Last week’s post called attention to what appeared to be a cognitive disconnect between a well respected environmental journalist, Jo Confino and ExxonMobile’s top energy forecasting expert Todd Onderdonk. In spanish, a conversation between people who do not understand one another is referred to as a dialog of “besugos” which is a fish called Sea Bream in english. If we are to make progress on a number of issues, I think that we need to start bringing these worlds a bit closer together.
Part of the problem is the way sustainability has been put forward to the business community and the enormous differences that exist between the way the men and women who run most business see the the world and the way activists, journalists, and legislators see it.
Specifically, I feel there are six essential differences that exist between the world view of these different groups.
In the first place, there is disagreement about the nature of business in society. For most people in business, the starting point, is the belief that business is a force for good in the world and that our modern society has been created by entrepreneurs and companies which built it. On the other side, there is a view that business is a negative force and that its relentless drive for profits is done at the cost of the environment or the people who work in its mines, factories, distribution networks, and stores. While business leaders might find this post-industrialist view as fundamentally naive, it is, in any case the starting point for many environmentalists.
Secondly, the logic of business leads managers to think in the relatively short term and typically look at a maximum of 3, 5 or perhaps 10 years into the future. This is due to the importance of the time value of money (as discussed in a post last June) , the strategic planning cycle and even the career paths of most managers. In contrast interest groups and government regulators, who are concerned about the environment, think in blocks of 20, 50 or even 100 years which is simply well beyond the scope, planning cycle, or even the imagination of many people in business.
Third, a tremendous amount of the time and energy of Sr. Management and Board Members is spent on looking at financial issues and unintended environmental problems can occur below the radar or even as a unforeseen result of cost saving measures. This focus on the financial aspects of operations are in contrast to much of the rhetoric of special interests and NGOs who are passionate about protecting different aspects of the environment.
Fourth, business is about dealing with a certain degree of risk and when accidents happen, business leaders tend to lament their statistical misfortune while activists and some politicians simply reject the idea of probabilistic risk and immediately look to malfeasance or criminal neglect as the root cause.
Fifth, at the limit, business leaders look to governments to establish the rules of the game and are often surprised when the public or activists go beyond the legislation and demand that they comply with some higher law. The idea, for example, that a firm is liable for actions done many years ago which were legal at the time, is considered very unfair by business people who want the rules to be clear.
Finally, business leaders often have a very hard time understanding people who question their very reason for existence of the company which they work for, manage or serve. This is especially true for entrepreneurs who may feel their purpose in life is deeply tied to the firm they built and thus any rejection of the firm is a rejection of themselves.
Taken together, these basic differences explain why so much of the history of business and the environment as discussed above is one of surprise, crisis and catch up. If we want business leaders to do more for the environment, and I believe they are our only chance, then those who are interested in the subject should at least learn to understand their point of view.
Hello Mike,
Thank you for this post. I reposted this blog post on my Facebook page and this is a thoughtful comment on about it tfrom Jacquie Sue Morris. Jacquie is an insightful social and political activist and commentator, who is well versed in current issues, and she is not part of the corporate world, except as a translator for Univiersity texts and as a consumer. I think it is interesting how she responds to the points you made
Jacquie Sue Morris: Thanks for this post, Shawn, and thanks for the article, Mike. I am really interested in dialogue with people who have different points of view from my own. ‘Preaching to the choir’, although it might be interesting, seems like a waste of time in my opinion. So in the interest of dialogue and hopefully moving ahead (whatever that might mean) a few steps, I’ve taken the opportunity to respond to some of the specific points in the article. Wish we could have an in person conversation sometime, Mike, Shawn, and others, but meanwhile FB is the next best thing to that. So what I have done is put in quotes some of the specific points in the article and then my take on that. Point 1: “For most people in business, the starting point is the belief that business is a force for good in the world and that our modern society has been created by entrepreneurs and companies which built it. On the other side, there is a view that business is a negative force”. As a starting point, we all do need to get over the binary, good-evil, mentality. That said, when you look at places like Bhopal in India and the impunity of corporations like Union Carbide, it can be hard to resist that urge. But I will grant that as a starting point we really need to work hard on that. We can see in many places how reconciliation has been the essential starting point for healing and that requires a willingness to really listen to the other, hard as it may be. Point 2: “In contrast, interest groups and government regulators, who are concerned about the environment, think in blocks of 20, 50 or even 100 years which is simply well beyond the scope, planning cycle, or even the imagination of many people in business.” To me, this makes it sound as though people in business are very limited; in other words, people in business are not only people in business. They are also mothers and fathers, children, grandparents, friends. They have other things that motivate them beyond business. Unfortunately it seems, though, that in their role as business people, they are somehow able to, willing to, or forced to separate themselves from their desires as mother and fathers, for example, who I think would want more than anything else to assure that there will be a world that is habitable for their children, grandchildren and all of the next generations.
Point 3: “Third, a tremendous amount of the time and energy of Sr. Management and Board Members is spent on looking at financial issues, and unintended environmental problems can occur below the radar or even as a unforeseen result of cost saving measures.” To me, again as in my previous comment, this asks us to imagine that Sr. Management and Board Members – the decision makers – are not capable of looking at multiple factors at the same time, which would include beyond the numbers – the financial issues – those environmental costs as well. Especially nowadays when the press and conversation is full of them, they are as aware of these costs as anyone else; in other words, is it possible anymore for this to be under the radar?
Point 4: “business is about dealing with a certain degree of risk, and when accidents happen, business leaders tend to lament their statistical misfortune” The issue here for me is WHOSE risk. Of course, every investment involves risk, but that is understood to be a risk for the investor, and not a risk for some innocent victims of his or her investment. In other words, if the Koch brothers’ Georgia Pacific plant in Alabama is dumping chemicals into the river and this is causing alarming increases in cancer, that is a risk those innocent people should not be subjected to ( See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…/arkansas-koch… ). So this involves a conversation about risks and what kinds of risks are acceptable or not; this would be a part of the corporate social responsibility agenda, wouldn’t it?
Point 5: “Fifth, at the limit, business leaders look to governments to establish the rules of the game…’ The problem with this is called Citizens United. Unfortunately, government is not an independent, entity representing all the people. We all know about the enormous influence of lobbies on legislation and the law. We only have to follow the agenda of groups like the corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange Council, ALEC, to see the enormous power of corporate lobbies. So we cannot assume that there are going to be rules of the game that are really protecting the environment and our health. Look at recent issues like labelling of GMOs, for example.
Point 6: “Finally, business leaders often have a very hard time understanding people who question their very reason for existence of the company which they work for, manage or serve.” I get that. I think we all have a hard time when our basic ideas, identities – who we think we are – are challenged. But that said, it seems to me our hope as humans, to be able to survive, to maybe even be able to create a better world, is to fearlessly question ourselves. And this is also a point where I think we can help each other, where maybe we can actually have a dialogue together to try and make progress on this issue and others. Can we not try to open ourselves up to this honest questioning from a place of respect? Can we not, through this kind of respectful questioning and conversation, try to find our overlapping ground? For sure, this kind of questioning is painful but it will be worth the pain, if it takes us toward survival and in the best of cases a more just, loving, harmonious and sustainable world.
Cancer In Crossett: Koch-Owned Georgia-Pacific Plant Linked To High Cancer…
HUFFINGTONPOST.COM
Jaquie, Shawn, Thanks very much for this post which articulates so clearly the view of business by many people who are concerned about the environment!