Sustainable philosophy, some multilevel analysis modelling and the benefits of an ethical chief executive

Clash of the philosophers

Are you a Malthusian or a Solovian? The Harvard Business Review insists your answer is fundamental to our planet’s future. In sum, Malthusians (as per early 19th century philosopher Thomas Malthus) believe the end is nigh. Put the brakes on, or pollution and population will gobble us all up. Solovians (followers of 20th century economist Robert Solow) put their faith in the power of technological innovation to get us out of the mess we’re in.

The two camps, generally, are at ideological loggerheads. Malthusians see Solovians as delusional and Utopian; natural limits are natural limits, they say. Solovians, in contrast, see Malthusians as dreary and depressive – “modern Luddites”, as the HBR puts it.

Duelling theories breed inaction. Policymakers and companies alike sit on the fence and await some clarity on which side is right. And there’s the rub: what if both worldviews are correct (or at least partially so)? What would the implications for policy and strategy be? On the face of it, they’re heading in different directions.

To promote radical, disruptive technologies in the Solovian style takes stash-piles of risk capital. Take Germany’s solar industry. It grew to become the largest in Europe thanks to the government obliging grid operators to purchase solar at five times the cost of conventional power.

For Malthusians, it’s all about the Rs: reduce, reuse, recycle and, above all, restraint. And restraint is a personal thing, something people can do on the street, at the shops and in their homes. Regulation can help, but economic incentives are better (like those nice folk at M&S who give store vouchers for giving their clothes to Oxfam). Better still is social or moral pressure; a nod to all campaign activists.

In its wisdom, HBR suggests the viewpoints be merged by allowing each to dominate in the appropriate areas. Solovian innovation, for example, is patently a longer-term strategy. Technology takes time to develop. So if HFCs are destroying the ozone layer, don’t hang on for the scientists: step in and ban them. But when the crisis point is not immediate, create the conditions for companies to innovate and to be rewarded for doing so. In conclusion, Solovian innovation needn’t exclude Malthusian restraint. The latter can buy time for the former.

Martin, R and Kemper, A (April 2012), “Saving The Planet: A Tale Of Two Strategies” Harvard Business Review, Vol 90 (4): 48-56.

Complexity theory and sustainability

Sustainability is a fast-growing field. Too fast, some might say. Scholars are recognising that it overlaps, undergirds and crosses complementary and contending areas of business science. Enter complexity theory. The approach ditches Newtonian notions of linearity and reductionist “problem chunking”, ie analysing problems in their individual parts, running the numbers and designing a top-down, “improved” system. Instead, it concentrates on the “multidimensional and non-equilibrium conditions that have traditionally been relegated to a black box of unknowable causes and effects”. Adopting a model of multiple-level analysis, knowledge and ideas are seen as constantly fluid and evolving. Far from being static, manageable objects, systems are thus seen as dynamic, potentially volatile entities.

Using a multilevel model of analysis of which complexity theorists are fond, the authors develop a complexity-based framework for sustainability management that accepts change as continual and unpredictable. They place a strong emphasis on networks and the role of independent “agents” within them. The model supposes that innovation is most likely to occur on the “edge of chaos” where tension and conflict may be at its greatest.

Agreed, it may all sound a bit – well – complex. Fortunately, the authors use extended examples from Toyota, Nike and the wind energy sector to make their framework more conceptually intelligible.

Porter, T and Derry, R (Spring 2012), “Sustainability and Business in a Complex World”, Business and Society Review 117 (1): 33-53.

Ethical leadership

Ethics are, in this pluralistic world of ours, hard to pin down. Ethical leadership is particularly problematic. A chief executive may see a decision as “ethical”, which his investors see as foolhardy or profit-forsaking.

This article (an introductory summary to a Journal of Business Ethics special issue) does a good job of spelling out the current debate. One hot area of discussion, for instance, is the focus on the norms of unethical leadership. Constructs such as abusive supervision, petty tyranny and bullying are all developing sub-literatures of their own. The puzzle is whether these are distinct areas of leadership studies, or whether we’re falling into “construct proliferation” with old ideas being reconstituted as new ones.

The paper brings to light another intriguing discussion between process and outcomes. Contrary to usual patterns, the latter often informs the former. If employee well-being is the desired outcome of ethical leadership, then decision-makers are advised to give employees a voice. Alternatively, if job satisfaction is the final goal, then engendering employee ownership should be the leaders’ mechanism of choice. Authenticity is also identified as critical – studies show that inauthentic behaviour undermines ethical leadership. All is not lost, however. Recent research shows that a key event or relationship in the lives of unethical leaders can switch them to an ethical footing.

Hunter, S (April 2012), “(Un)Ethical Leadership and Identity: what did we learn and where do we go from here?”, Journal of Business Ethics, 107: 79-87.

Campus news

China’s Fudan and Peking Universities are among nine new tertiary educators to join the Dow Sustainability Innovation Student Challenge Award programme.

SC Johnson and Cornell University have jointly launched a membership-based product concept aimed at preventing malaria in the developing world. The three-year, $1m WOW! project will be piloted in Ghana initially. 



Related Reads

comments powered by Disqus