Point of View Journal Essays 3 & 4 PDF

Preview

Summary

PoV essays 3 & 4...

Description

Assessment Task 1 20/10/2019

Part B

Business Ethics and Sustainability

Point of View Journals 3 & 4 Session 9: The Business Logic of Organisational Sustainability – Essay 3 There is an endless supply of choice in today’s society as organisations aim to satisfy countless consumer groups and trends. Customer satisfaction is significant to the success of businesses although often at the expense of the environment, which is evident in the growing environmental concerns our Earth faces. However, if all companies were to act entirely sustainable and create all products based on the best interest of the environment, it usually results in a negative impact to business growth. This essay will explore the effect of consumer choice on sustainability and the importance of organisations in acting environmentally friendly particularly to reduce waste.

There has been a slow shift towards the methods of sustain-centric, which is evident through the growing number of companies implementing sustainable initiatives. However, due to the large amount of customer choice in modern society, more needs to be done to better impact the environment. Stubbs and Cocklin (2008) enlighten readers to a traditional neoclassical view of sustainability, as currently the main concern of businesses is economic growth which is achieved through a larger consumer choice. However, neoclassicism is incompatible with sustainability, which is supported by Friedman (1970) who attempted to overthrow organisational sustainability and focus on satisfying shareholders over the environment. Bansal (2002) further support this shareholder-centric view as they suggest sustainability is only achievable through the institutionalisation of sustainable practices, which is difficult with the current hesitation from traditional organisations. Therefore, this view supports the shareholder-centric method, as businesses focus to increase profits and shareholder satisfaction.

Fortunately, a large number of companies are shifting towards sustainable strategies as they realise the importance of preserving the environment. Such companies include Unilever, depicted by their sustainability slogan “small actions can make a big difference” (Unilever Australasia 2017). The CEO of Unilever actively aims to reduce manufacturing and consumption wastage as he is aware of how the industry has a negative impact on the environment. This results in his desire to transform the organisation to be beneficial to both 1

Business Ethics and Sustainability the market and environment. Similarly, Ray Anderson, the founder of the flooring company ‘Interface’ aims to reduce the negative impact manufacturing has on the environment. This is shown through their ‘Mission Zero’ program which aims for the company to completely eliminate any negative impact they have on the environment by 2020 (Interface 2019). These large organisations prove Stubbs and Cocklin’s (2008) notion that it is possible for businesses to financially grow, while maintaining stakeholder happiness with environmental constraints.

In conclusion, it’s easy to direct blame towards large corporations when discussing negative impacts they have on the environment. Although it is still important for organisations to make profit and focus on economic growth, it is imperative for the future of the Earth’s environment that all businesses incorporate sustainability initiatives and become more aware of their impact on the environment.

2

Business Ethics and Sustainability

References Bansal, P. 2002, ‘The corporate challenges of sustainable development’, academy of management executive, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 122-131. Friedman, F. 1970, A Friednzan Doctrine, New York Times, viewed 16 October 2019, . Interface 2019, Our Mission, viewed 17 October 2019,

Stubbs, W. & Cocklin, C. 2008, ‘Conceptualizing a “Sustainability Business Model”’, Organization & Environment, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 103-127. Unilever Australasia 2017, About our Strategy, viewed 17 October 2019, .

3

Business Ethics and Sustainability

Session 10: Strategic Proactivity – Essay 4 Due to the ever-changing business market and trends, organisations need to find alternative ways to remain competitive and adapt to any unexpected changes. In order for organisations to react to market changes, proactive strategies can be implemented to predict future issues and prepare for alternatives to deal with changes in the environment. It is apparent that most consumers are seeking sustainable products from environmentally friendly organisations. As a result, businesses are beginning to measure their carbon footprint to better understand and adapt to this trending consumer preference. This essay will explore the Patagonia case and explore how the brand has achieved success while remaining sustainable.

Patagonia is an organisation clearly known to have implemented proactive strategies in its organisational culture to promote sustainability. As highlighted by MacKinnon (2015), Patagonia employs an “anti-growth” strategy, demonstrating the importance of the environment over business growth. Unlike more organisations in modern society, the Patagonia brand chose to be completely transparent with stakeholders when implementing their strategy “Build the best product, cause no unnecessary harm, use business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis” (Rosenblum 2012). MacKinnon (2015) enlightens readers how Patagonia’s 2012 sales were significantly increased due to the organisations “Don’t buy this jacket” advertising, as customers valued their transparency in educating them how they may be negatively affecting the environment. In contrast to Patagonia, brands such as Zara employ little pro-sustainability strategies, highlighting how consumers are also at fault for environmental issues through their choices (MacKinnon 2015). This transparency demonstrates how businesses are not exclusively accountable for depleting our environment and our society is partially to blame.

On the other hand, sustainability can be seen as a strategy to increase brand reputation and profits, as Patagonia’s success is due to its sustainable business model. Patagonia successfully increased their brand loyalty through their ‘Worn Wear’ tour, which offered consumers complimentary repairing of their products as another strategy to promote their environmentally friendly brand. Patagonia supports the stakeholder-centric model, as their stakeholders are consistently gaining from their aim to become a more environmentally friendly brand, which contrasts to traditional shareholder-centric business models. Patagonia supports Waddock’s (2011) notion that we should treat the environment as a stakeholder in 4

Business Ethics and Sustainability which we need to benefit with our business models. Patagonia proves that organisations are able to be successful and profitable, while making sustainable efforts as their proenvironment strategies are beneficial to the business’s value.

In conclusion, sustainability is significant in the preservation of our environment and organisations need to strategically make an effort to support sustainability. Stubbs and Cocklin (2008) reinforce how Patagonia have successfully been able to create a business model which is sustainable and successful, whereby the neoclassical business is transformed by sustainability. Evidently, fulfilling the notion that our environment is a stakeholder that need to be satisfied, sustainable organisations lead to a higher perceived value.

5

Business Ethics and Sustainability

References MacKinnon, J. 2015, Patagonia’s Anti-Growth Strategy, The New Yorker, viewed 15 October 2019, . Stubbs, W. & Cocklin, C. 2008, ‘Conceptualizing a “Sustainability Business Model”’, Organization & Environment, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 103-127. Waddock, S. 2011, ‘We are all stakeholders of Gaia: A normative perspective on stakeholder thinking’, Organization & Environment, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 192-212.

6...