Purpose Inspired: by Wayne Visser

When I think back on all the writing I have done over the years, it strikes me that much of my creativity has been the result of tension. All of these tensions I have felt, and continue to feel at a personal and professional level, are illustrative of the subject of this book. Business Frontiers are the points of tension inherent in current models of business and capitalism which are bringing massive benefits on the one hand, yet still failing the majority of the world’s poor and alienated people. There is a palpable tension between the realities of today and the possibilities of tomorrow. I trust that by sharing these words, you will be inspired to find your own threshold of dynamic tension, and join me in the search for creative solutions. For we can all, in our own way, make a meaningful contribution to the lives of others and the legacy of business in society.

Season 2 of Purpose Inspired is based on the book Business Frontiers: Social Responsibility, Sustainable Development and Economic Justice. Why business frontiers? Well, business operates at the frontiers of society – seeking out new territories to explore and exploit, imagining fresh new ways to meet age old needs, innovating the artefacts that become the legacy of civilisations, reinventing the rituals which shape acceptable social behaviour, and changing the way we spend our precious time. But what happens when the landscape itself changes? As the world globalises, power is shifting – from the plush boardrooms to dusty streets, from the financial market casino to the internet connected community, from the annual general meetings to the mass activist campaigns, from the office towers of the North to the crowded pavements of the South. Business faces its greatest challenge yet. Confronted with the triple imperatives of social responsibility, environmental sustainability and economic justice, business will need to adapt or die.

Having depicted the possible paths that the future can take in two mainline scenarios, we must now consider the options within the control of the principal actors which will increase or reduce the probabilities of either scenario materialising. While we will concentrate on the options facing companies, multi-level shapeshifting makes it essential to bring countries and individuals into the picture. At the business level, we have nominated the three options: (1) Catwalk; (2) Leophancy; and (3) The Charge of the Heavy Brigade. Our choices today will to a large extent shape our future landscape, whether it be Oases in the Desert or Plains of the Serengeti. Nevertheless, it bears repeating that our own choices as company executives and individuals are undeniably influenced by the direction of the choices being made at a political level. But governments can’t do everything. Ordinary people also hold the fragile destiny of our globe in their hands. Individuals do make a difference, little things do count.

Given the rules of the game and key uncertainties just described, we have chosen two contrasting scenarios to illustrate how the future landscape of business and the world could turn out. As mentioned already, the actual outcome will partly depend on the options we choose over the coming decade. The two scenarios are: (1) Oases in the Desert; and (2) Plains of the Serengeti. Remember scenarios are stories of what can happen in the future – they are not forecasts of what is going to happen. Their purpose is to educate rather than prescribe.

In constructing scenarios for the future, key uncertainties are those variables that could go one way or the other; they are the pivotal points on which the future swivels. It is critical that we explore these because often their outcome depends partially on our choices and actions over the short term as well as longer term factors beyond our control. However, it is just as crucial to realise that the future contains ‘unknown unknowns’. These wild cards come out of the blue and can make a huge difference. In other words, beware of placing too much faith in our powers of foresight. The future can always surprise us. With the qualification just expressed in mind, we have identified seven key uncertainties: (1) willingness to share power; (2) the direction of innovation; (3) economic and trade policy developments; (4) political maturity; (5) the rate of environmental decline; (6) social unrest; and (7) lifestyle choices.

The rules of the game are the conditions that we are fairly certain will apply within the foreseeable future. They govern our behaviour and up to a point are beyond our control. Unlike the rules of sport which are conveniently written down in a rulebook somewhere, the rules of business are normally unwritten. At times, they are subject to intense debate – particularly when they change as they are doing at the moment. However, there are certain rules that never change such as the moral rules of the game. Many lion companies either ignore or fail to understand that business is as subject to the moral rules as an individual is. Nor are they sensitive to those changes in the rules which are taking place as a result of alterations in the environment around them. We have identified seven rules of the game that underpin the world that is emerging through the mists of time. These are: (1) Spaceship Earth; (2) the demographic multipliers; (3) pervasive poverty, growing resentment; (4) declining ecosystems; (5) a techno-scientific boom; (6) the networked planet; and (7) a renaissance in values.

In the present era of globalisation, it is sacrilege to criticise unrestricted free trade when in the company of the pride. Somehow, questioning free trade is equated with being anti-democratic, pro-communist and an all-round sour-grapes loser. And yet evidence of the negative impacts of free trade on vulnerable communities, small economies and fragile environments is precisely why sustainability thinkers do question deregulated free trade. The critics of globalisation cite various reasons for their discontent. The prime argument is that such an environment leads companies to seek out investment destinations with the least number of obstacles to profit-making. The end-result is what US ecological economist and author Herman Daly calls ‘standards lowering competition’ and others have called ‘the race to the bottom’. Those wishing to shapeshift global trade towards something more sustainable have led the charge with a counter-movement of fair trade.

It is one of the great ironies of the unsustainable economy that those who most desperately need money are denied it, or made to pay an exorbitant price to get it. Most banks consider the poor as ‘unbankable’ and focus their appetites on ‘high net worth’ individuals. In the sustainable economy, however, equitable access to finance is high on the list of priorities, as is ensuring that the banks invest their money in sustainable activities. An example of financing a healthy society is the growth of the community development banks in the USA. Social banks are the European equivalent of America’s community development banks. Another issue that concerns sustainable finance types is the potentially perverse effects of interest on the most vulnerable sections of the population. While charging interest on loans dates back more than 4,000 years, so do critiques of its negative impacts.

economic growth is no longer (if it ever was) a guarantee for creating jobs. Jobless economic growth is the new reality. Therefore a fundamental re-perception needs to occur about the way that we structure work and welfare - and especially the way we think about money. We have to move our focus from creating employment to creating livelihoods. We have to empower people to put whatever skills and talents they may have to good use. People should not have to spend all their energy and resources on struggling to survive. Nor should they have to wait to be offered a job or to be told that they are economically valuable only when they engage in productive work for someone else in the private or public sector. But how would a more universal model of empowerment be achieved? There are three powerful avenues that merit further explanation: barter networks, parallel currencies and the basic income grant. 

The ‘sustainability investment’ phenomenon can be traced back to the beginnings of the corporate social responsibility movement in the United States in the 1930s. But it only really became visible in the 1970s when church and university groups set up funds, such as the Pax World Fund, to avoid investment in any companies which supported the Vietnam War and the Apartheid regime in South Africa. The trend continued to spread and settled into two basic approaches – shareholder activism and screened investments. And surprising though it may seem, evidence is mounting that many sustainability investments actually outperform the market. According to Russell Sparkes, author of the book, The Ethical Investor, there are good reasons for this unexpectedly superior performance of sustainability funds. But the ‘real returns’ of sustainability funds is in directing money towards the fulfilment of social and environmental goals which usually get under-funded in the marketplace.