Sustainability is Not a Social Problem…It is a Math Problem

Much of our belief system is built on faulty math.  That bad math is not sustainable.

We have come to believe that more = better.  Well your average second grade student can see that this cannot possibly be true.  It is like saying that 2 = 4 or cat = dog.  More does not equal better, it is just simply more.  Better is better, and that is the “new” reality that we must come to grips with if we are to become a sustainable civilization. Let me give you some examples of how this mindset has affected our culture. 

Food: In the late 60’s the USDA decided that the quantity of food that we produce needed to be increased.  We set in motion policies that rewarded the massive production of food (mostly corn) so that it could be cheap and widely available.  The result of these policies is food that is making us fat, sick and extremely unhealthy.  More food is not better; better food is better.

Healthcare: In the US, we provide massive amounts of healthcare; as a matter of fact we spend more per capita than any other country on Earth.  Yet, we consistently rank somewhere around 40th in health outcomes.  I can tell you from personal experience as a frequent flyer in the healthcare system that more is certainly not better when it comes to medicine; better healthcare is better.

Transportation: In most US cities, and now in developing countries, more cars represent a sign of wealth and success.  More cars, more streets, more gas stations, and bigger vehicles (SUV’s) has been our mantra for decades.  In a world of limited natural resources (i.e. peak oil), more is not better, better transportation is better.  In cities where public transportation is readily available, the average savings per household is $10,000 annually. 

Guns: Given the recent tragic events of mass shootings, I have to address this misconception.  More guns are not better.  In a typical year, somewhere around 30,000 citizens in the US are killed by gun violence. That is the equivalent of a Boeing 747 crashing every week. Can you imagine the absolute crisis if a 747 was falling from the skies every week?  I don’t know the answer to our gun culture problems, but I do know one thing – more guns in the hands of more people is not better for our society.

Homes: According to the National Association of Homebuilders, the average home size in the US was 2700 square feet in 2009, up from 1400 square feet in 1970.  That is 93% more home with 93% more stuff to fit into it.  I am fairly certain that we are not 93% happier than people in 1970.  More homes and more stuff is not better, it is just more.

There is no shortage of examples of this bad math in our culture.  Sustainable homes, families, communities, countries, societies, economies, and environments rely on good math where more = more and better = better.  Let’s hope that 2013 brings us to better.

Check out this new, Tacoma startup that is working to link the intentions of business with the efforts of nonprofits and the power of consumers.  GIVINGtrax™ uses the power of technology to enable companies to begin measuring the impact of community engagement in a tangible way. 

I have heard from many business owners, especially small businesses, that they are committed to supporting worthy community organizations, but they really don’t have a sense of how their contributions are making a difference for their communities or their bottom line. This new tool offers firms of all sizes the opportunity to leverage technology to begin making the link between the two.

There used to be an argument that the social responsibility of business is to maximize value (profits) for owners. There are two problems with this argument: 1) it assumes an either/or position that is patently false and, 2) it takes a short-term approach to value.

The new paradigm for business is that the two are critically linked.  A firm's social responsibility has a dramatic effect on its reputation and reputation is the single most important driver of long-term value.  Successful business leaders of tomorrow will not measure success by the next quarterly report.  They will use a new kind of measurement that accounts for the value of very tangible, but difficult to measure, factors like reputation.

GIVINGtrax™  is going to be a useful tool for calculating that value.

This time of year we hear many businesses talking about “giving back to the community”.  While I totally admire the sentiment and the intention, I wish we could change that language.  In order to give something back, you must have first taken it.  The implication when we speak of businesses giving back to the community is that they have taken something of value from the community.  The exact opposite is true.

Business (done legally, ethically and well) creates value for a community.  For trade to occur, the buyer and the seller must be better off after the transaction, and if both are better off, value has been created.  Multiply this by the billions of trades that occur every day you can see that commerce creates tremendous value in our communities.

Why then do we say that a business must “give back”?  I think some of the reason is the colloquial use of the term, but I think some lies deeper in society’s belief that business somehow takes from the greater good and needs to contribute back.  This belief is supported by the actions of the few bad actors who push the boundaries of business ethics, have blatant disregard for the law and do all that they can to privatize profits while pushing the costs of business onto society.  

So what does this mean for the “good business”?  Opportunity! 

The opportunity to contribute to your community in a way that aligns with your values, your business model and your strategies will leverage the value of “good business” to build your brand and your reputation as an honorable place to do business.  The market will reward you because you will differentiate your brand from the stereotypes and biases about “greedy” business people who will do anything to make a dollar.

I fully believe that corporate philanthropy is a good thing; I just don’t think that it is giving back.  I also don’t think it is enough.  Writing a check to a few good causes and “spraying money all over” may make you feel good, but it certainly isn’t how you would approach any other business problem.  In any other realm you would be strategic about your investments; you would make sure they align with your strategic initiatives, that they are providing ample return and that they are well managed. 

The Committee Encouraging Corporate Philanthropy (CECP) www.corporatephilanthropy.org, which was founded by Paul Newman in 1998, reports on corporate giving each year and in their recent report on 2011 giving, there were four major trends: 1) corporations are giving more, 2) non-cash giving is more volatile than cash giving, 3) there were fewer grants, for more dollars, and 4) corporations expected to give the same amounts in 2012. 

The Center for Leadership & Social Responsibility research has demonstrated that the larger a company, the more strategic they are with their giving.  It is time for the economic engine of our local communities (small- and medium-sized businesses) to start incorporating some of that strategic thinking into their philanthropy and in all the ways that they are engaged with their communities.

Stop “giving back” and start engaging the community with purpose.  We’ll all be better off.