central: Cleveland Ohio statistics, demographics & census. Retreived Decem-ber 18, 2009, from http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/

Cooperrider, D.L., Fry, R.E., & Piderit, S.K. (2007). New designs in transformative cooperation: The growing call and converging conversation. In S.K. Piderit, R.E. Fry, & D.L. Cooperrider (Eds.), Handbook of transformative cooperation: New designs and dynamics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Cooperrider, D.L., & Whitney, D. (2000). A positive revo-lution in change: Appreciative inquiry. In Cooperrider, D.L., Sorensen, Jr., P.F., Whitney, D., & Yaeger, T.F. (Eds.), Appreciative Inquiry: Rethinking human organization toward a positive theory of change. Champaign, IL: Stipes Publishing.

Cooperrider, D.L., Whitney, D., & Stavros, J.M. (2005). Appreciative Inquiry handbook: The first in a series of AI workbooks for leaders of change. Brunswick, OH: Crown Custom Publishing.

Eisler, R. (2005). The economic imperative for revisioning the rules of the game: Work, values, and caring. In S.K. Piderit, R.E. Fry, & D.L. Cooperrider (Eds.), Handbook of transformative cooperation: New designs and dynamics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Glavas, A., & Piderit, S.K. (2010). How does doing good matter: Corporate citizenship behaviors and their conse-quences within businesses. Forthcoming in the Journal of Corporate Citizenship.

Hock, D. (1999). Birth of the chaordic age. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Kelley, T. (2005). The ten faces of innovation. New York: Doubleday.

Kotter, J.P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73, 59-67.

National Research Council of the National Academies (2009). Sustainable critical infrastructure systems: A framework for meeting 21 century imperatives. Washing-ton, DC: National Academies Press.

Porter, M.E. (1995). The competitive advantage of the inner city. Harvard Business Review, 17, 104-115.

Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Senge, P.M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and prac-tice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.

Senge, P., Smith, B., Kruschwitz, N., Laur, J., & Schley, S. (2008). The necessary revolution: How individuals and organizations are working together to create a sustainable world. New York: Doubleday.

Turban, D.B., & Greening, D.W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospec-tive employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 658-672.

The United State Conference of Mayors and the Mayors Climate Protection Center (2008). U.S. metro economies: Current and potential green jobs in the U.S. economy. Lexington, MA: Global Insight.

Wal-Mart (2009). Global sustainability report. Retrieved from http://walmartstores.com/Sustainability/7951.aspx

Ante Glavas, Ph.D., is on the faculty in the department of management at the Univer-sity of Notre Dame. He received his Ph.D. in organizational behavior from Case Western Reserve University where he was also the Executive Director of BAWB, the Center for Business as an Agent of World Benefit. Prior to academia, he was as a senior manager in Diageo, a Fortune 500 company; started an organic foods company; founded Horizon, a leadership institute in Croatia; and led a team that built CBA, the first private gradu-ate business school in the Croatia and became its first CEO. He has received numerous awards for his work contributing to society such as the Medal of Honor from the President of Croatia.

Peter Senge, Ph.D., is a senior lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and founding chair of the SoL (Society for Organizational Learning) Council. He is the author of The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, co-author of the three related field books, Presence: An Exploration of Profound Change in People, Society, and Organizations and most recently, The Necessary Revolution: How Indi-viduals and Organizations are Working Together to Create a Sustainable World. Senge lectures throughout the world about decentralizing the role of leadership in organiza-tions to enhance the capacity of all people to work toward healthier human systems.

David Cooperrider, Ph.D. is the faculty director and is the Fairmount Minerals Professor of Social Entrepreneurship at the Weatherhead School of Management with a secondary appointment in International Health, the Division of General Medical Sciences, Case School of Medicine. His research interests include the theory and practice of Appreciative Inquiry (AI). Cooperrider is best-known for the AI methodology that he co-developed, as it is creating positive revolution in the leadership of change. His work is especially vital because of its ability to enable positive change in systems of very large and complex scales, for example with the U.S. Navy, Hewlett-Packard, Parker Hannifin, Mckinsey, the United Nations and Verizon.

Are You a Leader or a Laggard?HR’s Role in Creating a Sustainability Culture

Robert Sroufe, Jay Liebowitz and Nagaraj SivasubramaniamJohn F. Donahue Graduate School of Business, Duquesne University


We find an immediate need for understanding the possibilities of transformation to a sustainable

organization, and the range and type of actionable practices suitable for HRM and HR professionals. A small number of firms, including industry leaders like Nike and Star-bucks, have recognized the emerging paradigm of sustainability and have taken steps to make sustainability a central compo-nent of their strategy (Epstein, 2008). Despite the increasing clamor for more sustainable business practices from multiple stakehold-ers, many firms are reluctant to move quickly, due possibly to a lack of understanding of policies and actions leading to sustainability.

We are concerned that HR professionals may be missing an opportunity to develop and capture unique resources and competencies that customers will value and the competition will find difficult to imitate. Instead, they find themselves waiting to see what emerges, as firms transition out of an emphasis on com-pliance and pollution prevention activities to those in which social and environmental impacts will be the basis of strategic oppor-tunities and competitive advantage.

Our InvestigationWe focus on two primary questions: (1) How do firms organize and manage themselves to promote and integrate new sustainability initiatives, and (2) How do HR practices influence a firm’s ability to integrate and collaborate on a myriad of emerging sustain-ability-focused business practices? Our analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data helped us to:

• uncover three distinct types of firms integrating sustainability activities into the work place;

• identify three primary obstacles to implementing sustainability initiatives;

• develop strategies for overcoming these obstacles to implementation; and

• propose a stairway to sustainable opportu-nities for HR to take a leadership role.

Sustainable practices are those that go beyond process improvement and waste reduction (typically found in the operational approaches of the past), and focus on developing innova-tive social and environmental practices that promote collaborative efforts across func-tions, create unique social capital and build long-term economic value for the firm. A dominant theory in the literature, the resource-based view of the firm, stipulates that companies can gain sustainable competitive advantages if they are built on and supported by organization-level competencies (Barney, 1991). These competencies reflect unique combinations of resources that are rare, non-substitutable, difficult to imitate and valuable to customers (Barney and Wright, 1998). Organizations integrating organizational-lev-el competencies within sustainability activities are predicted to have highly motivated and engaged employees who can focus their efforts on the reduction of materials and energy by several orders of magnitude, the development of new, innovative “green” products or ser-vices and new business models that they can design to have a strategic impact on sustain-ability (Epstein, 2008).

So what can HRM professionals do to increase the opportunities that await them in the new, “green collar” economy? An organi-zation’s culture and entrenched business practices, and the strategic importance given to human resources may be critical determi-nants of building a sustainable organization. Every day, managers are charged with devel-oping new, “sustainability” focused programs

and strategies in a way that will most benefit the firm. Yet, researchers and practitioners have few examples of what has been tried that focus on HR elements such as organiza-tional design, recruiting, training and management practices; and several questions still remain unanswered.

After conducting an HR-focused forum on sustainability sponsored by the local chapter of the Human Resource Planning Society1, and through the collection of survey data, we are able to highlight the importance of the HR function and offer an explanation for why some firms adopt certain sustainability practices and others do not. There is a sig-nificant opportunity to build upon an emerging paradigm of sustainable develop-ment and explore how the HR function can play a strategic role to help lead the efforts to build a sustainability culture.

Study DesignWe designed and conducted a Web-based survey of executives of firms located in west-ern Pennsylvania, eastern Ohio and northern West Virginia. The survey, sponsored by the local chapter of the Human Resource Plan-ning Society, was designed to identify the extent to which firms had implemented vari-ous sustainability initiatives, and the role of the human resource function in creating and implementing these sustainability initiatives. Based on an extensive review of literature, we pooled many initiatives that had been identi-fied as examples of environmental and social dimensions of sustainability. We rewrote the items to avoid redundancy and ensure clarity, and pre-tested them with a group of academ-ics and practitioners. The Web-based survey, administered during October and November

➤

Human Resources Management (HRM)—function, practices and systems—may be missing the

next source of real competitive advantage. Leading and facilitating sustainability initiatives

and creating a sustainability culture are the critical tasks confronting human resources

professionals now. HRM, particularly in the specific practices impacting recruiting, hiring, training,

compensation, knowledge management and development, holds tremendous opportunity to

shape the firm’s sustainability agenda.

1. We are grateful to Peggy Fayfich and Michael Couch for their support of our research.


2008 resulted in 76 complete responses. The sample consisted primarily of HR profession-als (49 percent) along with operations (14 percent), sales and marketing (13 percent) and senior management (8 percent). Three-fourths of our respondents had nine or more years of experience in their field. Both small and large firms were represented in our sam-ple. The firms represented a variety of industry sectors including manufacturing, healthcare, retail and services.

We identified six sustainability dimensions based on a factor analysis of responses to 21 items that measured whether the respondent firm implemented particular sustainability initiatives. These ranged from employee-relat-ed efforts, such as promoting ethics and integrity and encouraging community volun-teer programs, to environmental protection initiatives such as conserving electricity and pollution reduction/prevention. We computed the dimension score by adding the responses to the initiatives that comprise each dimen-sion. We then classified the 76 firms based on their score on the six dimensions spanning social (employee orientation and volunteer-ism) and environmental (conserving materials, environmental protection, employee conser-vation and sustainability measurement) sustainability initiatives. We identified three distinct groups of firms using cluster analysis; we labeled them Leaders, People-focused and Laggards. We conducted further analyses to validate the cluster membership, as well as examine the presence of any systematic differ-ences across these three clusters of firms (additional details on the statistical proce-dures are provided in the sidebar).

Key FindingsOur analysis revealed four conclusions:

i. Firms differed significantly in the extent to which they had implemented sustainabil-ity initiatives. Those firms simultaneously integrating social and environmental sus-tainability initiatives were considered Leaders. Next, People-focused firms focused on social initiatives to a greater extent than environmental initiatives. Finally, Laggard firms had not implement-ed, to any significant extent, either the social or the environmental sustainability initiatives.

ii. Leader firms saw a significant role for HR in facilitating and leading the sustainabil-ity efforts within their organizations.

Leaders, People-focused and LaggardsA cluster analysis of the sustainability initia-tives across the six dimensions revealed three distinct groups of firms that were most simi-lar to each other within a group, and least similar across groups. We examined the pro-file of each group and labeled them as Leaders, People-focused and Laggards based on the extent to which they implemented social and environmental sustainability prac-tices. Characteristics of these three clusters are summarized graphically in Exhibit 1.

We validated our classification by looking at two indicators. Firms that we classified as leaders and people-focused were significantly more likely to have a sustainability policy than firms classified as laggards (50 percent, 35 percent and 7 percent respectively, χ2 sig-nificant). We also examined whether the three clusters differed in their responses (using a three-point scale) to the question: To what extent is your organization developing a sus-tainability culture/work environment? Again leaders and people-focused firms were engaged in developing such a culture to a greater degree than laggards (2.20, 1.82 and 1.25 respectively, p < .001). While leaders and people-focused firms were not significantly different in either having a sustainability policy or developing a sustainability culture, their extent of adoption of many of the envi-ronmental initiatives was significantly

iii. Leader firms utilized a range of human resource systems to reinforce their firm’s people practices and environmental prac-tices to build a sustainability culture.

iv. People-focused firms utilized a range of human resource systems to implement their firm’s people practices to a greater extent than their environmental practices.

Sustainability Dimensions and Diffusion of Sustainability PracticesThe six sustainability dimensions and the 15 specific sustainability practices that comprise them are summarized in Table 1. We also examined the extent to which the responding firms adopted or diffused these practices. The firms more widely adopted employee well-ness, safety and ethics-related initiatives than environmental initiatives. For instance, 75 percent of the responding firms implemented employee health and wellness programs and promoted ethics and integrity as an integral part of their organizational culture. In con-trast, fewer than 12 percent of the firms indicated that they conduct life cycle analysis of new products or calculated the carbon footprint of their companies. We captured the patterns of these differences in the adoption of sustainability initiatives using cluster analysis, and have summarized the results.

TABLE1:SUSTAINABILITY DIMENSIONS(1)

Sustainability Dimension Sustainability Business Practices(2)

SO

CIA

L

1. Employee Orientation • Value diversity & inclusion• Promote ethics & integrity• Encourage innovation & risk-taking

2. Employee Volunteerism • Support community volunteer programs on company time• Encourage biking to work & taking mass-transit

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NTA

L

3. Employee Conservation • Promote conservation at home• Encourage telecommuting

4. Environmental Protection • Address climate change• Conserve electricity• Reduce pollution

5. Conserving Materials • Develop “green” products & services• Purchase recycled products

6. Sustainability Measurement • Establish an internal sustainability team• Conduct life-cycle analysis of new products• Calculate the carbon footprint of the company

(1) We did not include an economic dimension, as corporate financial performance is an outcome of social and environmental practices and not a strategic initiative in and of itself.

(2) The dimensions were identified using factor analysis; an index was constructed for each dimension by summing up the Yes/No (1/0) responses to the set of practices that comprised each dimension.


different. These results confirm the existence of three groups of firms.

Leaders (N=20). These firms, comprising 26 percent of our sample, were far ahead of oth-ers on all six dimensions of sustainability practice, and were the most comprehensive in their approach to implementing both social and environmental sustainability initiatives. A typical firm in this group implemented at least two employee orientation and two envi-ronmental protection initiatives, and at least one employee conservation, materials conser-vation and sustainability measurement initiative. These firms were more likely than other firms to establish an internal sustain-ability team, address climate change or promote conservation at employees’ homes.

People-focused (N=28). This group, compris-ing 37 percent of the sample, had a strong showing on two of the six sustainability dimensions: employee orientation and volun-teerism. These firms clearly excel at becoming an employer of choice and creating a great place to work. Our results suggest that these firms have just begun implementing environ-mental initiatives, and are significantly behind the leaders on the environmental dimensions.

Laggards (N=28). This group showed no dis-cernible strength in any of the six sustainability dimensions and lagged behind the other firms on five of the six dimensions. Virtually none in this group had implemented initiatives such as valuing diversity, encourag-ing innovation and risk taking, reducing pollution, encouraging telecommuting, pro-moting conservation at employees’ homes, establishing an internal sustainability team or conducting life cycle analysis of new products.

The Role of HR in Sustainability To gauge the level of involvement of the HR function in implementing sustainability ini-tiatives, we asked the respondents to rate the extent to which the HR function either facil-itated or led their sustainability efforts. Results of our analysis are summarized in Exhibit 2. As expected, leaders and people-focused firms were significantly different from laggards in the facilitating role played by the HR function. However, when it came to the HR function leading the sustainability effort, leaders were significantly different from both people-focused and laggard firms. Our results suggest that a leading role for the HR function can be crucial for firms imple-

menting the full-range of sustainability initiatives. HR possesses an array of tools that can help to change an organization’s culture (e.g., employee selection, training and reward systems).

We examined the extent to which specific HR practices were changed to support developing a sustainability culture within an organiza-tion. The results are summarized in Exhibit 3. In general, leaders and people-focused firms had modified their HR practices to a signifi-cantly greater extent than laggard firms, and ANOVA tests confirmed this. This was most apparent for recruiting, employee selection and new employee orientation—practices that enable organizations to change their cul-ture, one hire at a time. This strategy of changing these practices first also might be prudent given the dual benefits of attracting an applicant pool with different characteris-tics and the possibility of encountering minimal resistance within the organization to implement new strategy. Training, develop-

ment and mentoring practices also were modified to support sustainability initiatives, though not to the same extent as the recruiting and selection practices.

Modifying HR practices to help build a sus-tainability culture is an evolutionary process, with the firms we observed at different stages of implementing their sustainability strate-gies. Our results suggest that HR practices targeted at the external community, i.e., potential applicants, were modified to a great-er extent than HR practices governing internal stakeholders, i.e., current employees. Logi-cally, we expect HR managers to modify performance management and compensation practices at a later date. Our results imply a natural progression beginning with modify-ing recruiting and selection practices to impact the characteristics of new hires, then to alter training and development practices to help current employees develop new competencies, and finally changing the way employee per-formance is measured and rewarded. ➤

ExHIBIT1: CHARACTERISTICS OF LEADERS, PEOPLE-FOCUSED AND LAGGARDS

Score for each dimension was computed by summing up the Yes/No (1/0) responses to the set of initiatives that comprise each dimension (see Table 1 for information on specific practices).


We analyzed the correlations between the eight HR practices and the six sustainability dimensions. As expected, firms that are doing more sustainability practices also changed their HR practices to a greater extent than other firms. Firms that are leading in the social dimensions of sustainability practices (employee orientation and employee volun-teerism) modified all eight HR practices to a greater extent than others (correlations ranged from .28 to .48, all significant at p < .01). When it comes to the environmental dimensions, the pattern also is clear. HR prac-tices were modified to support employee conservation and materials conservation, but not the other two environmental dimensions (environmental protection or sustainability measurement). For employee conservation, modifying HR practices related to recruit-ment, selection, orientation, training, development and performance management have the greatest impact, with correlations ranging from .21 to .31. Firms that imple-mented materials conservation initiatives to a greater extent also significantly altered HR practices, especially with regard to training and development.

In summary, our results suggest that leaders differed significantly from people-focused and laggard firms in the extent to which they implemented different sustainability initia-tives. The human resource function played a critical role in these firms in leading and facilitating their sustainability efforts. Lead-ers and people-focused firms modified their HR practices to a greater extent than laggards to support their sustainability agenda. These changes in HR practices also are aligned with certain sustainability initiatives: supporting our argument that HR practices play a stra-tegic role in implementing specif ic sustainability initiatives and creating a sus-tainability organizational culture.

Obstacles on the Pathway to SustainabilityDespite a growing consensus that firms can “do well by doing good” and considerable empirical evidence confirming a positive rela-tionship between a firm’s social and environmental performance and financial performance (Orlitzky, Schmidt & Rynes, 2003), our results suggest a lack of wide-spread adoption of sustainability initiatives. Either there is no acceptance of the basic premise, despite evidence to the contrary, or

ExHIBIT2: ROLE OF HR IN SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS

ResponseScale: 1 – To a little extent; 2 – To a moderate extent; 3 – To a great extent

ExHIBIT3: ROLE OF HR PRACTICES IN SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS

ResponseScale: 1 – To a very little extent; 2 – To a little extent; 3 – To some extent; 4 – To a significant extent; 5 – To a very great extent


the task of building a sustainability culture may be considerably more challenging and complex.

We asked the respondents what challenges and obstacles they encounter in creating a sustainability culture. We reviewed these open-ended responses for common themes and how frequently they occurred across the three distinct types of firms. Our research sug-gests three possible reasons for why firms either have not undertaken any sustainability initiatives or continued building on their early efforts to become a sustainable organization. These were (1) lack of commitment and buy-in from both management and employees, (2) lack of resources, and (3) cultural and institu-tional resistance to change. We also found systematic differences in the obstacles identi-fied by laggards versus leaders.

Lack of Commitment and Buy-in. As we expected, this was a primary obstacle among laggards and an important issue for people-focused firms who felt there was widespread “apathy,” and “lack of interest from top man-agement” regarding environmental issues. This was not the case for leader firms. With-out top management support and employee buy-in, it is very difficult to generate the momentum needed to implement any new sustainability initiatives (Wirtenberg, Har-mon, Russell & Fairfield, 2007). One respondent stated the difficulty of building a sustainability culture without senior manage-ment commitment as follows:

“I work for XYZ Co. and they just don’t care about sustainability…”

We also heard other comments such as “lack of understanding and endorsement at the top of the organization” and the need for “chang-ing the mindset of middle managers,” reinforcing our conclusion that the lack of commitment and buy-in is a major obstacle. These comments suggest that it might be due to lack of awareness of sustainability issues or the fear of dealing with change.

Lack of Resources. This was a critical issue for people-focused firms and an important issue among leaders as well. Only two laggard firms identified lack of resources as an obsta-cle to creating a sustainability culture. Resources were broadly defined to include financial, human and knowledge resources. A respondent from a people-focused firm cap-tured the need for specialized knowledge to create support and buy-in among employees:

“…having a hard time coming up with a clear definition of sustain-ability that can make sense and be motivating to employees”

Another respondent expressed the difficulty of “getting employees to understand why we are pursuing this and understand the benefits rather than just comply,” due to lack of knowledge or the resources to provide addi-tional education/training to their employees. Respondents recognized that they are asked to do more with less resources and indicated that they “do the best they can” with limited resources.

Cultural and Institutional Resistance. This was a primary obstacle among leader firms. Even when there was commitment from the top—buy-in from employees and available resources, albeit limited, for sustainability initiatives—there remained cultural and institutional resistance to creating a sustain-ability culture. “Changing behavior and habits” is possibly the biggest and the most deep-seated hurdle. Comments such as the

ones reproduced below confirm how hard it is to manage this cultural transformation effectively:

“..silos, business as usual, and established business metrics that do not yet reflect sustainability”

“..large company, so layers of poli-tics and hierarchy”

This effort to change the culture and “educate employees of the alternatives” may “take more time upfront, but produce better, lon-ger-lasting, successful outcomes.”

Strategies for Dealing with the ObstaclesWe also asked respondents to identify possi-ble solutions to the obstacles and challenges they identified. A content analysis of the responses indicated significant differences among the three groups of firms. Laggard firms identified “education and communica- ➤

Description of Statistical Procedures Used In This StudyIdentificationofSustainabilityDimensionsWe asked respondents to indicate whether or not they had implemented 21 different sustain-ability initiatives. We subjected their Yes/No responses (coded 1/0) to these 21 questions to an exploratory factor analysis to identify the underlying dimensions. We next used the principal components extraction method with varimax rotation procedure to obtain six coher-ent factors. Questions that were not loading highly on one factor (factor loading less than .5) or were loading highly on more than one factor were eliminated from further analysis. Descriptions of the six factors, represented by 15 sustainability initiatives, are summarized in Table 1.

Because we used a Yes/No response for each of the initiatives, we computed the score for each dimension by adding the number of initiatives that the responding firm had imple-mented. For example, the first factor, employee orientation, comprises three specific initiatives: “Value diversity & inclusion”; “Promote ethics & integrity”; and “Encourage innovation & risk-taking.” Hence the score for this factor ranged from 0 (had implemented none of the initiatives) to 3 (had implemented all three initiatives). This dimension score was used in all further analyses.

IdentificationofDistinctGroupsFinally, we used the scores on the six sustainability dimensions to group firms into clusters. We used the K-means clustering procedure to identify groups of firms, and compared the group profiles for multiple solutions (2, 3, 4 & 5 cluster solutions). We also compared these results to cluster solutions derived from an alternative method of clustering procedure (2-step clustering). We sought to identify the smallest number of clusters that best explain the vari-ance in the scores for the six dimensions. A three-cluster solution was identified as the best representation of the data based on analysis of variance results and the convergence with alternative methods. Based on the mean scores on the six sustainability dimensions, we labeled these three clusters of firms as leaders, people-focused and laggards.


tion” to improve awareness as the single best strategy to deal with the obstacles and chal-lenges. People-focused firms wanted information and tools for building the “busi-ness case” for sustainability, and leaders unanimously pointed out the strategic benefit of sharing “best practices” in sustainability.

Education and Communication. Only respondents from laggard firms identified education and communication as the primary strategy for overcoming the obstacles, possi-bly due to their position. Suggestions for educating both management and employees ranged from “information posters” and “…radio, newspaper, billboards, etc. telling of the importance” to “…trained executive lead-ership on the models (of sustainability), otherwise you’ll experience flavor of the month.” For laggard organizations starting on the path to sustainability, education and communication of all employees is a first step to build a shared understanding of sustain-ability, generate interest and support for the initiatives, and lay the foundation for the sustainability culture.

Building the Business Case. Having identified lack of knowledge resources as primary obstacles for implementing sustainability ini-tiatives, respondents from people-focused firms sought information and tools to make the business case. They wanted to convince other internal stakeholders of the benefits of such initiatives. Comments such as “(need) documentation of how it impacts profitabil-ity” and “…the benefits of functioning with greater efficiency, saving $ and resources” highlight the need for making the winning argument to other stakeholders, using lan-guage and metrics critical to their decision making.

Sharing Best Practices. Respondents from leader firms recognize the importance of col-laboration both within and across firms, and seek the sharing of best practices to further their sustainability agenda. They commented on the need for sharing “...best practices for metrics that make sustainability everyone’s responsibility” and “tips on how to create excitement within the organization.” This is consistent with the observation by Wirten-

berg, Harmon, Russell and Fairfield (2007) that some firms view sustainability not neces-sarily as a source of competitive advantage, but as an opportunity for holistic integration to build and be part of a sustainable ecosys-tem. After all, as one of their respondents indicated, it is not possible to be a sustainable company when the ecosystem, as a whole, is unsustainable. Seeking and sharing best prac-tices is possibly one way of creating a sustainable ecosystem.

Stairway to SustainabilityPast research in both TQM (Blackburn & Rosen, 1993) and Environmental Manage-ment Systems (Daily & Huang, 2001) argued for the human resource function to play an active role in implementing these new sys-tems. Blackburn and Rosen (1993), in their research of Baldrige Quality Award winners, found the HR function played a leading role in designing HRM policies and practices to create quality-oriented work cultures. Spe-cifically, HR policies and practices helped communicate the importance of quality ini-tiatives, empower employees to contribute to the initiatives and design appropriate rewards and reinforcements to ingrain the total qual-ity orientation into the firm’s DNA.

Implementing a comprehensive sustainability strategy is no different a challenge than the TQM challenge of the 1980s and 1990s. Like TQM, sustainability is about managing change. We believe the HR function can and should play an active role in ensuring that change toward sustainability happens.

One of the biggest blunders in leading change toward sustainability is the failure to institu-tionalize sustainability within the firm (Doppelt, 2003). If the internal policies and practices are inconsistent with the needed sustainability culture, “the risks are high that old thinking and behavioral patterns will eventually rise up and overwhelm efforts to adopt more environmentally and socially responsible paths” (Doppelt, 2003, p. 36). We recommend an active and early role for HR to help create the systems and processes (for example, selection, training and reward sys-tems) to reinforce the wide range of sustainability initiatives and institutionalize the change.

Our earlier observation that the adoption rates of different sustainability initiatives are not uniform across firms suggests that firms

ExHIBIT4: STAIRWAY TO SUSTAINABILITY

Strateg

icIm

plemen

tation

Seque

nce

Deg

ree

ofD

ifficu

lty

Stra

tegi

cPa

y-off


might not adopt a practice, either because of its relative difficulty or the need to follow a sequence for maximal effectiveness. Extend-ing this logic, we suggest a definitive pathway to sustainability that incorporates three decision-making dimensions:

the “flavor of the month”—leading to the random acts of greenness mentioned previ-ously. The diffusion of sustainability practices as observed in this study as well as other research on successful sustainability implementation, led us to the specific sequence

payoffs. As a firm moves up the stairway, there is a greater pay-off in making the firm sustainable. We have evidence of the perfor-mance implications of employee orientation and materials conservation; however, the linkages become weaker for other dimen-sions because of the excessive emphasis on measuring performance concurrently or at best, one or two years ahead. The benefits of the later initiatives are more strategic than financial, long-term than short-term, and as indicated above, the usual decision criteria may not be applicable.

Building a sustainability culture requires the sequential approach suggested here for two reasons. First, there is considerable evidence that the principle of “success breeds success” applies to individuals as well as organiza-tions. Early tangible wins from employee orientation and materials conservation efforts should increase the likelihood of cre-ating a self-reinforcing, virtuous cycle that creates excitement and potency among stake-holders that changes can become sustainable. Second, successful early initiatives help build organizational capacity for taking on the more challenging late-stage initiatives, increasing the likelihood of both adoption and success.

Implications for Managers. The first implica-tion for executives creating a sustainability culture is that they need to start by creating HR policies and practices that embody

Building a sustainability culture requires the sequential approach suggested here for two reasons. First, there is considerable evidence that the principle of “success breeds success” applies to individuals as well as organizations.

1. the need to maintain a strategic sequence to build on prior efforts,

2. the relative difficulty of adopting the ini-tiative, and

3. the strategic pay-off over the long-term.

In a useful strategic sequence, the first step toward sustainability is to be employee-ori-ented—valuing employee diversity, ethics, risk taking and innovation. The strategic HRM literature provides convincing evi-dence of the benefits of starting here: engaged employees resulting in increased organiza-tional identity and commitment leading to superior performance. A quick review of dif-ferent rankings of “green companies,” such as the recent list by Newsweek, reveals that the top companies are also among the most-admired companies and the 100-best companies to work for. Absent this “employ-ee-first” philosophy, efforts to promote other sustainability initiatives are unlikely to gain traction, creating a lack of coherence in an organization’s sustainability strategy. Makower and Pike (2008) coined the term “random acts of greenness” to identify firms that had no internal coherence or strategy when implementing “green” initiatives. This is primarily due to their weak foundation.

The strategic implementation sequence iden-tified in our Stairway to Sustainability model is based on the assumption that successive stages of building a sustainability culture depend on the successful implementation of the previous steps. This provides coherence to the strategy and organizational readiness to implement the next initiative. If a well-thought-out strategic implementation sequence is not followed, the likely result is

identified in Exhibit 4. Our Stairway to Sus-tainabil i ty framework complements Wirtenberg, Harmon, Russell and Fairfield’s (2007) work on the role of human resources in building a sustainable enterprise, by focus-ing on the “Foundation” and “Traction” stages of their Sustainability Pyramid.

As firms climb up the steps, the relative diffi-culty of implementing initiatives increases. The assessment of the degree of difficulty includes convincing the relevant stakeholders of the benefits of the focal initiative, as well as the resources required to implement it. Due to their higher adoption rates, there is abundant evi-dence of the positive effects of early stage

➤

initiatives, such as materials conservation (Esty & Winston, 2006). Yet evidence is scarce or the returns unclear as firms take on late-stage ini-tiatives, like conducting life cycle analyses or measuring a firm’s eco-footprint. The payback periods on these initiatives may be longer, and the time horizons for returns on investment might be more than the firm generally uses as hurdle rates for new projects. As a result, firms have to base decisions on the cultural and ethical rather than economic rationale.

The impact of a firm’s sustainability strategy is indicated by the third dimension—strategic

becoming an employer-of-choice. Then, they should encourage their technical, scientific and environmental managers to work more closely with human resources to change the ways they handle recruiting, selection, orien-tation, training, development, performance management and compensation to reinforce sustainability as a core organizational value. They should begin their sustainability journey with initiatives on the lower steps of the stair-way, and progress toward the highest level.

The three types of firms we identified will face very different sets of challenges to creating a

Second, successful early initiatives help build organizational capacity for taking on the more challenging late-stage initiatives, increasing the likelihood of both adoption and success.


implementing innovative practices to create buy-in and employee commitment. Laggard firms would do well to first focus on the social initiatives (i.e. becoming a great place to work) and then invest in education and train-ing in sustainability so as to create awareness of sustainability issues and motivation.

Limitations. Our sample provides a glimpse into current HR practices drawn from a sin-gle geographic region. As such, it should be looked at as the tip of an iceberg. What was highlighted here as both obstacles and solu-tions may reflect the region’s industrial history. Still, we strongly believe that the results provide valuable lessons for all man-agers. The amount and different kinds of sustainability initiatives and the challenges of implementing provide ample opportunity for further discovery and continued research.

ConclusionsSustainability starts with a guiding philoso-phy or strategic vision of achieving profits through people, while minimizing one’s impact on the planet. Human resource profes-sionals have a very important role to play in developing and implementing sustainability strategies. The success of every sustainability initiative depends on the extent to which the firm’s human capital is knowledgeable, engaged and committed to implementing new initiatives. Recognizing the need for a strate-gic rather than piecemeal approach to sustainability, the HR function can facilitate, if not lead, the sustainability effort by laying the groundwork, designing systems that help build a sustainability culture, and become the champion of the organization’s transforma-tion to sustainability.

ReferencesBarney, J.B., (1991). Firm resources and sustained com-petitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99–120.

Barney, J.B. and Wright, P.M. (1998). On becoming a strategic partner: The role of human resources in gaining competitive advantage. Human Resources Management, 37 (1), 31- 46.

Blackburn, R., & Rosen, B. (1993). Total quality and human resources management: Lessons learned from Baldrige Award-winning companies. Academy of Manage-ment Executive, 7 (3), 49-66.

Daily, B.F., & Huang, S. (2001). Achieving sustainability through attention to human resource factors in environ-mental management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 21 (12), 1539-1552.

Doppelt, B. (2003). Leading change toward sustainability: A change-management guide for business, government

and civil society. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing Limited.

Epstein, M.J. (2008). Making sustainability work: Best practices in managing and measuring corporate social, environmental and economic impacts. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Esty, D.C., & Winston, A.S. (2006). Green to gold: How smart companies use environmental strategy to innovate, create value, and build competitive advantage. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Makower, J., & Pike, C. (2008). Strategies for the green economy: Opportunities and challenges in the new world of business. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F.L., & Rynes, S.L. (2003). Corpo-rate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24, 403–441.

The Greenest Big Companies in America, (2009). News-week, Sept. 28, 34-52.

Wirtenberg, J., Harmon, J., Russell, W.G., & Fairfield, K.D. (2007). HR’s role in building a sustainable enterprise: Insights from some of the world’s best companies. Human Resource Planning, 30 (1), 10-20.

Robert Sroufe, (Ph.D., Michigan State University) is the Murrin Chair of Global Competitiveness in the Palum-bo-Donahue Schools of Business at Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, PA. His research interests include environ-menta l management sy s t ems , sustainable business practices, green supply chain management, perfor-mance measurement and human resource management.

Jay Liebowitz, SPHR (Ph.D., from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville) is an associate professor of Organiza-tional Behavior & Human Resource Management in the Palumbo-Donahue Schools of Business at Duquesne Uni-versity, Pittsburgh, PA. His research interests include the role of HR in sus-ta inab i l i t y, and new produc t development teams.

Nagaraj Sivasubramaniam, (Ph.D., Florida International University) is an associate professor of Leadership in the Palumbo-Donahue Schools of Business at Duquesne University, Pitts-burgh, PA. His research focuses on measurement of sustainability orienta-tion, climate protection strategies & models, and organizational impacts of individual and team leadership.

sustainability culture. Leader firms already have climbed quite a few steps on the stair-way to sustainability, and now have to deal with resource constraints to implement initia-tives with less clear pay-offs, amid resistance from forces entrenched in the current system. HR managers in these firms are faced with leading deep change, and will benefit by col-laborating with other leader firms to identify best practices. They also may benefit by align-ing their performance management and reward systems with a comprehensive sus-tainability strategy. People-focused firms already have taken the first step of becoming an employer of choice and now should focus on building a business case for adopting a broader set of sustainability initiatives and

www.simonandschuster.com

The Orange RevolutionHow One Great Team Can Transform An Entire Organization

Based on an international 350,000 person survey, this new book from the authors of the New York Times bestseller, The Carrot Principle, shows how to build highly motivated and harmonious teams that will spearhead dynamic improvement in results and innovate powerful business solutions.

“Full of creative ideas.”

—Fortune, on The Carrot Principle

The Way We’re Working Isn’t WorkingThe Four Forgotten Needs That Energize Great Performance

From the coauthor of the New York Times bestseller, The Power of Full Engagement, The Way We’re Working Isn’t Working is a truly new approach, deeply grounded in the multi-disciplinary science of high performance, that lays out a new value proposition for fueling more productive organizations and satisfied employees. Offers leaders and individuals alike a solution to managing the relentlessly rising demands of the modern workplace.

“ An authoritative manual for optimal performance—a business must-read”

—Daniel Goleman, author of Emotional Intelligence

The Leader Who Had No TitleA Modern Fable on Real Success in Business and in Life

Robin Sharma, author of the international best-seller, The Monk Who Sold His Ferrari, makes his proprietary process available to the general public. In this book people will learn how to play to their peak abilities and help their organization break through to a dramatically new level of winning.

“ Read this book and make the leap to extraordinary performance, innovation, and influence in work and in life.”

—Keith Ferrazzi, New York Times bestselling author of Never Eat Alone

“ If you want to operate at the level of ‘WOW!’, be an exceptional leader and live life ‘full out’—buy this book.”

—Darren Hardy, Publisher, Success magazine

New York Times and Wall Street

Journal Bestseller! Published in over

19 countries

More Than 250,000 Copies

Sold!

Want to ensure your company’s success?Empower your people.


Sierra Nevada Brewing Company’s Thirty-Year Journey Toward SustainabilityAngela Casler, Michael J. Gundlach, Bonnie Persons and Suzanne Zivnuska, California State University, Chico

The authors sincerely thank Ken Grossman (CEO, founder, and owner of Sierra Nevada Brewing Com-pany (SNBC), Sierra Grossman (brand manager of SNBC), Carrie Alden (director of Human Resources for SNBC), and other members of the SNBC team for the time they offered during interviews and the information they shared that enabled the produc-tion of this article. Without their cooperation and passion for their business, this article would not have been possible.


The Dual Nature of SustainabilityKen founded the company in 1980, with the intention of running his company in a way that allowed him to respect and pay homage to the Sierra Nevada mountain range, where he had spent so much time backpacking. Thirty years later, he still is personally involved in all aspects of the company’s operations and just as passionate about the beauty and wonder of the natural world.

Ken’s abiding love of the great outdoors is evident in his personal life as well as the operations of SNBC. As he explains it, sus-tainability describes business practices that have a positive impact on the social and natural environment, but that also enable a business to maintain and grow.

From Ken’s perspective, this dual meaning of sustainability is vital to understanding the success of SNBC. He believes a company should pursue sustainable business practices because they benefit the social and natural environment, and because they drive the suc-cess of a company. To him, focusing on people and the planet as an integrated, strategic cen-ter improves profitability.

This philosophy drove Ken throughout the start-up of the company and it still does today. It only has become stronger over time and has influenced every aspect of the com-pany’s operations. Now, SNBC is the six`th largest brewery in the United States, and it produces a wide variety of award-winning ales and lagers. Moreover, the many sustain-able business practices at SNBC all have been a natural outgrowth of the talented human resources personnel that Ken and his staff have hired and trained.

Sustainability from the HeartClearly, SNBC is a company with a culture that values the triple bottom line: “the eco-nomic, social, and environmental performance

of a company” (Elkington, 1997, p.2). Not surprisingly, its genuine dedication to sustain-able management has earned SNBC many accolades. In 2005, SNBC received Califor-nia’s top environmental honor for sustainable practices regarding waste reduction and recy-cling. Additionally, every year since 2001, SNBC has received the prestigious WRAP (Waste Reduction Awards Program) award from California.

However, when anyone mentions the awards SNBC has received and its reputation for being a leader in sustainability, Ken is reluc-tant to discuss these issues from a marketing perspective. He does not promote the idea of showcasing SNBC’s leading sustainability practices as a strategic approach for the com-pany. He and his employees embody these practices because they make good business sense, and they feel like the right thing to do from the heart. In fact, the SNBC sales force is specifically instructed to refrain from pro-moting SNBC products as being “green.” Rather, they sell their beer based on its evi-dent quality and taste.

Human Resource PracticesThese sales and marketing policies illustrate a key point in the relationship between SNBC’s corporate culture and its human resource practices. Because sustainability is such a natural element of its culture, a sustainable mindset directly feeds into its human resource policies and practices, but not in a contrived or obligatory manner. The human resource department has made a concerted effort to develop policies and practices that support employee engagement and foster commitment to the firm’s goals. Employees are actively encouraged to develop new ideas through a formal suggestion process and an employee-run continuous improvement group. Innovation related to sustainability is reward-ed explicitly through recognition programs and the performance management process.

Not surprisingly, this HR approach has led to the generation of many cutting-edge sustain-ability initiatives that have benefited the company. In 2007, SNBC started a program to use spent vegetable oil from its restaurant as an alternative fuel source. It purchased a biodiesel processor to provide alternative fuel to be used for truck deliveries. Likewise, SNBC provides feed for dairy and beef cows through the spent grain, hops and yeast it collects. In turn, the cow manure is used as fertilizer for SNBC’s onsite nine-acre experi-mental hop field. These are just a few examples of employee-generated suggestions that have been implemented successfully.

SNBC’s human resource practices are aligned strategically with the company’s emphasis on sustainability. SNBC has created two sustain-ability coordinator positions, a full-time manager and a full-time assistant. SNBC was an industry leader in designating the official job title of “sustainability coordinator.” SNBC’s sustainability coordinators are responsible for organizational effectiveness and efficiency by identifying sustainable opportunities that will create new revenue streams and reduce operational expenses.

The new employee-orientation process emphasizes the values and practices of sus-tainability that characterize the company. The sustainability coordinators train new employees on the company’s environmental management policies and procedures. SNBC encourages new employees to offer feedback and ideas to enhance the spirit of sustain-ability. SNBC views the achievement of employee-culture fit as equally, if not more important, than establishing employee-job fit. Its rationale is that if an employee is not comfortable with the company’s emphasis on sustainability, then this person will not fit the culture and will compromise employee pro-ductivity and engagement.

SNBC also focuses on hiring from within the company. The company recently filled approximately 80 percent of its production positions via internal transfer. This is a

Ken Grossman is an avid outdoorsman. He is also the founder, CEO, and owner of Sierra Nevada

Brewing Company (SNBC). To understand the culture at SNBC, and the competitive advantage it

brings, you have to start with Ken.

➤


powerful way to maintain the culture. SNBC plans on sustaining its culture with its succes-sion plan that involves the second generation of Ken’s family. Sierra Grossman, Ken’s daughter, is currently the brand manager of SNBC. She worked her way from the bottom up, and over time proved that she was excep-tionally qualified for the high-level position she now holds. Likewise, Ken’s son Brian has worked in every entry-level position at the company and now serves as the brewery general manager.

SNBC’s People: Human Capital InvestmentToday, SNBC has emerged as one of the coun-try’s most successful microbreweries, outlasting the competition and establishing a brewing tradition that is mimicked by its com-petitors. The company has maintained a

strong but lean structure, with about 350 full-time employees, 100 part-time employees and an active roster of about 15 on-call employ-ees. Of these, a small group of eight comprises the senior management team, who are supported by an additional 12 managers. They have achieved an average 82 percent retention rate across all functions of the brew-ery, and are above average in retention in all three of SNBC’s separate industries (brewing, restaurant and events). Ken and Carrie Alden (director of Human Resources) credit this suc-cess in maintaining a committed workforce to various employee-focused programs initiated to support the core values of Quality, Heritage and Tradition. They foster the development of high-quality relationships among senior man-agers, managers and employees through creative HR initiatives.

Leadership and Human Resource Management PracticesKen Grossman is an active, visible and approachable leadership figure in the brew-ery. Ken’s perspective on social and environmental sustainability is that it needs to be modeled at all levels of the organization and spreads from one’s immediate contacts into the greater community. He makes a par-ticular effort to demonstrate true care for his employees by investing in his relationships with them. He trusts them to take that mes-sage into the larger community of customers, suppliers and locals.

For example, every other week he hosts a “Lunch with the Chief,” in which a random-ly selected employee is invited to a one-on-one lunch at any restaurant of his or her choice. One of his most recent lunches was with Kim, a local college student who is a recent hire in the restaurant. She admitted to being a bit nervous about the lunch, and took him out for sandwiches and salads at a nearby restau-rant where they talked about her schoolwork and future career plans. Afterward, she com-mented enthusiastically to Carrie about what a great time she had and how approachable and open Ken had been. His next lunch date is scheduled for the nearby Costco food court with Earl, a 20-year employee in brewery operations. Based on his long-time relation-ship with Earl, Ken predicts the conversation will revolve around ideas for process improve-ments in the brewing cycle, over pizza and a hot dog.

Similarly, Ken encourages his managers to follow his example. The brewery sponsors a quarterly employee-appreciation meal where

managers cook for their employees. Like “Lunch with the Chief,” this program is highly anticipated and has the feel of a holi-day—with managers bringing joviality and a heartfelt sense of appreciation for their orga-nization and their employees. This event demonstrates to employees that they are seen, valued and cared for; and management is not only willing, but also enthusiastic, to take time to support employees.

These two programs reinforce the high prior-ity the organization places on the development of quality relationships. The senior manage-ment team sees these programs as an essential cultural building block. Efforts to connect employees to the organization as a whole complement these relationship-focused efforts, thus enabling workers to participate in the core business. The “Brewer for a Day” program allows employees from different functional areas to take part in the brewing process as an apprentice. This promotes cross-functional relationships between employees, increases appreciation for the work everyone in the organization does, and helps employees in support areas feel more connected to the product and core mission of SNBC.

Employee EmpowermentAnother example of a program that connects all employees to the organization is the Con-t inuous Improvement Group (CIG, pronounced “keg” as in “beer keg”). This employee-level committee meets monthly to discuss and problem-solve areas where the brewery can improve, be it related to product quality, process costs or even employee reten-tion. After developing a solid plan, the committee reports to a larger group, and then, after any necessary revisions, may even have the opportunity to present to senior management. Participation in this committee enables employees to take quite a bit of own-ership and pride in all aspects of the organization’s functions. Furthermore, the opportunity to present their ideas to senior management and see them implemented is a clear demonstration to employees about how much senior management values them. The process by which used vegetable oil is con-verted into an alternate fuel source for transportation is one such example.

Training, Benefits and SustainabilityThe human resources team has been instru-mental in creating innovative programs that support the organization’s commitment to


Quality, Heritage and Tradition, as well as sustainable business practices. The brewery heavily invests in employee training and development, a strong benefit plan, and piv-otal employee programs that support individual efforts at social and environmental sustainability.

SNBC has developed a state-of-the-art train-ing center, complete with computer labs and tutorials. The training center’s offerings range from internal managerial training to skill development for employees in areas such as Microsoft Office Applications. SNBC will offer training to teach the implementa-tion of sustainable brewing practices in the future. The return on investment of these efforts is measured at the employee level, with regular surveys of employee engage-ment and exit surveys.

The employee benefit structure at SNBC similarly is geared toward promoting quality; a culture aimed at social and environmental sustainability and healthy employees. To that end, the company offers a comprehensive, innovative wellness program that includes on-site healthcare for employees and their dependents and massage therapy. A Healthy Opportunity Program (HOP) encourages employees to examine lifestyle behaviors that can improve their long-term health (e.g., smoking cessation, weight management and stress management).

In addition, the company recently opened an on-site daycare program for employees to support the need for greater work-family bal-ance. Other work-family balance initiatives include “beef, juice and beer bucks” with each paycheck. These “bucks” are redeemable in the brewery to supplement employee grocer-ies. Free T-shirts are offered not only to help promote the brand, but also to create a sense of pride and belonging among employees. For employees actively involved in the brewing process, special footwear is required. These employees participate in a shoe voucher pro-gram that defrays the costs associated with purchasing expensive required safety gear.

Senior management is convinced, by both qualitative and quantitative data, that by investing in people in a socially responsible way, their triple bottom line is enhanced.

Effective Motivation and Outreach TechniquesSNBC offers transportation subsidies to encourage employees to directly engage in

pro-environmental lifestyles. Employees who ride the bus or bike to work are offered $20 subsidies each month. This helps defray any costs of bike maintenance or bus fare and helps employees save money on gas and car upkeep. For those who bike, this program encourages more physical activity, thereby creating a healthier and more sustainable workforce, while reducing greenhouse gas emissions from cars.

Social responsibility also is encouraged through an optional volunteer program that provides opportunities for employees to

the two sustainability coordinators are responsible for aligning business systems, education and motivation, as well as quanti-fying sustainable management practices. These sustainability coordinators will help guide the brewery to the next level.

Currently the brewery faces many challenges in its water and energy usage, costs of distrib-uting their product nationwide from their single brewery, and not just meeting, but stay-ing ahead of, ever-tightening environmental regulations in farming and brewing. SNBC’s investment in its workforce facilitates

➤

With a strong focus on human resource management and all of these programs in place, SNBC clearly recognizes that sustainability is a journey rather than an end state…the company is constantly seeking to improve.

engage within the local community. A com-mittee coordinates this program that provides time and opportunity for employees to sup-port local residents. The volunteer program builds employee self-esteem and a sense of satisfaction by contributing to the commu-nity’s quality of life. At the end of each year, those who have participated are recognized in a special ceremony that highlights their achievements and commitment to socially responsible action.

Another way in which SNBC encourages healthy lifestyles is by providing employees with their own organic-garden plots, which assists them in engaging in sustainable prac-tices. Employees plant organic gardens with fruits, vegetables and flowers of their choice. In working these gardens, employees gain an appreciation for nature and learn about the science of growing that underlies all of the yeast and hop production inherent in SNBC’s business process. Even better, employees get a break on their grocery bills come harvest time.

With a strong focus on human resource man-agement and all of these programs in place, SNBC clearly recognizes that sustainability is a journey rather than an end state. Rather than seeing their work in this area as com-plete, or even satisfactory, the company is constantly seeking to improve. For example,

successful environmental achievements, as it trains employees to identify and create solu-tions that positively impact the environment and social fabric. SNBC focuses on waste, energy, water and pollution as key environ-mental factors that drive successful sustainable management practices.

Environmental Management Systems and Profitable Results: Reduce, Reuse, RecycleSNBC achieves environmental stewardship due to the dedication and innovation of its owners and employees. Great ideas are gener-ated from the front line of the Tap Room and Restaurant, the Big Room for entertainment venues, bottling, and warehouse and admin-istrative offices. Employees follow the mantra “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle” to decrease expens-es and generate new revenue streams by reducing waste and energy usage, reusing water and recycling.

WasteAt SNBC, as at many other companies, sus-tainability management begins with


developing metrics so the company can quan-tify and report the benefits and outcomes of environmental management systems. To develop the metrics, many organizations practice Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), which is a tool to track material and energy input and output through the entire system (Senge, 2008). Instead of managing a linear business process, life cycle assessment creates a circular process in which nothing is wasted. The assessment assists businesses to evaluate “what it takes, what it makes, and what it wastes” by assessing core products/services, their environmental and social impact, and methods for using resources differently (Hawken, 2005, p. 21). Companies then adopt practices to reduce what they use in the first place, reuse all by-products, and recycle all residual materials; the “3 R’s”: reduce, reuse and recycle.

SNBC’s goal was to utilize the 3 R’s to reduce waste to landfill both up and downstream and reduce stress on finite natural resources. To implement LCA practices, the company began with management decisions that they could control internally. Longer-term, col-laboration up and down the company supply chain would be necessary to engage external partners to formulate greater environmental impact. SNBC has achieved a terrific 99.5 percent diversion rate due to some of the fol-lowing internal practices:

1. Spent grains and yeast feed local cattle herds within a 150-mile radius. SNBC helps the local farming community with healthy feed for livestock and their own herd that it raises for the restaurant. It also reduces transportation modes by keeping

the spent feed local and reduces green-house gas emissions.

2. Packaging materials, such as cardboard and shrink wrap, are baled and sold to recycling companies, which has created generous new revenue streams and divert-ed landfill waste.

3. The recycling program makes it easy for employees to separate and recycle bot-tles, glass, bottle caps, labels, cardboard, paper, wood and metal. Signage clearly marks each bin, and employees have made recycling a daily routine. Helping to make recycling easy and convenient has been a key success factor for SNBC’s diversion rate.

4. The composting program diverts one to two tons per day. SNBC collects pre-con-sumer food scraps in two 32-gallon bins at its restaurant. California State Univer-sity, Chico’s (CSUC) Associated Students Recycling Organization picks up the scrap bins that are later composted at CSUC’s farm in windrows. Landscaping waste is composted at the Chico Regional Com-post Facility. Food scraps from break rooms also are collected and composted in an onsite worm bin. The latest initiative is to invest in an in-vessel compost machine, so SNBC can compost all organics onsite. SNBC’s on-site compost is used as fertil-izer in the hop field, barley field and the employee vegetable garden, which reduces expenses on purchasing compost and fer-tilizer. Finally, SNBC then brews a special Chico Estate Harvest Ale from the hop and barley fields for the local community.

How do all these business practices posi-tively impact the Triple Bottom Line? SNBC reduced expenses for landfill tipping fees by $4.5 million in 2008, and the recycling program generated approximately $800,000 in new revenue. These new revenue streams and cost reductions allowed the brewery to invest further in excellent employee benefits, hiring sustainability coordinators, new machinery and equipment, expanded opera-tions and philanthropy.

WaterOn average, SNBC’s wastewater treatment facility treats 280,000 gallons per day of brewery water using a two-stage anaerobic/aerobic digestion process. The treated water is then used to irrigate the hop field. Because SNBC is the largest water user in the county, Ken decided to build a wastewater treatment facility to help mitigate the company’s impact on the water supply. Wastewater treatment also reduces the firm’s utility expenses. Reus-ing 280,000 gallons of water per day represents significant environmental stew-ardship that does not place stress on local aquifer reserves or the city municipal water treatment facility.

The local community celebrates the brewery as an active partner in preserving the area’s natural resources. In addition, SNBC has partnered with California Water Services to conduct employee training on water conser-vation at both home and work. Several partnerships help support SNBC’s drive for sustainable management, which is difficult to achieve alone.

EnergyCombine waste and water reduction with energy conservation and you have a winning formula. SNBC is 100 percent energy efficient on a sunny day, and roughly 88 percent self sufficient throughout the year, due to a mix of power sources and conservation techniques.

1. A 1.4-megawatt (MW) rooftop solar array provides approximately 25 percent of the energy needs of the facility. SNBC has installed more than 10,000 photovol-taic panels to date, covering roughly 185,000-square feet of rooftop space.

2. In addition, a separate solar-tracking system powers approximately 25 percent of energy needs. A solar-tracking system pivots 180 degrees to follow the sun throughout the day to maximize energy production. The


tracking system covers roughly three acres of parking spaces at the brewery, and creates an added value of shading customer vehicles throughout the day.

3. SNBC installed fuel cells in 2005, to complement the power mix, and generate approximately 50-55 percent of energy needs. Fuel cells use natural gas to extract hydrogen, which is then converted to elec-tricity. Hot exhaust from the fuel cells also is captured to produce steam that is recy-cled directly back into the plant, adding 15 percent efficiency to the functioning of the fuel cells.

4. Numerous heat exchangers and heat recovery installations at the plant help to conserve energy and improve efficiency.

5. SNBC installed conservation measures with convenience in mind. Instead of con-stantly reminding employees to turn off lights when not in use, SNBC installed motion-sensitive lights in low-use areas and uses ambient lighting complemented by skylights and timer systems through-out the plant.

Innovative capital financing strategies enabled SNBC to offset the cost of investing in renewable energy. With a mix of federal and state tax credits, and rebates offered from the Department of Defense and Pacific Gas & Electric, the solar arrays payback period was only seven to eight years and the fuel cells six to seven years. SNBC focuses on long-term energy independence to run a long-term sus-tainable business. SNBC creates so much power it provides excess power to the grid on many days.

PollutionBiodiesel, carbon dioxide recovery and effi-cient transportation modes are all ways SNBC reduces pollution impacts to land, air and sea. In 2008, it switched from truck to rail to transport malted barley from Canada and ship finished products nationally. The rail system is 60 percent more efficient in weight capacity and only emits 3 percent of truck emissions. The rail system allows efficiencies of scale to ship more products, which saves significant supply-chain-management costs.

Additionally, the vegetable oil from the res-taurant is processed in a biodiesel converter, and SNBC produces 50 gallons every other week to use in its fleets. Reusing the vegetable oil also reduces expenses by reusing by-prod-

ucts. SNBC is currently working with E-Fuel Corporation in processing spent yeast by-products into ethanol biofuel as well. In 2009, it purchased a hybrid-engine for local delivery route trucking. It is a certified mem-ber of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Smart Way program, which focuses on driver training, recycling tires and truck parts, and no-idling policies just to name a few. SNBC even has two electric car charger stations for employees, vendors and patrons.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) produced during the fermentation process is recovered and reused again in the plant, allowing SNBC to reduce expenses. It is able to offset 60 percent of its CO2 needs with recovery. Particulate matter from emissions results in negative health impacts because it creates smog, which affects the immune and cardiovascular systems, and oftentimes causes asthma and emphysema (Emissions and Health Impacts, 2008).

Reduced emissions from transportation and biodiesels lower pollution emissions (Stern, 2008). Greenhouse gas emissions, such as CO2, also create heat-trapping gases in the stratosphere (Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons, 2008). SNBC’s effort to reduce greenhouse gases positively impacts both the natural environment and society.

SNBC’s sustainable management practices reduce expenses, create new revenue streams and generate great new ideas. Internal, or controllable, initiatives are systemic, but Ken Grossman knew it was a pivotal juncture to begin working through the supply chain with external stakeholders to achieve even greater results. As of 2009, SNBC is now managing for sustainability throughout the supply chain as a long-term strategic initiative.

Greening the Supply ChainSNBC continues to integrate sustainable practices throughout the supply chain, including agriculture. The most important external stakeholders are the hop and barley farmers. SNBC’s talented people have now formed direct relationships upstream with growers. They regularly visit them to advo-cate for sustainable farming practices, such as no-till farming to ensure healthy rejuvenated soil quality, water conservation and organic farming to reduce pesticide and herbicide usage. They offer up-front incentives to farm-ers per acre to encourage and motivate action for sustainable farming practices, as organic farming oftentimes produces lower yields.

In addition, SNBC helped establish the “Grower Partnership,” which creates strong business-to-business relationships that benefit both suppliers and manufacturers. The pur-pose of the partnership is to share sustainable practices, receive updates on new technology and equipment, conduct field trial research on new barley varieties, and inform members of world barley opportunities and threats.

For risk management, SNBC has implement-ed what it refers to as a “traceability program.” It now utilizes a “chain of custody”—a paper trail to track production of raw materials to finished goods that assists in selecting and comparing suppliers who are engaged in sus-tainable farming pract ices . SNBC’s collaboration with suppliers ensures a strong supply chain working toward the same goals, though other partnerships are necessary to manage the traceability program.

SNBC works with several certifying bodies and third-party agencies to inspect product

➤


along the supply chain for quality control. For instance, two outside companies inspect the documents, or chain of custody, from growers to the malt company. Then a differ-ent company samples both pre- and post-malt or barley shipments. Finally, a fourth com-pany monitors fuel consumption and product efficiencies throughout the system.

These partnerships allow the supply chain to use a consistent metric system to quantify and communicate results. Using respected third-party inspectors and certification agencies increases quality assurance and healthier end products for consumers. From seed to pint

share from Budweiser. Other large commer-cial breweries were forced to respond in kind. Preceding this last round of mergers, beer prices were maintained at artificially low lev-els due to price wars among the major commercial brewers. With a joint venture between SABMiller and Molson Coors, the market powers of the second and third largest companies have combined and created tre-mendous market-pricing power. To date, InBev has not responded. There is speculation that this restraint is a result of the recognition that further price wars would not be advanta-geous due to the debt burden remaining from the merger.

in sales positions. Should trends continue, this increased availability should affect a wider range of positions.

Concerns for the EconomyA dramatic economic downturn could be cause for alarm for any business, and Ken Grossman is quick to point out that no busi-ness is completely immune to the current economic downturn. However, craft brewers generally view their industry as recession-resistant. In fact, some economic indicators related to craft brewers are showing promise. The first half of 2009 reflected real promise for the beer industry according to the Brew-er’s Association. Craft Brewers reported a 5 percent increase in volume and a 9 percent increase in dollars over the preceding period in 2008. Likewise, SNBC continues to expand and is showing no appreciable impact from the current economy. Nonetheless, the indus-try as a whole has not been totally immune, and the local community surrounding SNBC certainly has been heavily impacted.

Hiring the Next Generation of WorkersThe new generation is matriculating into the workforce. “Gen Y” is the generation born between approximately 1977 and 1994. By reputation, Gen Y is a group with lofty work-place expectations. For example, Gen Y’ers have been reported to expect immediate chal-lenges and/or upward mobility in the workplace (Trunk, 2009). When these expec-

glass, SNBC plays an integral role in making a positive environmental impact greater than it had ever hoped it could achieve. In turn, the company has more control over the quality, heritage and tradition customers expect from their ales and lagers.

Challenges AheadAlthough SNBC has achieved phenomenal triple bottom line success during its 30 years, important challenges lie ahead. As Ken and his management team look toward the future, several noteworthy issues emerge.

Volatility in the IndustryFrom October 2008 to January 2009, the large commercial beer producers saw unprec-edented consolidation that radically altered their landscape. This recent consolidation marks the biggest beer industry shift since Prohibition. In November 2008, Anheuser-Busch (U.S.) was acquired for $52 billion by InBev (Belgium). A year earlier, U.S. opera-tions of SABMiller merged with Molson Coors Brewing Company (Molson and Coors merged October 10, 2007).

When South African Breweries bought Miller in 2002, it slashed prices to secure market

While the major producers are a market unto themselves, the product and market can dic-tate what consumers will pay. The current absence of a price war among the major industry brewers has resulted in a reasonably secure platform for craft brewers for the time being. To date, SNBC has not faced with sig-nificant downward pricing pressures.

Partnerships allow the supply chain to develop a consistent metric system to quantify and communicate results. Utilizing respected third party inspectors and certification agencies increases quality assurance and healthier end products for consumers.

From seed to pint glass, SNBC plays an integral role in making a positive environmental impact greater than they had ever hoped to achieve.

Also, for the first time in many years, the cost of labor has stabilized as the labor pool has grown, due to both industry consolidation and the high unemployment rate. As of November 2009, California was facing a 12.3 percent unemployment rate. Butte County, in which SNBC operates, was hit even harder. The local unemployment rate increased from 8.8 percent in October 2008, to 13.3 percent in November 2009. SNBC has been able to take advantage of this larger applicant pool and seen the greatest benefit

tations are not met, resultant turnover may be likely. Managing this group will pose chal-lenges and many opportunities for HR Director Carrie Alden.

Many Gen Y employees approach employ-ment positions as personal joint ventures. Although work is a priority, it often trails behind competing commitments to friends, families, communities and other personal pursuits. To assimilate the new generation of employees and to address some of the


priorities these applicants hold, Carrie and SNBC are experimenting with a variety of workplace programs, like the ones previously discussed. Carrie is confident the next gen-eration of innovation resides within these workers. The key will be providing the job incentives and tools to retain and adequately motivate them.

Supply Chain ManagementThe supply chain is frequently an area of vul-nerabi l i ty for manufacturers . The consolidation of large beer manufacturers has created a ripple effect on the power of distributors. To meet the distribution needs of customers, small breweries must compete alongside powerful conglomerates and respond to distributor demands on price, quantity, and logistics. SNBC will have to ensure that its talented people can continue to navigate this important arena.

The beer industry also faces challenges sur-rounding the current high price and scarcity of quality hops. In the early 1990s, excess production resulted in a worldwide glut of hops. The oversupply pushed down prices and drove hop farmers to plant more profit-able crops. By 2006, the acres planted with hops worldwide were less than half the acre-age planted in the early 1990s. During 2008, the combined effect of shrinking hops pro-duction and growing demand fostered a market where specialty hops were selling for as high as $25 an ounce on the retail market. While some substitutions are possible, they can adversely impact the product.

To mitigate these risks, SNBC has chosen to secure its supply directly with growers. The goal is to foster mutually beneficial and long-standing relationships that will stabilize the availability and cost of good hops, because without them, SNBC can’t make great beer.

ReferencesElkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bot-tom line of the 21st century. Gabrioloa Island, Canada: New Society Publishers.

Emissions and health impacts from diesel trucks and buses. (2008). Retrieved Nov. 25, 2008, from: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/documents/FS_health.pdf.

Hawken, P. (2005). The ecology of commerce: A declara-tion of sustainability. New York, NY: HarperCollin.

Senge, P., Smith, B., Kruschwitz, N., Laur, J., & Schley, S. (2008). The necessary revolution. New York, NY: Dou-bleday.

Staff report: Initial statement of reasons. (2008). Retrieved Nov. 25, 2008 from http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2008/truckbus08/truckbus08.htm, Appendix G: Emissions Inventory ~ Methodology and Results, http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2008/truckbus08/appg.pdf.

Trunk, P. (2009). Motivating Gen Ys in a downturn. BusinessWeek Online. June 10, 2009, 11-12.

Beyond the immediate benefit to SNBC, this approach also helps support family farms and contributes to economic health and recovery.

ConclusionFor 30 years, the journey toward sustainabil-ity has been amazing and rewarding for SNBC, and the remarkable leadership of the company is well-respected within the craft beer industry. Selling the beer for its high quality has been a key to sustaining long-term brand value and price, as well as internal and external stakeholder satisfaction. Ken Gross-man’s leadership has built a strong company culture that supports human resource prac-tices and environmental management systems that respect the natural environment and the people who live within it. SNBC has achieved long-term, sustainable growth that it believes can endure future challenges.

Angela Casler prepares future leaders on how to manage for sustainability on behalf of the Department of Management, College of Business, California State University, Chico. Casler is also the Sustainable Business Partnership Coordinator and serves as the faculty advisor for the student organization Sustainable Consultation of Office Practices.

Michael J. Gundlach, Ph.D., teaches, conducts research and consults in the areas of human resource management and general management. He has published numerous articles on a variety of topics in these areas, and has presented his work at national and international conferences.

Bonnie Persons, J.D., MBA, is an attorney in Silicon Valley, California. She teaches in fields of law and communication. In addition to substantial pro bono pursuits, she is the President of the Western Academy of Legal Studies in Business and a faculty advisor for the sustainability organization Net Impact.

Dr. Suzanne Zivnuska is a professor at California State University Chico specializing in Human Resource Management. Her doctorate is in Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management from Florida State University. She has published 20 articles and book chapters, including Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Human Relations and Leadership Quarterly.


Human Values and Sustainability:Can Green Swim Upstream?

Daniel F. Twomey, Rosemarie Feuerbach Twomey and Gerard Farias, Institute for Sustainable Enterprise, Fairleigh Dickinson University,

and Meric Ozgur, HR Specialist in A Global Manufacturing Company

$


Changing ValuesChanges in values-in-use can be seen in our schools, businesses and all levels of govern-ment. For example, a value-in-use that has changed over time is evident in the statement, “Cheating is okay if you don’t get caught” (Whitley, 1998). This “desirable” is self-serv-ing and displaces the old “desirable” value of integrity.

Historically, we as a nation make claim to specific human values, such as honesty, hard work and the Golden Rule. Also, our nation embraces democracy and democratic princi-ples. Today’s businesses, universities, governments and religious congregations proclaim adherence to these historic values.

Yet, these values are no longer dominant in many institutions. They may be espoused, but they do not influence behaviors, as evi-denced by the recent spate of scandals in corporate and public life. Instead, a new set of values-in-use has been gaining strength, and is now embedded in many parts of our society, especially business. We believe these values will hinder efforts toward sustainabil-ity. Such values and their consequences are readily seen in some major corporations. And, because of the dominance of business in society, the role it plays in re-establishing sus-taining values may determine the fate of human civilization (Speth, 2008).

Sustainability: Reversing Underlying ForcesSustainability has come to mean many differ-ent things and has, in part, become synonymous with the term, “green.” To the extent that “green” focuses primarily on the natural environment and on short-term efforts, it falls short of addressing the larger scope of sustainability concerns. “Sustain-ability,” as we use it, is captured in the more

holistic, longer-term perspective of the Brundtland Commission Report in which sustainable development “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Report of the Brundtland Commis-sion, 1987). Sustainability takes into account societal, as well as environmental issues, and views these as highly interdependent.

Many experts claim the time is fast approach-ing when downward trends in the planet’s life-support systems will accelerate, and reversal will no longer be possible (Hawken, 2007; Stern, 2008). Contemporary business and society foster values like growth and con-sumption that tend to run counter to community values (Speth, 2008). This, in turn, prompts actions that degrade life-sup-port systems. Such values-in-use, like growth and consumption, enable and reinforce the perceptions, beliefs and actions that seep into the structures, procedures and systems of organizations. Woven into their fabric, they become self-justifying and resistant to change.

Outcomes of these values-in-use include autocratic hierarchy, extraordinary differ-ences in pay, limited transparency, deceitful practices and short-term profits as the major objective, and limited regard for society and the environment. Toyota CEO’s recent admis-sion to Congress that the company shifted its emphasis away from safety to favor growth exemplifies this. The sustainability problem is systemic, so corrective actions must address the whole system, including its fundamental driver—human values (Horkheimer, 1941).

Just as bad money drives out good money, bad values drive out good values. Ghoshal (2005) points out how academic theories built on a set of negative values, like focusing on shareholder value at the exclusion of other things, form the foundation for business practices and become self-fulfilling prophe-sies. Indeed, Harris (2009) found that while the application of agency theory was intend-

ed to align the interests of shareholders and managers, the evidence indicated the oppo-site. Similarly, Leavitt (1989), Handy (2002), Marshall (2004) and Mitroff (2004) all have expressed deep concern over the loss of vision and values in business education.

Some organization leaders understand the need for substantial change and are “going green.” They have taken significant actions to better serve society and to limit damage to the environment. However, the depth, scope and urgency of the sustainability challenge will require a greater response—not only in time and effort, but also in creativity, innova-tion and fundamental changes in lifestyles and existing practices.

For instance, Ray Anderson, founder of Inter-face Carpet, made a commitment to make the company carbon neutral by the year 2020. The people at Interface welcomed the chal-lenge. The company reports significant environmental improvements and substan-tial cost savings. We believe these results have been generated because of the human value of caring for others, the environment and the future. We doubt that others can meet the challenge without embracing values that pro-vide the context that enables actions to emerge that align with sustainability.

Swimming UpstreamMany green initiatives, prompted by external pressures to consider the triple-bottom line of people, planet and profits, increase efficiency and/or reduce waste, thereby providing cre-ative ways to increase profits. These green initiatives are consistent with current values and require no fundamental change in values-in-use—they are “swimming downstream” green initiatives. Wal-mart’s cost-saving sus-tainability initiatives, like saving energy, are easy to implement because they align with company values and culture—“swimming downstream.”

A human value is the “desirable” that influences the selection of our actions (Williams, 2000).

“Values-in-use”—are those values that actually influence our decisions and actions, as opposed

to values that are “espoused” but do not influence choices of action (Argyris & Schön, 1996).

We focus on those human values that lead to decisions and actions that influence sustainability.

➤


The problem is that doing what is consistent with contemporary values-in-use will not bring about the fundamental changes needed to fully address sustainability issues. Much more difficult to undertake or maintain are initiatives that conflict with corporate val-ues— that “swim upstream.” Ray Anderson (1998) refers to “climbing sustainability mountain,” implying that “going green” gets steeper and harder.

(Twomey, 2006; Leiserowitz, Kates, and Par-ris, 2006); and pretence of knowledge (Hayek, 1989, Ghoshal, 2005).

Individualism and HedonismIndividualism, which can be a desirable trait when the situation demands it (the rugged individualism of pioneers), has become large-

tainable society, including equity, community, generosity, trust and the desire to make a contribution.

Non-democratic ValuesDemocratic principles constitute a set of human values shared by citizens of the Unit-ed States and other countries throughout the world. Democracies are, ideally and by their nature, “of the people, by the people and for the people.” People, not their leaders, have the ultimate say. The peoples’ influence is exer-cised through choice, and that choice is most effective when it is exercised in a free, informed and uncorrupted forum.

Many large U.S. corporations operate in a manner inconsistent with democratic princi-ples and the values that ensure an effective democracy (Twomey, 2006). Handy (2002), ranked second in 2001 among the most influ-ential living management thinkers by Thinkers 50, wrote, “It is ironic that those countries that boast most stridently about their democratic principles derive their wealth from institutions that are defiantly undemocratic, in which all serious power is held by outsiders and power inside is wielded by a dictatorship or, at best, an oligarchy.”

For many organizations, their employees, supply chains, consumers and the communi-ties impacted by them have little or no voice in decision making. Over time, corporate val-ues have replaced traditional human values throughout society—particularly monetary gain over well-being of people and planet (Speth, 2008). Sharon Beder (2008), a noted educator and author, stated, “[T]he market values of competition, salesmanship and deception have replaced the democratic ide-als of truth and justice.” Likewise, in discussing the impact of today’s corpora-t ions, Fotopoulos (2008) observed, “Increasingly, there is little room for the expression of higher human values and qual-ities such as generosity, compassion, selflessness, willingness to seek out and expose the truth, and courage to fight for justice.”

Knowing and Certainty (Pretence of Knowledge)Being perceived as knowing and being right has increasingly become desirable in our soci-ety and organizations (Yanow, 2009.) In contrast, humility and a willingness to learn opens minds to the influence of others and new ideas. For example, it is the non-sustain-

Contemporary values-in-use will not bring about the fundamental changes needed to fully address sustainability issues.

HR is no stranger to swimming upstream. Long-term development programs that con-flict with short-term financial goals are sometimes swept away when, for example, HR may be encouraged to increase short-term profitability by outsourcing special skill needs and downsizing, rather than develop-ing current employees.

NON-SUSTAINING VALUES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCESNon-sustaining human values are those “desirables” that are not aligned with sus-tainability—the well being of people and planet, present and future. Sometimes non-sustaining values are extreme or perverted forms of historically desirable values. For example, personal well being, when balanced with the well being of others, reflects the value of equity. However, when personal well being disregards others, the value can trans-form into greed. When disregard for the “other” is manifested at the corporate level, it can negatively affect the climate, water and air quality—earth’s life-support systems. Greed is, therefore, a non-sustaining value.

While there is limited research on the role of human values and sustainable development, “most advocates for sustainable development recognize that for it to be realized would require changes in human values” (Leiserow-itz, Kates, and Parris, 2006, 441). The three value sets that follow are frequently cited as contributing directly or indirectly to prob-lems that make sustainability more difficult to achieve: individualism and hedonism (Etzioni, 2002); non-democratic values

ly a non-sustaining value, as in “What’s in it for me?” When individualism rises to the level of dominance, it threatens such human values as equity, mutuality and community. Indi-vidualism is evidenced in the workplace when behaviors are externally motivated and con-trolled through a system of personal rewards. These reward strategies are justified by claims of increased productivity and profits. Yet, much of the literature suggests the opposite, especially when it involves creativity, initia-tive and/or cooperation (Argyris & Schön, 1996). Singh and Krishnan (2008) report that they found positive relationships between self-sacrifice, altruism and transformational leadership, which, in turn, is related to collec-tive identity and perceived unit performance.

Similarly, the pursuit of happiness is a funda-mental human right, but taken to the extreme, it can be a non-sustaining value that does not align with sustainable choices and actions. Advertisers spend millions developing ads that entice customers to buy, whether or not the goods or services are actually good for the customer. For example, in response to a recent ban on chocolate milk in a school caf-eteria because of high sugar content, the milk industry launched a campaign to encourage its consumption, arguing that chocolate milk is better than no milk (Brady, 2009.) So, what is really being sold? We suggest that it is mostly pleasure or privilege—intangibles associated with feeling good and fostering the value of hedonism.

When individualism and hedonism predomi-nate in a society, the resulting attitude can be, “What is the least I can do to get what I want?” This combination of values directly runs counter to those needed to effect a sus-


ing value of certainty that leads some to deny global warming outright, in the face of sub-stantial evidence to the contrary. Conversely, some promote global warming and deliber-ately limit debate on the topic. This desire to be right and not be challenged, which occurs at all levels, not only makes for bad decisions but also makes change nearly impossible. Leaders who “know with unquestioned cer-tainty” operate within fixed ideas and goals, and are unlikely to collaborate with others or explore the complexity and dynamics of larger systems (Sharma, 2000; Boiral, Cayer, & Baron, 2009). Incorporating sustaining values into corporate strategies and processes will require systemic and paradigm-shifting change.

SUSTAINABILITY PATH: What HR Can DoThe sustainability path refers to going beyond what is typically perceived as “green.” Popu-lar green initiatives, while noteworthy and necessary, are not enough to transform the company to be fully sustainable. An examina-tion of the current values-in-use can begin a shift in both operations and processes as a first step on the path to sustainability.

What is the path to aligning business with sustaining human values? A good place to

start is the Stockdale Paradox (Collins, 2001) that contains two sustaining qualities, integ-rity and trust. Stockdale’s principle was, “Face the brutal facts, and keep faith in a positive outcome.”

First, face the brutal facts: (A) Consumers and the public are right in their dismal assess-ment of corporations and leaders (Edelmans Trust Barometer 2010 reports recent tenuous rises after recording 10-year lows); and (B) Corporations have played a key role in weaving the fabric of non-sustaining human values into society (Speth, 2008). Second, keep the faith: (A) We need to believe in a sustainable future and act to transform our-selves and our organizations for the purpose of preserving planet and people; and (B) Make this our passion and, along with others, inquire about and build a new paradigm for the corporation and society—one that incor-porates human values that are aligned with sustainability (Hamel, 2009).

HR: Create a DialogueBecause engagement of people is fundamen-tal to transformational efforts, HR is perfectly poised to support the organization as the custodian of human values. To initiate a dialogue about the transformation of val-ues-in-use for the purpose of attaining sustainability objectives, HR can take the fol-lowing steps. First, HR can start an internal assessment of its own values-in-use using a

dichotomy of HR practices (See Chart 1). Second, HR can embed the dialogue about values and sustainability into traditional HR functions such as recruitment, hiring and training. Third, in partnership with the orga-nization’s other executives and managers, HR can extend the dialogue throughout the entire organization. By shining a light on the gaps between the espoused values and values-in-use, the stage is set to bring about greater alignment.

1. A Beginning A major vehicle and context for promoting the sustaining values is community. As Block (2008) indicates, community is the place where the level of trust, connectedness and common purpose allows us to name and let go of the past to create a different future. As a beginning, HR can strengthen its own com-munity around the common purpose of creating greater value for the firm and society by examining and shifting values-in-use. The HR unit could use items in Chart 1 to name (acknowledge) non-sustaining values-in-use and develop possibilities for new values. Throughout this process, HR must learn how to create a context for itself and others that will foster a paradigm-shifting dialogue.

Chart 1 distinguishes between two sets of practices—non-sustaining and sustaining—and provides an effective way to differentiate and examine values-in-use. By moving to the sustaining practices, and changing values-in-

ExHIBIT1: HR NON-SUSTAINING PRACTICES VS. SUSTAINING PRACTICES

➤

Non-sustainingpractices Sustainingpractices

Hire talent when you need it workforce Develop talent to create opportunities

Claim values but don’t examine espousedvaluesvs.values-in-use Surface and develop: top to bottom

Top down: direct and control organizingprinciple Organic: Self directed and managed

Incremental within current paradigm change Radical: Deep and transformational

Prescribed and limited (silos) careerpaths Self-generated and broad

Growth, technology, money drivers Values, people, society

Top-down – individually based decisionmaking/action Collaborative – co-creation based

Based on financial outcomes rewards Based on financial and non-financial outcomes

Internal, process focused impact Internal and external, strategy focused

Limited to business responsibility To all stakeholders

$


values is difficult because they exist not only at the personal level but also within the fabric of the organization—in its processes, struc-tures and reward systems. Hamel (2009) gives 25 examples of ways to change the fab-ric of the firm to transform its ability to meet the challenges facing the world.

HR’s greatest contribution to the organiza-tion and to the organization’s stakeholders may be to create a dialogue that will shed light on the corporation’s values-in-use and thereby leverage change. The positive, sus-tainable values the firm claims are often espoused values—not its values-in-use. Clos-ing the gap between sustainable and non-sustainable values needs to be approached in a way that allows change to emerge rather than be forced. A first step is to help people to see the gap and its consequences for behav-iors related to sustainability, such as innovation, creativity and motivation. A next step is to tap the knowledge of the organiza-

tion to better understand the systemic nature of the gap. A cross-organizational dialogue will highlight the gaps and open possibilities for aligning values (and thereby practice and behavior) with sustainability. The process through which the firm achieves this will be unique to each situation, as it relates to the current challenges the company faces. Typical HR avenues for building a dialogue include employment decisions, performance apprais-al, training/development, reward and recognition processes, work/life balance practices, employee surveys and company-wide events. Through such activities, HR can initiate a series of dialogues among employees by asking some focused, explor-atory questions.

Based on the responses to these questions and on the values to which the organization is committed, HR can seek ways to embed the desired values into HR processes. For exam-ple, reexamine recruitment materials,

use, HR will be laying the foundation for a larger organizational transformation.

Any group within or outside the firm might notice and explore how the practices on each side of the chart are interactive and reinforc-ing. Reflecting on those practices and how they change over time can provide additional insight. HR professionals, in collaboration with other units, can customize the chart for the various functions and levels of the firm and use it as a basis for a dialogue about the larger fabric of the organization.

2. Branching OutAny level in an organization can shift values by deliberately (1) raising awareness of the sustainability challenges, (2) surfacing per-sonal values-in-use versus the corporate/organizational values-in-use as they relate to sustainability, (3) enabling a commitment to change, and (4) aligning practices with sus-taining values. Identifying non-sustaining

1. Do our values-in-use in the corpora-tion/organization enable a high level of creativity, innovation, adaptability and internal motivation throughout the organization? What current val-ues-in-use limit or promote these behaviors?

2. What are the values-in-use with respect to top management, hierarchy and control, rewards and punishments in the corporation/organization? What is the impact of those values and resultant practices on our unit?

3. What are the values-in-use in our unit? How are they integrated? Are they acknowledged?

4. Do we operate in an environment of transparency where information is openly shared? What are the values-in-use that encourage or discourage transparency?

5. What are my/our personal/family/community values-in-use?

6. How are my/our values-in-use differ-ent from corporate/organizational values-in-use?


reconsider where recruitment takes place and ask whether the questions asked of candi-dates might be changed to better reflect the values needed to advance the sustainability of the organization, its people and the greater community, and so on. These efforts can be part of a continuous cycle of inquiry and learning.

3. Engaging the Organization in TransformationA third step, beyond the HR unit and HR’s major roles, is to engage the entire organiza-tion as a partner in transformation. A likely first partner is the unit most responsible for sustainability. As in the other steps, the action is co-created from the possibilities that emerge from a broad-based dialogue between units. Now the focus shifts to the organiza-tion level and its strategy and operations.

The following activities might be helpful in a dialogue. These items are not steps, but rath-er they offer places to start a dialogue. Most important is the trust, openness and commit-ment that enable people to have the courage to surface and share their values, assumptions and beliefs. This is not about HR creating solutions or programs for others. This is

people taking responsibility for their values-in-use and the behaviors they prompt.

1. Raise awareness of the current values-in-useInquire. What are customers, employees, and the public telling us and other corporations like us about our role in society and the world? What are the values that have contrib-uted to the non-sustainable behaviors and outcomes of the firm? Where are the gaps? What values-in-use do the gaps reflect?

2. Acknowledge the current values-in-use and their negative consequences.Create an internal dialogue across the orga-nization about how customers, employees and the public view the business. Surface the values-in-use that underlie the positive or negative actions/feedback. In particular, sur-face those values-in-use that block the firm from moving forcefully toward sustainability.

3. Develop a new set of core values-in-useTogether, make a list of sustaining values-in-use that might prompt innovative, trusting and transparent behaviors and outcomes for the customers, employees and the public, as well as for the firm. Possibly, start with the values-in-use that drive one’s own passion.

4. Compare the new set with corporate valuesIn an honest assessment, most firms will find major gaps between their corporation’s claimed values and their current values-in-use. Surface and acknowledge the gaps and show how current values-in-use are part of the fabric of the firm, affecting its external relationships, its strategies and its HR prac-tices. Also, individuals must take personal responsibility for being actively or passively part of this fabric. Explore the fabric—for example, language, processes and structures.

5. Align HR practices and values-in-useTogether, develop a strategy driven by those values-in-use that are the new core of the firm. The change in values-in-use will sub-stantially change, as well as strengthen, the strategy formulation process.

Using “Trust” to Demonstrate How HR Can Begin a TransformationA key characteristic of “best companies” is the establishment and maintenance of trust between an organization and all its stake-holders, particularly in the context of organizational transformation (Collins, 2001).

ExHIBIT2: VALUES-IN-USE AND TRUST BETWEEN BUSINESS AND ITS STAKEHOLDERS

Business

Alignment

Stakeholders

TRU

ST TR

US

T

Value-in-useHonesty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Freedom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mutuality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Possible Corresponding ActionAccurate information �ow

Innovation

Collaboration

Co-creating common ground

➤


Trust, a positive expectation of intent and outcomes, is reinforced and becomes a virtu-ous cycle when expectations are met consistently. The Diagram that follows illus-trates the cycle. A business establishes trust by its values-in-use, such as honesty, freedom, equity and mutuality (sustaining values) manifested in the behaviors that those values prompt. For example, honesty might prompt the corresponding action of “accurate infor-mation flow.”

When a corporation has non-sustaining val-ues - in -use , such as ind iv idua l i sm, non-democratic principles and certainty, negative behaviors and outcomes can lead to a vicious, downward cycle. When a corpora-tion “espouses” sustaining values while acting on non-sustaining values-in-use, cyni-cism results and trust is eroded.

For employees and other stakeholders to trust a company, a company needs a long-term commitment to the alignment of its actions with stated sustaining values. (See Diagram 1) A deep long-term dialogue is facilitated by a shared mutual intent that is more than the company’s need for profit, such as transforming the company’s role in society.

ConclusionEvery organization must find its own way forward as it faces a highly dynamic and com-petitive marketplace. Putting human values into the conversation is a means of distin-guishing the level and types of change to pursue and how current values are support-ing or limiting objectives. Comparing the “business case” with the “sustainability case” provides alternative perspectives on the type and level of change desired. The business case is usually about incremental change—change within the current processes and authority structure—with a primary focus on the finan-cial impact. The sustainability case is about benefitting society and the environment, where profit is more of a means to that end (Collins, 2001; Hamel, 2009).

Higher levels of sustainability require trans-formation of major approaches and processes that are driven by a set of human values different from those pertinent to the business case. The business case assumes a high level of knowing, first by those who pro-pose, document and provide the rationale for a project, and then by the managers who give approval. Embedded in the business case is a

process involving top-down direction and control consisting of a set of procedures, communications, job descriptions and appraisal and reward systems. The business case is well-suited for incremental change and fits well with dominant current values.

The “sustainability case” is a different para-digm for business—one that supplants the “business case.” The sustainability case, in which societal and environmental concerns play a pivotal role, is about collaboration, openness to emergence, self-organizing, com-munity building, internal motivation and a robust systems perspective (Twomey, 2006). It is less about knowing, certainty, hierarchy, reward-driven behaviors, individual well-defined responsibilities and short timeframes (Twomey, 2006). The sustainability case is aligned more with creating a long-term sus-tainable future. Moreover, it provides the means for the transformation needed to make this possible.

ReferencesAnderson, R. (1998). Mid-Course Correction. Peregrinzil-la Press.

Argyris, C. & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organization learning II: theory, method, and practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Beder, S. (2008). The corporate assault on democracy. The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy, 4(1).

Block, P. (2008) Community: The structure of belonging. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Boiral, O, Cayer, M., and Baron, C.M. (2009). The action logics of environmental leadership: A developmental per-spective. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 479-499.

Brady, J. (2009, December) Dairy groups fight to keep chocolate milk on menu. All things considered. Retrieved from http:/ /www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=121238407.

Collins, J. (2001). Good to great. New York: Harper Col-lins Publishers Inc.

Etzioni, A. (2002). Individualism—within history, The Hedgehog Review, Spring, 49-56.

Fotopoulos, T. (2008). Values, the dominant social para-digm and neoliberal globalisation. The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy, 4(1).

Gentile, M. C. (2008) The 21st century MBA. Strategy+Business, 51, 1-12.

Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroy-ing good management practices. Academy of Management: Learning & Education Journal, 4 (1), 75-91.

Hamel, G. (2009). Moonshots for management. Harvard Business Review, February 2009.

Handy, C. (2002). What’s a business for? Harvard Business Review, December, 49-55.

Harris, J. D. (2009) What’s wrong with executive compen-sation? Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 147–156.

Hawken, P. (2007). Blessed unrest. Viking Penguin.

Hayek, F. A. Von. (1989). The pretence of knowledge (Nobel Lecture). American Economic Review, December, 3-7.

Horkheimer, M. (1974). Eclipse of reason. Seabury Press, (1974) (Originally 1941).

Leavitt, H. G. (1989.). Educating our MBAs: On teaching what we haven’t taught. California Management Review, 31 (3), 38-50.

Leiserowitz, A.A., Kates, R.W., Parris, T.M. (2006). Sus-tainability values, attitudes, and behaviors: A review of multinational and global trends. Annual Review Environ-mental Resource, 413-444.

Marshall, J. 2004. Matching form to content in educating for sustainability: The masters (MSc) in responsibility and business practice. In Galea, C. (Ed.), 2004. Teaching Busi-ness Sustainability, 1.Sheffield,UK: Greenleaf, 196-208.

Mitroff, I. (2004). An open letter to the deans and the faculties of american business schools from ABI/INFORM global. (Document ID: 724522921).

Report of the Brundtland Commission (1987). Our com-mon future. Oxford University Press.

Report of Edelman’s Trust Baramoter (2010). Trust: 2010 trust barometer executive summary. Retrieved from http://www.scribd.com/full/26268655?access_key=key-1ovbg-bpawooot3hnsz3u

Sharma, S. (2000). Managerial interpretations and orga-nizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy of Management Jour-nal, 43(4), 681-697.

Singh, N. and Krishnan V. R. (2008). Self-sacrifice and transformational leadership: Mediating role of altruism. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29(3), 261-274.

Speth, J. G. (2008). The bridge at the edge of the world. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,

Stern, N. (2008). The economics of climate change. Amer-ican Economic Review, 98(2), 1–37.

Twomey, D. F., (2006). Democracy and sustainable enter-prise. Global Forum, 4(1), 236-241.

Twomey, D. F., 2006. Designed emergence as a path to enterprise sustainability, E+CO: Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 8(1), 12-23.

Whitley, B. (1998). Factors associated with cheating among college students: A Review. Research in Higher Education, 39(3), 235-274.

Williams R., (2000). Change and stability in value and value systems: A sociological perspective. In M. Rokeach (Ed.) Understanding Human Values: Individual and Soci-etal, New York, NY: Simon-Schuster.

Yanow, D. (2009). Ways of knowing: passionate humility and reflective practice in research and management. American Review of Public Administration, 39(6), 579.

Right Leaders... Ready FasterTop Global Clients Recommend PDI Ninth House*

94% are willing to be a reference.

84% are more satisfied with PDI Ninth House than with other talent management and HR consulting firms.

* 2009 survey of PDI Ninth House global clients

Contact Us:1.800.633.4410 www.pdininthhouse.com

PDI Ninth House is the premier global leadership solutions company with distinctive expertise in accelerating leadership effectiveness to maximize organizational performance. We have 43 years of experience in helping clients identify, manage, develop, and promote superior leaders across all levels of client organizations. PDI Ninth House serves thousands of clients on six continents, including 70 percent of the BusinessWeek Top 100 Global Brands, 75 percent of the Forbes Global 100, and 80 percent of the Fortune 100 firms in the United States.

Premier Global Leadership Solutions Company

PDI_NH_Ad_vert_final.indd 1 3/16/10 1:48:28 PM

Dr. Daniel F. Twomey is professor of management at Fairleigh Dickinson University (FDU). He received a Doctorate of Busi-ness Administration from Kent State University. For the past decade Twomey’s research and professional activities have focused on leadership, learning, organization design and sus-tainability. He is a co-founder and a director of the Institute for Sustainable Enterprises and the founder and director of the Center for Human Resource Management Studies at FDU. He organized the annual Professional Development Work-shop “Practitioner Series: Action Research Community” at the Academy of Management.

Rosemarie Twomey is professor of legal studies in business at Fairleigh Dickinson University (FDU) where she teaches in the Executive and regular MBA programs. She received her J.D. from West Virginia University College of Law and practiced law for 10 years before pursuing an academic career. She was a charter member of the Center for Human Resource Manage-ment Studies (CHRMS) and helped establish the Institute for Sustainable Enterprise (ISE) at FDU. Recently, McGraw-Hill published her textbook, “Employment Law: Going Beyond Compliance to Engagement and Empowerment.”

Gerard Farias is associate professor of management in the Silberman College of Business at Fairleigh Dickinson Univer-sity. He teaches strategic management, change management and organization theory. His interests lie in the areas of emer-gent organization and the role of business in society, particularly with regard to sustainability. Within these broad fields, he has focused on the role of human values, leadership and wisdom in the context of business and society.

Meric Ozgur is working as a human resources specialist in a global manufacturing company where she is a practitioner in numerous HR functions, including compensation, interna-tional/domestic relocations and immigration. She received her undergraduate degree in Statistics, at Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey and her EMBA degree at Fairleigh Dickinson University (FDU). She recently finished a graduate program in Managing Sustainability from FDU and INCAE Business School in Costa Rica. She is involved in several sus-tainability projects, focusing on individual and group behavior and its impact on business and society.

The Chicago Executive InstituteAdvanced Management Program

Plus Three One-week ElectivesSelected by participant in coordination with the program’s administration

Introductory Core Session

Sept. 13–17, 2010

Mid-Course Core Session

April 4–8, 2011

Final Core Session

Sept. 12–16, 2011

The only individualized, flexible advanced management program

Consists of six weeks over the course of year

Half of the program is completely customizable and tailored to your individual needs

To register visit

ps.cei.chicagoexec.net

Or call 312.464.8732


A Must Read Worthwhile Skim It Over Bottom of the Stack

edited by John Bausch and Patsy Svare book reviews

Ecological Intelligence: How Knowing the Hidden Impacts of What We Buy Can Change Everything

Author: Daniel Goleman

Publisher: Broadway Books

Reviewer: Krista J. Pilot, Senior Vice President, Sustainability Practice, DKC Public Relations

If you learned your shampoo was toxic, would you continue to use it? Of course not. But how would you learn if it was? What does “toxic” really mean? Will it kill you right now? Or after using it for 20 years? And where would you find the facts from a source you trust?

Daniel Goleman addresses these questions in Eco-logical Intelligence, which describes his journey to becoming more informed about the hidden impacts of the processes and ingredients behind everything we buy.

What did he learn on his journey? Ecological intel-ligence calls for a “radical transparency” for consumers. Goleman wants clear facts and analy-sis about environmental and social impacts of products, their ingredients and how they are made. Armed with this data, consumers will be empowered to make better decisions. Radical transparency helps us to develop “ecological intelligence” to dis-cern whether a product is “good” or “bad,” green or polluting, fair trade or exploitative.

Goleman describes how environmental groups and even progressive companies are trying to overcome the current information asymmetry, where consum-ers are unable to make informed choices about the impacts of their purchases. GoodGuide, as one example, is compiling a massive database of infor-mation on consumer products, and setting up point-of-purchase mechanisms that will allow con-sumers to instantly access an environmental and social rating for a given product.

The author’s knowledge of human biology brings insights into how product information can trigger

nervous system reactions to drive consumer behav-ior. We are hard-wired to see immediate dangers, he writes, but we need to develop a new sensitivity to threats like bioaccumulation (overload of inor-ganic toxins in the body) or global climate change, which occur over a long time. He describes how our neocortex can be trained to sense new threats, so that we develop a strong aversion (like our reaction to spoiled meat) when confronted with chemicals that might prove toxic over time.

That said, Goleman’s fervor with radical transpar-ency leads to a one-sided analysis of some very complicated, system-level problems. As we all know, while better information certainly helps consumers make decisions, the sad truth is that emotions, habit and inertia usually trump the facts. No one doubts the dangers of smoking cigarettes, yet people continue to light up.

Also, part of being a wise consumer is the ability to question the accuracy or credibility of the informa-tion used to create rating systems or eco-labels. While non-profit and government information sourc-es have more credibility than corporations, they still are subject to their own biases, which Goleman, in his enthusiasm, does not acknowledge.

Ecological Intelligence doesn’t cover any new ground beyond classics like Crade to Cradle by Wil-liam McDonough and Michael Braungart, Green to Gold by Dan Esty or Natural Capitalism by Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins, but it is a good option for readers starting to learn about sustainability.

Green Careers for Dummies

Author: Carol McClelland

Publisher: Wiley Publishing, Inc.

Reviewer: Larry Finkelstein, President, Transition Manage-ment Associates

In Green Careers for Dummies, Carol McClelland provides an up-to-the-minute overview of the rapidly expanding area of “green” careers, with valuable resources to make the transition to green an easy one for her readers. The book is well-organized and takes a straightforward approach to classifying occupations by the types of education, skills and experience needed to enter the field. It covers a variety of functions and industries and provides information about key trends the reader will want to consider.

Throughout the book, McClelland’s passion for, and in-depth knowledge of, the green economy comes across clearly. Her style makes it easy to read and

the organization allows readers to focus on the areas that are most important to them. Sections focus on:

• Whatconstitutesagreencareer, with suggestions on how readers can assess their personal values, interests and skills to see how they can match the present and future needs of green jobs.

• Pointersonjobsearchtechniques valuable for both identifying rapidly evolving positions and utilizing lifelong learning to stay relevant.

• Resourcestounderstandsocietaltrends that will influence the world of work.

➤


book reviewsA Must Read Worthwhile Skim It Over Bottom of the Stack

The Green Collar Economy:How One Solution Can Fix Our Two Biggest Problems

Author: Van Jones, with Ariane Conrad

Publisher: HarperCollins Publishers

Reviewer: Jonathan Cloud, Director, Sustainable Business Incubator, Fairleigh Dickinson University

The Green Collar Economy builds a very simple—and to me a very convincing—case that putting people to work solving environmental issues is one of the best ways to rebuild our economy. The 200 pages of clear-eyed advocacy are read easily. Plus, there are more than 40 pages of action items, resource lists and footnotes, if you want or need more.

The new green economy—based on clean energy, environmental technologies and electric transporta-tion—seems to be gathering momentum. Now it’s difficult to remember that at the time of its first printing in 2008, The Green Collar Economy was truly a visionary book. The revised paperback version, issued in September 2009, was issued just before the author’s exhilarating but ultimately ill-fated appointment as the Obama administration’s “Green Jobs Czar.”

Van Jones has become a controversial figure and is now almost totally out-of-sight, but that should not stop you from reading his book. Jones points out that our present society is not only unsustainable in the distant future, but it is already harming the vast majority of people today. He maintains that the poorest communities have borne the brunt of our trash and toxic waste, our leakiest and most broken-down homes, and our poorest nutrition, education and healthcare.

Jones makes the case that this is not just a matter of “fairness” or environmental justice. Instead, he argues that the shift required to reverse global warming and the manifold other crises we face requires everyone’s willingness to live in harmony with nature. This can only occur if we also solve the problems of poverty and exclusion.

What makes his argument more than just an abstraction is the author’s personal sacrifice and deep commitment to addressing the challenges in the most disadvantaged communities. He calls this “greening the ghetto first,” and shows us how this approach most effectively helps solve our global problems.

Jones advocates a “green New Deal,” and urgent-ly reminds us that while we still have a choice, time is running out. He raises the larger social ques-tions as to why we cannot address the immediate and practical problems that affect the daily lives of millions of people, whether it is the mortgage crisis, healthcare or the creation of jobs, and why we choose to drag others down rather than sup-port the only meaningful choice—a better world for everyone.

Green Careers for Dummies(continued)

• “GreenTips” to make your present position and life more grounded on concepts of sustainability.

McClelland provides definitions and descriptions of job titles that should help both the individual who is entering the job market, as well as someone who is considering a career shift. She lists requirements for the various job titles to help the reader see what skills are needed for each career. In addition, she includes a number of exercises to gain greater understanding of your job-related strengths, so it is easier to communicate your potential value to employers.

One of the books greatest strengths is that it con-tains a plethora of Web site references related to careers and organizations devoted to sustainability. These Web sites include industry associations, as well as links to research and trends, educational

and training organizations, social networking sites, federal, state, local government and non-govern-ment organizations (NGOs). Having done career transition coaching for 25 years, I am confident this resource will be invaluable in expanding readers’ understanding of many career choices they may not have considered or did not know about. In addition, these links can be used for research into specific organizations, make it easier to network with people in a targeted field and facilitate making contact with potential employers.

For anyone interested in a career transition into what has been predicted to be the most growth-oriented area of our economy (and wouldn’t it be great to take a position where jobs will be growing, not shrinking?), Green Careers for Dummies is an excellent resource.



The Necessary Revolution:How Individuals and Organizations Are Working Together to Create a Sustainable World

Author: Peter Senge, et al

Publisher: DOUBLEDAY

Reviewer: Lisa Anderson, VP HR Practice Leader, InSearch Worldwide, Allegis Group Services Co.

Countdown: 5, 4, 3, 2, 1… It’s time to regenerate resources and build a sustainable global system before we hit zero! Peter Senge, management guru and founding chair of the Society for Organizational Learning, drives home the message with urgency in this fact-based, provocative book. Senge, along with fellow authors Bryan Smith, Nina Kruschwitz, Joe Laur and Sara Schley, provides significant and compelling data, brought to life with relevant iconic examples, such as Coke, Alcoa, Nike, Costco and Google.

According to the authors, business has reigned supreme throughout the Industrial Age, with environ-mental side effects and imbalances due to rampant consumerism, industrial waste and a disconnect to the consequences. Although we see the pollution and feel the climate changes, we keep doing the same thing and expecting different results. Our quality of life, and indeed our ability to live, is at stake for future generations.

Fortunately, the book outlines a plan for addressing this dilemma, based on three guiding principles.

1. Theonlyviablepathforwardtakesintoaccounttheneedsoffuturegenerations—and the future is now.

2. Allrealchangeisgroundedinnewwaysofthinkingandperceiving; we must shift our paradigms from short-term financial gain to pre-serving natural resources.

3. Institutionsmatter—so you must take these issues of sustainability to work with you.

The business rationale for sustainability includes consumer favor, employee retention and signifi-cant financial savings. Ultimately, we’ll build a sustainable future by integrating sustainability goals into the core corporate mission. Says Jeroen van der Veer, Royal Dutch Shell’s chief executive, “The successful companies of the future will be those that integrate business and employees’ personal values.”

Throughout the book, you’ll find many compelling statistics, diagrams and “toolbox” ideas for devel-oping action plans. Leaders and innovators will come from all walks of life, says Senge, bound by their passion to enact real change, their ability to listen and their commitment to building enduring relationships that cross boundaries.

Can you learn a lot from this book? Absolutely. Does it inspire and give well-conceived tools for action planning? Definitely. Does it provoke deep reflec-tion? Yes.

Hitting home, reading this book caused me to pon-der my parental status: What kind of parent am I really, if in spite of all the soccer lessons, braces and myriad advantages I provide my children, I leave them with a scarcity of life-sustaining resources and an overabundance of toxic waste?

Many responsible people are personally invested in helping to “save the planet.” The bigger decision will be to make a real difference by taking these issues to work.

Sustainability by Design:A Subversive Strategy for Transforming Our Consumer Culture

Author: John R. Ehrenfeld

Publisher: Yale University Press

Reviewer: Gerry Groe, Managing Director, Business Development, pan, A Talx Company

John Ehrenfeld, a Sc.D. from MIT, is a chemical engi-neer with a distinguished career in the field of industrial ecology. Given his technical credentials, the reader might expect a passionate technical dis-course on the evils of wanton industrial production and the resultant inevitable destruction of our planet. However, while Ehrenfeld indulges in some finger wagging, he also surprises us with a decid-edly balanced and holistic approach.

But this book is not an easy read. Ehrenfeld jour-neys widely into varying schools of thought, including philosophy, cultural anthropology, ethics and social psychology. You must remain diligent while mining for insight gold—but keep panning, because it’s worth the effort to understand his key message.

• Wemust focusonproactiveenvironmentalsustainability, where human and other life will flourish on the planet forever. Currently, instead of fixing the root causes harming the environment, we are reactively mitigating the damages of unsustainability.

• Wemustshifttothefullnessof“Being” from our current consumerist culture of “Having.” Our enormously productive economy encourages consumption as a way of life. The “I Have, therefore I Am” mindset results in equating our “Being” with our possessions. Ehrenfeld believes our level of materialism has reached such a state of “addictive consumption” that our species will become known as “homo economicus.”

➤



Sustainability by Design(continued)

• Sustainabilitymustbeaculturaloverhaulinwhich we recognize that our world—oure c o s y s t e m — i s i n t e r c o n n e c t e d a n dinterdependent. This ecosystems view facilitates an awareness of the need to design and manufacture products with a full understanding of the corresponding environmental impacts through the complete product life cycle, from design through manufacture, assembly, distribution, purchase, use as a valued product and, finally, as a discarded object in Monday morning’s trash pick-up.

• Technologycanbeextremelyimpactful,onlyifitisappliedtofacilitatesustainabilitybydesign. Ehrenfeld bashes the misguided emphasis on technology as an environmental Band-Aid to solve environmental problems instead of using technology to address the root causes underlying unsustainability.

Ehrenfeld emphasizes that business is becoming more aware of social responsibility, though usually at a superficial level. Corporate social responsibility programs are a step in the right direction, but gener-ally are focused on mitigating unsustainability, such as recycling plastic. Corporations will have the greatest positive, sustainable impacts when they engage in responsible product design. Business must design products within the broader context of a global ecosystem and think through the conse-quences of their actions.

NoticeofAnnualMeetingofHRPSMembershipBe advised the Annual Meeting of HRPS Membership is taking place at the HRPS Global Conference:

Tuesday,April27,20108:00am–8:30amLoews Coronado Bay, Commodore C-ESan Diego, CA

For more information, e-mail [email protected] or call 312.321.6805. To register for the HRPS Global Conference, April 25-28, 2010, visit www.hrps.org.

HRPS MEM

BER

SHIP

April 25 –28, 2010 • Loews Coronado Bay • San Diego, California

3 3 r d A n n u A l H r P S G l o b A l C o n f e r e n C e

oPPortunitieS for leAderSHiPNew Learnings

New

Rea

liti

es

r e G i S t e r t o d A y A t w w w . H r P S . o r G !

The game is changing. businesses worldwide are adapting to new rules and realities. Human resource strategies, policies and practices must adapt as well. Attend the HrPS Global Conference for a viewpoint of these new realities through the eyes of thought leaders and strategists. learn how to optimize success in this “new normal” from information sharing and experiences of your peers. leave re-energized and prepared to implement ideas to immediately to benefit your organization.

HRPS_0811109_ConfAd2010.indd 1 12/22/09 9:40:05 AM

volume 33 issue 1 2010 people &tstrategythe hjou

Documents