Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Leadership and The Corporate Sustainability Challenge
Leadership and The Corporate Sustainability Challenge
Leadership and The Corporate Sustainability Challenge
MINDinsets
action
Contents >> Executive Summary 2
Introduction 8
1 | Gearing Up 12
2 | Foundations for Success 20
3 | Bridging the Gap 30
4 | Accelerating the Up-Shifts 40
Closing 46
References and End Notes 48
The Authors BACK COVER
<<
Business must become agents of
transformation. We have the resources. We have
the talents. And let’s be clear here, we have the self-interest.
Business has stepped up with both promises and programs.
But if we add up all the great progress to date, it’s only a
mildly encouraging start. It’s time to scale up. It’s time to
leverage our efforts through concerted, coordinated,
>>
cooperative global action.
E. NEVILLE ISDELL
Chairman and CEO, The Coca-Cola Company, remarks at the Global Compact Leaders Summit, July 2007
The ACSS draws on investigations with ten Leadership and the Corporate Sustainability
prominent corporations, each with substantial Challenge synthesizes the information from
sustainability experience and varying degrees the ACSS and related learning to discern what
of achievement. In presenting findings, the is required for organizations to activate and
ACSS also considers current leadership and power up the gears of sustainability. It charts
sustainability theories, practices, and real- progress of the ten companies across the five
world viability. gears, identifies the foundational patterns that
underlie success, and brings to light the central
The companies participating in the ACSS are challenge dynamic that must be addressed.
global in scale, representing a diverse set of The paper also explores the untapped realm of
industry groups, including transportation, leader mindsets, including the nature of their
metals and mining, high technology, foods, development and the correlation between
pharmaceuticals, industrial and consumer leader mindsets and realization of complex
products, textiles, and chemicals. Study data sustainability goals.
were delineated using a comparative frame-
work that incorporates five stages (or “Gears”)
of sustainability, with a top gear, or 5th Gear,
extending further than other models.1 The 5th
Gear activity required—and the current chasm
in organizations’ attention to 5th Gear—is a
significant finding that we believe is important
to the future of sustainability.
complex activity. Results show that all companies are Although these success factors are important, they yield
operating in the low to mid-level stages of activity (Gears only so much perspective by themselves. Through the
1.0 COMPLY, 2.0 VOLUNTEER, AND 3.0 PARTNER); all are application of an additional analytical framework—the
in the process of up-shifting to higher gears of sustain- AQAL Integral Model developed by Ken Wilber—a newly
ability, with none having fully reached the 4.0 INTE- contoured foundation for success begins to emerge,
GRATE Gear (embedding sustainability in the business). one that has not garnered significant attention in the
In addition, most do not recognize or view as “business- sustainability field.3
relevant” the highest 5.0 REDESIGN Gear, which focuses
Analysis shows that a multi-dimensional or comprehen-
on large-scale systems shifts and recasting of market and
sive approach to sustainability gear up-shifts is need-
institutional frameworks critical for addressing the over-
ed—although the dominant emphases in sustainability
shoot of planetary limits.
writing, conferences, and media reports tend to be
Progress is being made—yet there remains a much less thorough. In the study, the composite of com-
significant gap. panies’ success factors demonstrates that focus on inte-
riors (subjective factors) and exteriors (objective factors)
The up-shift process from the lowest to the highest gear
at both individual and collective/organizational levels is
dramatically expands in scale and scope. This move-
required for success. Culture, systems, experience, and
ment calls for an expanded view regarding boundaries
behavior all need suitable attention.
of consideration and the systems (and meta-systems)
that are being impacted. Upward movement through Two important patterns emerge: (1) interiors and exteri-
the gears represents a progression from sustainable ors are equally important to the organization’s up-shift
activities that reduce costs and save money (Gears 1.0 success, and (2) systems are necessary but not sufficient
and 2.0), to endeavors that generate opportunities and by themselves. A significant overall finding is the impor-
make money (Gears 3.0 and 4.0), to those that transform tance of interiors (which include mindsets and collective
the systems through which money flows (Gear 5.0) worldviews), as will become evident below.
This dynamic lies under the radar of both study compa- Through better understanding of mindsets, two impor-
nies and the field at large. While some authors mention tant attentions of leadership are clarified: “translation”
mindsets in the context of sustainability, most appear and “transformation.” Translation involves framing
to not fully understand their nature and development. sustainability in terms that others understand where
This misunderstanding constrains up-shift progress and they are now (from their mindsets), in concert with
limits potential. enhancing their capabilities for effective action.
>
Transformation refers to the potential for leaders to
Mindsets offer up-shift their own perspectives and capacities through
vertical development.
untapped potential
We build upon study findings and supplement them
with affiliated research that broadens and deepens
understanding about mindsets and their direct impact
on the sustainability success equation.
> Fresh ground—recognizing
the relationship between gears
of sustainability and leader
mindset development
The term mindsets refers to interior patterns of mind, or
frames of reference, from which individuals see sustain- The culmination of this report is the introduction of a
ability and its importance. Two aspects driving mindset new concept that we hope will add new energy to the
growth and expansion are “horizontal development” and sustainability conversation. This idea draws on affiliated
“vertical development.”4 While horizontal development research and points out the direct relationship between
refers to expansion in capacities through increases in leader mindset development and the realization of
complex sustainability outcomes.
This relationship suggests that, without the engagement Gear as business-relevant. However, we believe that
of later-stage leader mindsets, organizations face sub- these findings—the inherent potential and opportunity
stantial difficulty in attaining 4.0 INTEGRATE Gear. for leveraging expanded leader mindsets—offer reason
Without high-capacity leaders, the up-shift process to 5.0 for optimism.
REDESIGN Gear—which requires positive, full, and wide-
At its heart, movement through the gears of sustain-
spread momentum—will likely not progress at the speed
ability is not about realizing a particular gear and
required, or happen at all.
completing a process. In fact, the sustainability process
The implications of this perspective are twofold: (1) to is continuous, a journey ongoing, and the expansion
actualize the highest gears, leaders with later-stage potential for individual mindsets and organizations is
capacities need to be accessed and engaged; and (2) con- vast. This is cause for celebration, not trepidation.
sideration must be given to reshaping leader education
As we express in this report, we believe that as human
and development efforts to activate vertical develop-
beings, organizationally and individually, we are at a
ment and expanded capacity.
juncture that offers tremendous opportunity despite
Accelerating Up-Shift Efforts the complexity and challenges we face. Yet new mani-
festations of leadership are required. The fundamental
The ACSS outlines steps to accelerate up-shift efforts at nature of who we are as human beings offers opportu-
any gear and bridge the gap to Gears 4.0 and 5.0. nity for expanding our realities, our identities, and
Accelerating efforts at any gear incorporates findings our worldviews. The necessary ingredient for powering
and frameworks referenced in the study. Steps include positive change can be found in the leaders of global
the following: current reality assessment—using Gearing organizations and their willingness to expand and
Up framework, all-quadrant analysis, and leader mind- embrace new realities.Truly envisioning these realities
sets/worldviews determination; aligning strategy and requires a deeply conscious perspective and a new
competitive advantage with “shared value” orientation vision for living and leading. The ACSS makes a clear
and Gear 5.0 demands; utilizing best-fit change connection between organizations with activity at high-
methodology to mobilize mindsets; and deploying a er gears of sustainability and the advanced later-stage
critical mass of energy through individual and connect- capacities of their leaders. For organizations to achieve
ed leadership—Leading Integral Sustainability. and sustain high-gear up-shifts, interior mindsets of
Although up-shift movement through each gear requires their leaders must match the complexities of a new
conscious effort and care, the ACSS offers an outlook reality. New, large-scale redesigns are needed, and clear
on bridging the gap to Gears 4.0 and 5.0. It is clear that and expanding perspectives must inform them.
the mindset portion of the activity-mindset dynamic Is this a challenge? Certainly. But it is a challenge to be
is important in bridging the gap to higher gears of met with grace and joy. The very nature of progress
sustainability. through the gears of sustainability brings transformative
power. The journey offers a return on investment previ-
Reason for Optimism ously immeasurable at the human and organizational
At first glance, the findings of the ACSS may seem like level. The future holds infinite possibilities and the rare
cause for concern, not optimism. After all, none of the opportunity to leverage new capacities in leadership to
participating organizations have achieved a center of transform not just the organization but also our vision
gravity at the 4.0 Gear, and most do not identify 5.0 for humanity and the way we live.
These are the questions of industrial and information ages.6 While some experts,
like strategist Michael Porter, state that the varied
corporate sustainability.
approaches to sustainability taken by corporations are
As many suggest, there are more questions than answers piecemeal and disconnected from business strategy,
when it comes to sustainability, as it is complex both in others believe we already may be reaching the limits of
theory and practice. In fact, questions abound regarding what CSR can deliver.7
precisely what corporate sustainability is, what it isn’t,
This complexity can be daunting—yet with that com-
and what organizations should be doing about it. For
plexity comes challenge and, most importantly, oppor-
many of these questions, we have yet to find full or suf-
tunity. Within the complex nature of sustainability we
ficient answers.
have the opportunity to usher in a newly crafted world,
In the meantime, definitions of the very term “sustain- one for which there is no precedent.
ability” fluctuate between the poles of Milton Friedman,
To envision this new world is to see the possibility of
who said, “the business of business is business,” to cor-
new economy, new governance, and even new philoso-
porate social responsibility (CSR) mantras, which add
phy. It is to hold the possibility that the new world is not
social responsibility to the mix of organizational
a variation on how things are now—but an essentially
“musts,” to Andrew Zolli’s term “eco-innovation revolu-
new paradigm for living.8
tion” coined to describe the current era as we exit the
We are unlikely to meet the future effectively with exist- The data collection phase of ACSS was conducted confi-
ing perspectives and mindsets. To usher in this new dentially in 2006, with companies in manufacturing and
reality, new frameworks and capacities are required— transportation sectors who represent a diverse set of
ones that catalyze breakthrough thinking and solutions, industry groups: metals and mining, high technology,
assist in communicating this new reality to people in foods, pharmaceuticals, industrial and consumer prod-
ways that they understand, and expand the very mean- ucts, textiles, and chemicals. The companies had a mix
ing of sustainability. As Albert Einstein said, “No prob- of organizational histories, with legacies ranging from
lem can be solved from the same level of consciousness 25 to more than 200 years. All had a clear orientation
that created it.” In essence, a shift in consciousness is toward sustainability. Six of the ten companies were
needed to effect substantial change. Embracing the listed on the Dow Jones Sustainability Index World and
complexity of sustainability calls for understanding it Global 100 Most Sustainable Corporations. The size of
at a new level of consciousness. the participating companies varied from $1 billion to
well over $100 billion, based on 2005 annual revenues.
And that is what we are here to explore. This report
offers several frameworks for examining corporate Research was conducted via direct one-on-one inter-
sustainability and discerning what is being done sus- views with company officers, vice presidents, or direc-
tainability-wise by some of the best-known companies tors of sustainability/corporate responsibility from each
worldwide, and what can be learned from them. It also company. An independent research firm established the
contextualizes their progress by connecting it to the big- overall study methodology and developed the database.
ger picture of planetary limits and ecological overshoot. Principals from Avastone Consulting conducted and
transcribed interviews, performed data analysis and
Specifically, this report highlights results of an initial
synthesis, developed findings, and prepared this report.
qualitative study, the Avastone Corporate Sustainability
Study (ACSS), which researches corporate sustainability With respect to language, we use the term “sustainabili-
among ten global companies, some of whom are ty” to refer to business or corporate sustainability and
recognized as sustainability icons. The ACSS categorizes corporate responsibility. We define it more broadly than
the overall nature of progress, identifies what drives some, offering the term as a simple catchall for other
success, reviews challenges being faced, and points to terms such as corporate citizenship, sustainable devel-
new capacities needed to accelerate headway. Through opment, corporate social responsibility and its acronym
data and analysis, we present a set of core findings CSR, and ESG (environmental, social, governance).
and reflections about what rests at the heart of sustain-
ability progress and what will be required to realize
substantial shifts forward.
A goal of ACSS was to establish a baseline for “what is really going on” with
corporate sustainability today. In interviewing executives from the participating
companies, we sought to understand the current state of progress being made,
what further work is targeted, and how progress compares with what experts
and stakeholders in the field view as essential.
Key players: Sustainability is driven by public relations Key players: Sustainability experts emerge with top
and legal departments, often in a defensive or reactive management participation at major events. Stakeholder
manner. Stakeholder engagement is conducted mainly engagement is two-way with involvement from a range
through philanthropy. Government relations are based of nontraditional participants. Closer relationships with
on compliance. government emerge through public-private partnerships.
PROFILE OF COMPANIES
5.0
Redesign
Redesign
Systemic
Systems changes
change inin
financial systems,
markets,
markets and
and
business models
Increasing Scale/Complexity
4.0 Integrate
Increasingly strategic,
embedded in business
processes, integrated
responses across
value chain Partner
3.0 Partner
Proactive risk
Proactive risk
management,
management,
co-evolution
co-evolution
of
of solutions,
solutions,
reputation building
reputation-building
2.0 Volunteer
Impact reduction
and eco-efficiency
Comply
1.0 Comply
No business
No business case
case
perceived
perceived beyond
beyond
compliance and
compliance and
philanthropy
philanthropy
A B C D E F G H I J
Increasing Size
Illustrations of COMPANY G
On the way from 3.0 PARTNER to 4.0 INTEGRATE
Companies on the Gears
The Vice President, Corporate Responsibility for a
The following quotations provide examples of three
pharmaceutical manufacturer noted: “Our leaders
companies’ gear activity. While representative in nature,
understand the contribution it makes to the company
they show differences in view taken and scope of
in terms of enhancing reputation and managing risks to
activity involved.
reputation. You can’t just do corporate responsibility.
COMPANY B What you have to do is build responsibility into every
Most of the way from 1.0 COMPLY to aspect of the way you do business, so it’s built in, not
2.0 VOLUNTEER bolted on. It can range from how we license our vac-
cines if we have pandemic flu, to the use of nanotech-
The Director of Corporate Responsibility from a foods
nology, to driver safety in the field forces.”
manufacturer said: “I am trying to activate a group of
volunteers. The senior team is intrigued by sustainabili-
ty and has given me time and space to try this stuff. I Broad Findings and Trends at Play
have won their support, but I don’t have a budget. I’m
Several relevant findings are revealed through examina-
spending a lot of my time justifying what I wish I could
tion of the comparative gear profiles and related study
dictate—let’s do it. I’m going to operations and market-
data. These findings point to encouraging trends—and
ing and saying, ‘What do you think?’ I have to rob Peter
a substantial gap. A summary of top-level findings and
to pay Paul. They are very generous with dollars in the
trends follows:
community and have done some great things.”
A push to the 5.0 REDESIGN Gear is seen as a need public governance, demand both systemic change
by some but not by most—a real and significant and sustained engagement by business. In what could
gap exists. be a profound mindset shift, many CEOs recognize
the underlying tension between business models
The majority (60%) of the companies studied does not
wedded to increasing patterns of consumption, and
recognize or view as “business-relevant” the activities
the reality of limited natural resources.”13
associated with the 5.0 REDESIGN Gear. Those that do
have Gear 5.0 aspirations have varying degrees of atten- Remarks by E. Neville Isdell, Chairman and CEO, The
tion and activity underway, with the most emphasis on Coca-Cola Company, at the Global Compact Leaders
the micro (business model) level and some focus on the Summit, July 2007: “Business must become agents of
macro level. transformation. We have the resources. We have the
talents. And let’s be clear here, we have the self-inter-
This finding points to the distinctive reach of the 5.0
est. Business has stepped up with both promises and
Gear in the Gearing Up framework in contrast to other
programs. But if we add up all the great progress to
developmental models. Gear 5.0 assumes that, to
date, it’s only a mildly encouraging start. It’s time to
address the root causes of non-sustainability in society,
scale up. It’s time to leverage our efforts through
business must be a core player and contributor to
concerted, coordinated, cooperative global action.”14
envisioning and realizing large-scale systems change.
If the 5.0 Gear assumption is correct, we see that progress From the World Wildlife Fund/SustainAbility report
is still not at the scope and scale needed to match the One Planet Business, 2007: “The defining challenge
sustainability challenges that global society faces. The of the 21st century will be to transform the system
gap is real—and the 5.0 REDESIGN Gear offers context for governing markets so that they work for, rather than
the degree and type of vision and movement still needed. against, sustainability.”15
But is this assumption valid? The Global Compact Challenge reflects, “While corpo-
rate responsibility initiatives have potential to bring
Does business have a role beyond that of the 4.0 INTE- about positive change, this will only be realized if
GRATE Gear—beyond creating business value in concert such initiatives focus on achieving critical mass across
with societal value? Views from prominent CEOs, all industry sectors, and are connected to wider
sustainability experts, and stakeholders suggest that public policy efforts that address the root cause of
business does indeed have such a responsibility, as the problems.”16
highlighted by these representative comments:
Movement to higher gears calls for Gears are clearly evident and the
fundamental (and radical) change. framework shows itself as a valuable tool.
The up-shift process from the lowest to the highest gear Application of the Gearing Up framework does appear
dramatically expands in scale and scope. This move- to bring coherence to a complex (and often messy) array
ment calls for an expanded view regarding boundaries of sustainability issues and activities. It demonstrates
of consideration and includes the systems (and meta- usefulness as a means to delineating levels of activity
systems) being impacted. At lower gears, “low hanging while accommodating different views of sustainability,
fruit” is more available through clear targeting, while varying actions, and degrees of progress. It serves as a
at upper gears complexity of integration becomes ever practical reference point for considering and assessing
more challenging. This movement calls for a transition where an organization is now, where it is heading on
from traditional methods of goal setting and measure- the path of sustainability, and how it connects to the
ment (common at lower gears) to an emphasis on inno- big picture of planetary limits.
vation, adaptability, and resilience (characteristic of
upper gears).
In the next section, we build upon the
This substantial shift reflects the tension inherent in
developing a vision for the future while continuing to broad Gearing Up context established
deliver daily results. Each company in the study is living and define the foundational patterns
this dynamic and experiencing the change called for
across the organization. These shifts seem radical to
that contribute to positive up-shift
some, especially in contrast with traditional norms of progress.
doing business.
Section 2 provides a look at these learning fields and describes the foundations
for positive up-shift progress. Presented are factors for success in top theme
areas, an integrated pattern of successful movements, and challenges to
progress—including the central challenge dynamic.
Figure 2.1 lists these themes as the top five contributors The Top Contributors to Success are evidenced in
to success: the stories told by study participants. For example,
with respect to Shared Values, Ethics, and Guiding
Principles, the Director at a health care products manu-
Top Contributors to Success facturer said: “We’ve had tenets that have guided the
corporation in every element that makes up corporate
Shared Values, Ethics, and Guiding Principles responsibility for more than 60 years. Everyone works
Aspects of the company’s culture, collective world- under the umbrella of the tenets. We refer to making
view, and language that support sustainability tenet-based decisions every day.”
efforts. Reflects the internal DNA of the company— Regarding Leadership, the Director of Sustainability at a
including historical roots in key areas—efficiency, prominent metals company noted: “We were very lucky
safety, care for workers, etc. with our former CEO because he saw the value of this,
particularly health and safety. So we had some very
Leadership strong leadership to get all of this started. And, we had
Key people, who define sustainability, set direction, champions in the early days. That was an early driver—
champion efforts, and hold the organization people that pushed it when it wasn’t sexy to do it. They
accountable for results. did the basic research, put themselves on the line, and
said, ‘This is different, but it is what we need to do.’”
Goals, Metrics, and Reporting Concerning Goals, Metrics, and Reporting, the Chief
Communication of overall direction through goals Sustainability Officer at a chemicals and materials
and targets, along with means to measure, track, manufacturer said: “We established sustainable growth
and report on progress realized. as a corporate goal and core vision for the company. We
have quite a system of safety and performance metrics
Engagement and measurement. This has been very effective inside
Involving people—whether internal or external—in the company in focusing people’s attention on achieving
these goals. I don’t know of other companies that have
a process of listening, understanding, and building
set goals as ambitious and met them.”
buy-in on direction, plans, and activities.
Relative to Engagement, the Director at a health care
Structure products manufacturer said: “When we developed the
Creating organizational forms, positions, placement new set of environmental goals, we spent two years on
of right people in right places, and support for the stakeholder engagement. We first collaborated with
decision-making and action. external partners of all kinds, then developed, drafted,
vetted, took feedback, and redrafted. Next we went
internal to all of our operating companies to sell it to
FIGURE 2.1: Top Contributors to Success. peers and environmental professionals around the com-
pany. We then had to sell it at the executive level, so
they say, ‘Yes, these things are worth people’s time to
spend money on as they support our commitment to
protect the environment.’”
On the importance of leadership: “It is the first ingre- Using a Broad Integrated Frame
dient.” “Eminently, completely important.” “Absolutely As with the Gearing Up model, the frame utilized for
vital.” “Nothing gets done without leadership.” analysis helps shape what is revealed when investigat-
“Essential.” ing the nature of what is really going on. In this case,
On the function of leadership: “To set vision and a Wilber’s AQAL Integral Model offers an elegant framing
compelling platform.” “Guide the organization.” “Create perspective, one that provides a practical and compre-
passion.” “Build commitment/buy-in.” “Empower and hensive map for analysis when applied to complex
support.” “Make resources available.” “Make it real.” issues. For those not familiar with the framework,
“Help people make tough decisions and choices.” Wilber put together the Integral Model to offer a more
complete representation of the multiple aspects of real-
When asked “to whom leadership refers”: “CEO.” ity found in all situations and events. The AQAL Integral
“Executives.” “Senior management.” “Champions in the framework (comprised of 5 aspects: quadrants, levels,
business.” “Leaders throughout the company.” lines, states, and types), which evolved over the course
As practitioners in leadership development, we of 30+ years of trans-disciplinary and cross-cultural
observed that most participants equated leadership scholarship, is documented in two dozen books and
with position, referring to it primarily as a noun rather more than 100 articles, and is translated into more
than considering it more generally. Most did not speak than 24 languages.
in terms of the verb “to lead” applied daily through the
work of leadership. This distinction reinforces the
importance of structure within organizations, and of
leveraging influence through role clarity.
The quadrants aspect of the AQAL framework provides In our analysis, we examined each success factor
four universal lenses or perspectives that, when taken described by every company and identified which quad-
together, afford a comprehensive way to examine any rant it focused on. We asked the following questions in
situation or issue—including corporate sustainability.18 examining success factors:
The four lenses describe the exteriors and interiors of
• Is the factor describing an interior or exterior
individuals and collectives (i.e., groups, organizations,
dimension?
societies). Exteriors refer to objective dimensions of real-
ity, while interiors refer to the subjective dimensions. • Is it describing an individual or group dimension?
Each quadrant is represented by the graphical summary
in Figure 2.2 and illustrated by study data that follow. • Is it most accurately described by systems, behavior,
The quadrants are scalable in application; this analysis culture, or experience?
is at the organization level. To illustrate this process, the following summary pres-
ents a representative selection of success factors accord-
ing to their quadrant emphasis:
Individual
Systems: Establishing a clear direction; working with
Experience Behavior shifting goalposts; tracking and reporting results; lever-
Mindset Performance aging technology; creating new products and services;
Motivation Competencies utilizing appropriate structure.
Commitment Skills
Behavior: Championing/enacting the agenda; putting
oneself on the line; taking action and making things
Exterior
Interior
Interiors and exteriors are equally important. Systems are necessary but not sufficient.
Figure 2.3 reveals an important pattern for success: Figure 2.4 reveals a second pattern of success: 40% of
47% of success factors are interior oriented, and 53% success factors are systems oriented with the remaining
are exterior oriented. Therefore, focus on interior factors 60% oriented to behavior, culture, and experience.
is as important as focus on exterior factors. Interior This 60/40 pattern reinforces the importance of systems;
realms (such as motivation and shared values) are sub- however, it also exposes that, while systems are impor-
jective and often considered by business to be “soft,” tant and essential, much more is involved in a gear
while exterior realms (such as skills and processes) are up-shift process. Individual experience, behavior, and
objective and often considered “hard.” Success is built culture are core to the success equation.
on both, not one to the exclusion of the other. Interior
dimensions are prominent factors for emphasis.
Individual Individual
Experience Behavior Experience Behavior
s 60%
ant
dr
a
Qu
rior 53%
erior 47%
Exterior
Interior
Exterior
Interior
ACSS ACSS
Other
Success Success
Exte
Factors Factors
0%
Int
s4
m
te
Sys
FIGURE 2.3: Interior-Exterior Success Profile. FIGURE 2.4: Systems-Other Quadrants Success Profile.
These patterns point to a significant finding of ACSS, to However, this all-quadrant emphasis requires that quad-
the importance of interiors and a multi-dimensional rants first be differentiated, which is often not done. Our
(all-quadrant) emphasis in support of sustainability consulting work beyond the study indicates that interior
efforts. Systems and exteriors are clearly important, yet quadrants are frequently collapsed into the exterior
emphasis on them is not biased to the exclusion of inte- behavior or systems domains, or not recognized at all.
riors. This tendency toward bias, and over- or under- This collapse or lack of acknowledgment of every quad-
emphasis, is represented well by popular sustainability rant presents a potential impediment to up-shift move-
scholarship and literature. Most writings, conferences, ment. Important factors for attention are often missed
and media reports lean toward the systems perspective or not understood in relation to the change effort as
and often reflect an exterior, technical systems orienta- a whole.
tion—to the exclusion of other dimensions at play.
Once each quadrant is effectively differentiated and
To illustrate this strong emphasis on systems, eight realities ascertained within and among them, progress
well-known books about sustainability (five focused on is activated through efforts that serve to integrate them,
business, three multi-sector) were analyzed as part of bringing them together through a process of alignment
a literature review.19 Barrett Brown’s 2006 research and mutual reinforcement. Key levers (appropriate to
includes a sentence-by-sentence analysis of each book the company’s unique situation) are selected across the
with mapping across all four quadrants. Results are quadrants and initiatives crafted to optimize the up-
shown in Figure 2.5 on page 27. shift change process. Thus, an integrated, all-quadrant
change process replaces a more typical partial or frag-
Brown’s research demonstrates that the systems quad-
mented change approach.
rant clearly dominates in this literature selection. While
reflecting the importance of systems, it displays the
Challenges to Progress
tendency toward a one-dimensional and potentially
fragmented emphasis. The composite success profile of Along with the success orientation described above, the
all study companies describes up-shifts and progress in study also identifies prominent challenges being faced
sustainability as more complex and encompassing than in the gearing-up process. These challenges add
seen through a systems lens alone. further nuance to the patterns of success.
Optimizing the Gearing Up Approach Outlined next are two challenge areas: top areas of
difficulty and the common challenge experienced.
Study findings reviewed so far demonstrate that an
overall foundation for success encompasses more than
attention to a narrow set of success factors or isolated
quadrant emphasis. Instead, success is built upon a
pattern of multidimensional, all-quadrant attention.
Findings also suggest that the highest rates of accelera-
tion and impact may be generated through comprehen-
sive change efforts—that is, the coverage of all interior-
exterior and individual-collective dimensions.
Exterior Interior
Book Title Systems % Behavior % Culture % Experience %
Cradle to Cradle 73 10 9 8
Natural Capitalism 90 1 7 2
The Ecology of Commerce 75 5 16 4
Walking the Talk 79 3 14 4
The Natural Step for Business 63 4 22 11
Plan B 2.0 91 6 2 1
Our Common Future 94 1 4 1
Ecovillage Living 64 6 19 11
ACSS Success Factors 40 13 32 15
40 60
Source: Barrett C. Brown, “The Four Worlds of Sustainability: Drawing Upon Four Universal Perspectives to Support Sustainability Initiatives.”
Top Areas of Difficulty fundamental ways we exchange value and the barriers to
more sustainable commerce? This is our last major area
Study participants identified a number of specific diffi-
of focus, and we don’t have many metrics for this one.”
culties that we have again categorized into top theme
areas. The top three are represented in Figure 2.6, show- And with respect to Engagement, a Director, Corporate
ing the difficulties over time in “getting here,” and the Responsibility said: “We are a matrix organization,
evolving challenges of “moving forward.” Note that each and it often takes quite a long time to get buy-in from
reflects a specific quadrant and shows an increase in all the different players. It’s not a simple, ‘Here’s the
difficulty from past to future. program to run with.’ You have to get a lot of internal
stakeholders on the same page with you. One individual
These specific difficulties are represented by quotes
has to influence many.”
from study participants. Regarding Mindsets, a Vice
President of Corporate Responsibility stated: “The The Common Challenge Experienced
biggest struggle is internal reticence. There is a general
Specific difficulties were further amplified by a common
ill ease at disclosing any more than one is absolutely
overriding challenge described by all participants—that
forced to, and the problem with that, of course, is that
of embedding sustainability, planting its roots deeply
nobody trusts you.”
into the business. This challenge is characteristic of the
Concerning Difficult Metrics, a Vice President of shared focus by study companies on the 4.0 INTEGRATE
Sustainable Strategy noted: “How do you get into the Gear and exemplified by one participant’s reflection to
Mindsets
• Deepening the level of embrace • Making a full change in perspective
• Taking sustainability thinking deeper • Seeing broad, new innovation
• possibilities
Difficult Metrics
• Defining and measuring what makes • Accumulating/rolling-upmeaningful
• a sustainable company • globaldata
• Measuring diversity and the social • Quantifying tough-to-measure issues
• side of sustainability
Engagement
• Involving others early on and • Aligning expectations, needs, and
• over time • workable paths forwards
KEY MESSAGE | The key challenge rests in seeing and acting upon
the activity-mindset dynamic. The good news is that some in sus-
tainability are beginning to see its importance. The bad news is
that lack of understanding about the nature of mindsets and
their development are constraining up-shift movements.
make sustainability “built in, not bolted on.” This com- Central Challenge Dynamic
ment intersects with our earlier point: embeddedness is
best considered at the intersection of all quadrants, The patterns of success and challenge profiles described
where integration among quadrants can establish and above, when examined together, begin to illuminate a
grow deep roots. central sustainability dynamic. This dynamic—the corre-
sponding interplay of interior and exterior realities—
Overall, participants reflected on the current level of serves to either fuel or constrain gearing-up processes.
organizational embeddedness and its future importance, One fundamental observation about up-shifting, how it
as shown in Figure 2.7. occurs or fails to occur, can be framed this way:
that help people understand sustainability and what Developmental theories provide a coherent way to
they are supposed to do differently.” understand how people interpret events and their expe-
riences. They can also predict how people are likely to
We call this orientation to mindsets translation—how
act in many situations.22 Mindsets are an interior human
sustainability can best be framed in terms that others
function; they are not visible as, say, a person’s behavior.
understand where they are now, while enhancing their
They are inherent to the composite way people express
capabilities for effective action. Effective translation is
themselves.
essential to sustainability progress.
Developmental theorists use several terms interchange-
Yet there is another, more fundamental aspect to mind-
ably when referring to mindsets, including meaning-
sets that must be considered: What are the mindsets of
making systems, action logics, and mental models.23 For
leaders? How do they see the world, reason and make
the purposes of this report, we use the term “mindset”
meaning, and behave in response to their experience?20
to refer to individuals and the term “worldview” to refer
To what extent are they able to up-shift their own per-
to groups of people (as in the worldviews reflected by a
spectives? What is the breadth and depth of their indi-
group or organization).
vidual capacities to envision and activate Gears 4.0 and
5.0? By these references to mindsets, we are referring to Vertical Power
the potential of leaders, to the transformation of mind-
Contemporary developmental researcher Susanne Cook-
sets, and to a transformation of perspectives that may
Greuter describes two main aspects to mindset growth
rest at the heart of large-scale sustainability gains.
and expansion: “horizontal (or lateral) development” and
Simply put:
“vertical development.”
Sustainability is as much about the Horizontal development refers to the expansion in
mindset through which the world is capacities through increases in knowledge, skills, and
abilities associated with a current mindset. Horizontal
seen as it is about the activities taken development is the terrain of most conventional educa-
in support of it. tional efforts, achieved through an array of traditional
methods, and supported by general exposure to life.
It is the foundation for the translation work described
Mindsets and Capacity Development
above.24
Before we look more closely at mindsets in relation to
Vertical development is associated with capacity shifts
sustainability, it is useful to understand the nature of
from an individual’s current way of meaning-making to
mindsets and capacities associated with them.
a broader, more complex mindset. Vertical development
Developmental Research refers to how an individual learns to see through new
eyes, changes his or her interpretation of what is
Mindsets are researched in several academic disciplines,
experienced, and how that person transforms his or her
including one field called developmental theory.
view of reality.25 It describes the increase of individual
Researchers in this field study the unfolding of human
awareness, the expansion of what an individual can
(and leadership) potential toward deeper understanding,
pay attention to, and, therefore, what he or she can
wisdom, and effectiveness in the world and in business.21
influence.
M I N D S E T / S TA G E SELF-IDENTITY COGNITION S U S TA I NA B I L I T Y
P E R C E N TA G E O R I E N TAT I O N CONTRIBUTION
the Greater the Impact Torbert confirms that later-stage leaders (Individualist
and beyond) have demonstrated effectiveness in suc-
A series of research studies is demonstrating the impact
cessfully leading complex organizational change
of later stages of development on key leadership func-
processes where earlier-stage leaders (before the
tions and performance—those needed for organizations
Individualist stage) have not. Torbert states: “Notably,
to realize Gears 4.0 and 5.0. Two main elements are
we found that three groups of leaders associated with
required of leadership: understanding, shaped by one’s
below-average corporate performance (Opportunists,
mindset, and action, enabled through competencies
Diplomats, and Experts) were significantly less effective
and behaviors. Three studies show that leaders with
at implementing organizational strategies than
later-stage capacities and accompanying competencies
Achievers. Moreover, only the final 15 percent of man-
correlate with:
agers in this sample (Individualists, Strategists, and
Commitment to sustainability Alchemists) showed a consistent capacity to innovate
in business operations and successfully transform their organizations.”40
Bob Anderson’s research using his developmentally- This correlation does not suggest that sustainability
based 360° leader profile, the Leadership Circle 360°, success is based on “all” leaders attaining later-stage
shows that later stages of development (Individualist capacities. This is neither realistic nor required. Yet it
and beyond) correlate directly with superior levels of does suggest that a critical mass of capacity generated
operational and/or bottom-line performance in business. from later-stage leader development is needed to attain
Likewise, earlier stages correlate with lower levels of complex sustainability outcomes.
performance. Not incidentally, the Leadership Circle has
validity and a norm base of over 2,700 participants. The
Leadership Circle 360° is being correlated with the LDP.39
Taking the above parallels further, Figure 3.4 summarizes As shown, Gear 4.0 requirements call for Achiever and
the cognitive capacities of Achievers, Individualists, Individualist cognition; Gear 5.0 complexities have need
Strategists, and Alchemists in relation to the complexi- for at least Individualist and above cognition. According
ties found at Gears 4.0 and 5.0. Cognitive capacities to research by Torbert (April 2005 Harvard Business
reflect the level of complexity in awareness, thought, Review), most senior management teams operate at the
and scope of attention exhibited within these stages. Achiever mindset.
FIGURE 3.4: Leader Mindset-Cognitive Capacity for Gears 4.0 and 5.0.
Alchemist 5.0
Redesign
Redesign
(Cross-Paradigmatic)
Systemic
Systems changes
change inin
financial systems,
markets,
markets and
and
Strategist business models
(Paradigmatic)
4.0 Integrate
Increasingly strategic,
Individualist embedded in business
(Meta-System) processes, integrated
responses across
value chain
Achiever
(Single-System)
In specific terms, the mindset-gears correlation has two While sustainability is talked about most often in terms
important implications: of activity and systems—with increasing demands for
exterior shifts in structures and large-scale systems—
First, to actualize the highest gears, leaders with later- mindsets may be the key, untapped factor in mobilizing
stage capacities will need to be engaged. These leaders the required changes from both an organizational and
can help envision, formulate, mobilize, and harmonize global perspective.
the integrated sets of actions needed for large-scale sys-
tems redesign and radical shifts forward. These leaders In the next section, we combine the
can also translate sustainability into communications
and methods of change and engagement that match
mindsets discussion with overall ACSS
the mindsets and worldviews of others. Without high- findings and review the steps for
capacity leaders, the up-shift process to Gear 5.0— accelerating up-shifts.
which requires positive, full, and widespread momen-
tum—may not progress at the speed required or hap-
pen at all.
This section provides a look at steps forward to accelerate the corporate up-shift
process based on the results of the ACSS and affiliated research. These steps are
offered as a means to complement, support, and push the boundaries of practical
work already underway in organizations today. We also hope to stimulate further
research that includes or builds upon some of these steps and study findings.
Accelerating Efforts at Any Gear carbon and natural resources constraints) mean in
terms of risk and opportunity for the business.
Sustainability efforts at any gear can be accelerated
through a process that incorporates the findings and Gearing Up provides an analytical base and tool for
frameworks referenced in the study. We summarize achieving clarity. Establish the intent and future focus
these below in relation to assessment, strategy, of up-shifts. Discern states of implementation progress
change execution, and a view toward leading integral and gaps to be overcome. Recognize that, as a compa-
sustainability. ny up-shifts through the gears, retaining earlier gear
activity is important. Use the Gearing Up framework in
Current Reality Assessment concert with the quadrants analysis below.
Analysis of the sustainability situation can be well Assess Progress though
served through mapping realities and progress to date. All-Quadrant Analysis
Assess Progress Using Perform an all-quadrant analysis of progress, differ-
Gearing Up Framework entiating and identifying significant enablers and
Delineate the organization’s current and anticipated gaps in each quadrant. Directly investigate the combi-
sustainability activities and initiatives across each of nation of interior and exterior dimensions, and indi-
the gears. Use the framework as a landscape for vidual and collective dimensions. Identify areas that
assessing “where the organization is now” and “where are minimally attended to or absent yet needed.
it is heading” on the path to sustainability. Identify the factors that have facilitated progress to
Understand the differences between the gears and date and those that are constraining or preventing
what they mean to the business. Pay special attention progress. Isolate and conduct deeper assessments on
to Gear 5.0, including what ecological limits (such as particular areas as needed.
Pinpoint the all-quadrant factors, levers, and metrics, Alignment with Business Strategy
based on the organization’s unique situation and con-
text, that combine to form an integrated, mutually Explore up-shift opportunities by clarifying linkage and
reinforcing set of accelerators that fuel momentum integration of sustainability with the organization’s
up the gears. business strategy and competitive advantage.
Quadrants analysis can be used in several ways to Full integration with strategy comes online at the 4.0
serve corporate sustainability—for example: (1) to INTEGRATE Gear. In preparing for this integration, incor-
organize sustainability knowledge and information; porate the principle of shared value into the business. As
(2) to map and diagnose forces and factors influencing Michael Porter describes it, shared value and its distinc-
the sustainability up-shift process; and (3) to craft tive strategic orientation focus on value creation to the
integrated responses, solutions, and initiatives that benefit of society, the environment, and the business
take into account all four dimensions.42 Quadrants are simultaneously.45 Thoroughly consider and analyze the
scaleable in application and also can be used at mul- organization’s inside-out and outside-in (social/environ-
tiple levels of investigation—for example at group, mental influences on competitiveness) contexts. Plant
organization, industry, sector, and society levels. sustainability roots by anchoring them to strategy for
future competitiveness and making sustainability central
Determine Current Leader Mindsets and to the differentiated value proposition of the business.
Organizational Worldviews
Recognize that the broad view of strategy integration
Use one of several developmental assessment tools to must also be based on recognition and understanding
profile mindsets among those with key sustainability of Gear 5.0—and in particular, the key implications of
responsibilities.43 Ascertain the individual leader global overshoot and limits on business. One Planet
mindset capacities available in the organization and Business is a well-articulated resource for understanding
the collective organizational worldviews represented the global overshoot context.46 Draw upon it (and other
in business units, segments, or other key groups.44 resources) as sources of data, frameworks for under-
Identify and characterize the leadership cadre to standing, and context regarding measurement, risks,
support up-shift movement, along with the world- and new competitive landscapes. Incorporate Blue
views that need to be reached through translation. Ocean StrategyTM by W. Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgne
Recognize that these types of assessments produce and its related analytical framework to take advantage
more accurate and meaningful results if people with of new market space and opportunities available with
later-stage capacities oversee their interpretation Gear 5.0.
and use.
Change Execution and Mobilizing Mindsets
Use assessments as one way to determine how to
place leaders into key and influential roles and to Most organizations already have experience with one
shape the path of continuing development of leader- or more change models and recognize key components
ship capacities (horizontal and vertical) in concert of the planning and execution needed to actualize
with the organization’s overall executive and leader- movements. Acknowledging this, we outline below only
ship development and succession strategies. Position relevant elements that point to distinguishing character-
leadership stage assessment and development in istics of the ACSS findings.
parallel with the Gearing Up pathway.
<<
The corporate responsibility move-
ment forces companies into thinking, “What am I doing?”
They think more about what goes into their GRI report than
how they connect to system change. Yet ultimately, this is not
about reducing CO2 emissions by 1% but about helping build
>>
a system that reduces society’s total emissions by 60%.
ANDRÉ FOURIE
National Business Initiative, South Africa.47
Use Best-Fit Change Methodology comprehensive way. Efforts delineated in the current
reality analysis, assembled in an integrated fashion,
The Gearing Up process is best considered as a substan-
yield a process that more fully covers the bases.
tial change effort—one whose change methodology
is selected to match the type of change, culture, and Mobilize Your Leaders
predominant worldview(s) at play. As discussed earlier,
Involve the leadership cadre in developing an inte-
change includes focus on translation, transformation,
grated up-shift plan and process that addresses orga-
or both. To illustrate, organizations that reflect pre-
nizational change through all quadrants—emphasiz-
dominantly LDF-based Expert and Achiever worldviews
ing shifts in systems and shifts in people (culture,
and call largely for translation find an effective fit with
mindsets, behavior). Use the model presented in
John Kotter’s Eight-Step Change model. For Achiever-
Figure 4.1 on page 44 as an orienting framework to
Individualist worldviews, Kurt Lewin’s Three-Step
Leading Integral Sustainability. Address both transla-
model is an effective translation approach. And for
tion and transformation needs in the process.
Achiever-Individualist worldviews and a need for trans-
formation, Dee Hock’s Chaordic approach is relevant, Recognize that most work needs to be done in transla-
as is Clare Graves’ Change States and Ron Heifetz’ tion, especially leader/manager to the employee base.
Adaptive Change Strategies.48 Prepare leaders/managers for this translation function,
while keeping in mind that most managers operate at
Transformative change can encompass a number of
Expert/Achiever mindsets, and translation efforts must
translation elements. The key is finding the best fit in
also meet them where they are. Approach their learn-
terms of the type of change required, where distinc-
ing and growth in ways that match their mindset pro-
tions in the real world may not always be clear cut.49 It
files, incorporating horizontal training and develop-
is important to recognize that, while some commonal-
ment to support preparation efforts.
ity exists across many change models, subtle aspects
of the approach resonate more directly with particular Also, draw from the current reality assessments previous-
cultures and worldviews. When considering the mind- ly discussed to take advantage of leader mindset data to
sets/worldviews of the organization, this fit is a support change sponsorship and its related structure.
contributor to success acceleration. Match sponsor capacities with the change vision.
No matter what change methodology is utilized, Mobilize Your Employees
incorporating a whole-system, all-quadrant emphasis
moves the change process forward in an effective and Translate the up-shift plan and activities into commu-
nications and horizontal development initiatives that
best address existing organizational worldviews as This deployment is portrayed as Leading Integral
reflected in the current reality assessment. People at Sustainability in Figure 4.1.
all mindsets contribute to an organization’s vitality.
Meet the mindset profiles of employees where they Bridging the Gap to Gears 4.0 and 5.0
are, so they are optimally mobilized.
As we have explored, bridging the gap to higher gears
Support change demands with ongoing horizontal requires the engagement of later-stage leaders in the
training and development as needed. Engage employ- sustainability up-shift process. Therefore, we emphasize
ees in the change execution process, making it come the mindsets portion of the activity-mindsets dynamic
alive in day-to-day activities. as the key focus, in part because of its previously
unrecognized role and influence.
Leading Integral Sustainability
The ACSS shows that none of the ten companies exam-
A key finding of the study is the centrality of leader-
ined have moved into the 4.0 INTEGRATE Gear, although
ship—notably, the power of leadership at all levels of
seven companies have made varying degrees of progress
the organization to intentionally focus on interiors and
beyond the 3.0 PARTNER Gear. We did not ascertain
exteriors of individuals and the organization (systems,
whether an individual company’s gap between the 3.0
behavior, culture, and experience) in service of sustain-
and 4.0 Gear is reflective of the lack of later-stage mind-
ability progress. Deploy a critical mass of energy
sets, the tendency toward a less than comprehensive
through individual and connected leadership—with
approach, or both.
focus on understanding and action that generates
coherence, integration, and mutual reinforcement— This is ripe territory for further study. However, the find-
to mobilize and maintain the up-shift change process. ings and related research point to the importance of
later-stage capacities at the 4.0 Gear in relation to
change, commitment, and performance. These later-
Experience Behavior stage capacities are crucial to envisioning and actualiz-
ing Gear 5.0. Accordingly, we have added steps to the
uals “Accelerating Efforts at Any Gear” series of actions.
i vid
nd n • Mu
ti o Discover Opportunity by Expanding the View
I
ra t
in
ua
g
Shifts
Inte
en
ste
organization at large and defining the underlying leader holding a high-leverage position can make a dif-
assumptions upon which the sustainability agenda has ference in terms of an organization’s development.51
been constructed. Clarify the explicit and implicit
Initiate a vertical development component into ongoing
approaches being utilized toward sustainability, contrast-
leadership development processes, where benefits are
ing them with a deep review of Gear 4.0 and 5.0 reali-
realized longer term. Draw from a range of practices,
ties—in particular, the context of global overshoot.
activities, and approaches that facilitate this develop-
Recognize that the definition and view of sustainability ment. Emphasize this development while leveraging two
is not fixed—it takes shape through the lens of the pre- affiliated areas of focus: (1) understanding and use of
dominant mindsets and collective worldviews. The ten- comprehensive, inclusive frameworks (AQAL Integral as a
dency to pigeonhole sustainability often causes a clash good example) that serve as a common basis for lan-
of perspectives and a shortfall of action. Depending on guage and communication, and (2) deepening the under-
“who” (the mindsets of leaders at the strategic table) is standing of the multiple and linked meta-systems at play.
looking at “what,” the vision, scale, scope, and focus of
Several institutions have successfully initiated pilot pro-
the sustainability effort can vary widely. The fact is, a
grams and served as a beacon for vertical development
different case for sustainability can be made by each
in the arenas of executive education and university
mindset stage.50
graduate education. The University of Notre Dame and
Our background suggests that leaders are best able to its public Executive Integral Leadership program,
see the reason for varying definitions of sustainability by launched under guidance of Associate Dean Leo Burke,
experientially inhabiting (to the degree possible) differ- is one example.52 (Burke is the former director of
ing mindsets. A related step focuses on cognitive under- Motorola University, the global education and develop-
standing of the range of definitions. This understanding, ment arm of Motorola, Inc.) Another that stands out is
coupled with Gear 5.0 needs, points to areas of move- Sean Esbjörn-Hargens at John F. Kennedy University, who
ment that might otherwise never appear on the organi- in 2002 launched a Master of Arts program in Integral
zational radar screen. Psychology, explicitly based on an integral theory educa-
tion model.53
Based on this review, consider the organization’s explicit
role as part of a network of influence regarding large- Also emerging is the new work of Australia’s SHIFT
scale redesign. Consider what efforts are needed to Foundation, focusing on both horizontal and vertical
engage a Gear 5.0 network of players—and the respons- development of young global leaders.54 In addition,
es required to make the company-level impacts called Avastone is supporting the design of vertical develop-
for in support of the global view. Enlist later-stage lead- ment processes and launching a new Leading Integral
ers to be involved in this Gear 5.0 outreach. Sustainability series.
Engage and Develop Later-Stage Leader Capacities Representative sources of introductory readings on verti-
cal development include Esbjörn-Hargens’ article on
Seek out and engage Individualist/Strategist/Alchemist
Integral Education from AQAL Journal (Summer 2007),
leaders in the overall sustainability effort. Incorporate
Rooke and Torbert’s Harvard Business Review article
these mindsets in championing and sponsoring roles.
“Seven Transformations of Leadership” (April 2005), and
Use later-stage leaders to build bridges among all mind-
the Integral Life Practice book, supported by a forthcom-
sets at play and optimize each of their unique strengths.
ing Internet portal, www.integrallife.com.55
Research shows that even one competent later-stage
ways, a huge leap is required to cross the complex terrain and adapt with resilience
respond gracefully even amid shock waves of possible perfect storms. Yet the
importance and inherent potential of leadership bring with it reason for optimism.
In many respects, we have traveled far in this report, and based existence and the vast inherent potential of the
in other ways we have only scratched the surface. We essence of life itself.56 At its heart, movement through the
have even come to some counter-intuitive conclusions in gears of sustainability is not about realizing a particular
the course of our work. We began with a look at sustain- gear or completing a process. It is about taking action
ability progress and the resounding call for large-scale from a deeply conscious perspective, evoking from the
systems change activated in tangible forms and activities ground of potential a new vision for humanity and way of
across companies and the globe. We progressed by draw- life. New, large-scale redesigns are needed, and clear and
ing attention to interior dimensions and the centrality of expanding perspectives must inform them.
leadership. And we concluded that the highest gears are
It is true that there are options for accessing this trans-
likely to be realized only by development and activation
formative leadership perspective. In the words of busi-
of later-stage leader capacities. Achieving high-gear up-
ness, you can “make or buy.” Yet the fact is that new
shifts requires interior mindsets that match the complex-
manifestations of leadership are required. Today more
ities involved.
than ever, we need leadership that can re-imagine the
In our review, we have taken only a top-line view of the boundaries of individual and organizational identity,
nature of mindsets and their development, introducing thought, and purpose in light of the fundamental nature
how a leader transforms his or her view of reality. In its of reality and who we are as human beings.
deepest sense, this vertical mindset development refers to
This is ultimately a full and complete call to leadership—
a transformation of consciousness—where consciousness
to live and fulfill the true nature of our human potential.
is considered along a continuum between ordinary, ego-
1. SustainAbility Ltd. (2004). Gearing Up: 10. Other authors of developmental or Worlds of Sustainability: Drawing Upon
From Corporate Responsibility to Good stage-based sustainability models Four Universal Perspectives to Support
Governance and Scalable Solutions, reviewed include: Sustainability Initiatives,” AQAL Journal.
pages 34–37. www.sustainability.com/ http://aqaljournal.integralinstitute.org/
a. Philip Mirvis and Bradley K. Googins
insight/scalingup-article.asp?id=133 public/Default.aspx
(2006). Stages of Corporate Citizen-
2. World Wildlife Fund-UK (2007). ship: A Developmental Framework, 19. Barrett C. Brown (in press). “The Four
One Planet Business, pages 2–3. a monograph by The Center for Cor- Worlds of Sustainability: Drawing Upon
porate Citizenship at Boston College. Four Universal Perspectives to Support
3. Several books by Ken Wilber which
Sustainability Initiatives,” AQAL Journal.
discuss the AQAL Integral framework b. Brian Nattrass and Mary Altomare
include The Integral Vision (2007), (1999). The Natural Step for Busi- 20. Susanne R. Cook-Greuter (2004).
Integral Spirituality (Integral Books: ness: Wealth, Ecology, and the “Making the Case for a Developmental
Boston, MA, 2007), A Brief History of Evolutionary Corporation, (Gabriola Perspective,” Industrial and Commercial
Everything (2000 and 2007), Integral Island, BC, Canada: New Society Training, Volume 36, Number 7.
Psychology (2000), A Theory of Publishers), pages 13–17.
21. Julian Simcox (February 21–22, 2005).
Everything: An Integral Vision for
c. Bob Willard (2005). The NEXT Harthill. Detailed Descriptions of the
Business, Politics, Science, and
Sustainability Wave, (Gabriola Island, Developmental Stages or Action Logics of
Spirituality (2000). All are published by
BC, Canada: New Society Publishers), the Leadership Development Framework,
Shambhala Publications, Inc., Boston,
pages 26–29. presented at the W. Deming Research
MA, except where noted.
Institute, Eleventh Annual Research
11. Mirvis and Googins discuss stages of
4. Susanne R. Cook-Greuter (2004). Seminar, Fordham University Graduate
development generally and stages of
“Making the Case for a Developmental Business School, Lincoln Center, New York.
corporate citizenship specifically on
Perspective,” Industrial and Commercial
pages 2–3 of their 2006 monograph. 22. Susanne R. Cook-Greuter (2004). “Making
Training, Volume 36, Number 7,
the Case for a Developmental Perspec-
pages 276–277. 12. SustainAbility Ltd. (2004). Gearing Up:
tive,” Industrial and Commercial Train-
From Corporate Responsibility to Good
5. Susanne R. Cook-Greuter (2004). ing, Volume 36, Number 7, page 277.
Governance and Scalable Solutions; and
“Making the Case for a Developmental
SustainAbility, The Global Compact 23. Robert Kegan (1994). In Over Our Heads:
Perspective,” Industrial and Commercial
Challenge. www.pactoglobal.org.br/ The Mental Demands of Modern Life,
Training, Volume 36, Number 7,
doc/CompactChallenge%20final.pdf (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
pages 277–278.
Press); Bill Torbert and Associates (2004).
13. McKinsey & Company (July 2007).
6. Andrew Zolli (March 2007). Fast Action Inquiry: The Secret of Timely and
Shaping the New Rules of Competition:
Company, Business 3.0, “The Oblivious Transforming Leadership, (San Francisco,
UN Global Compact Participant Mirror,
Capitalist’s Days are Numbered,” Issue CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.);
page 13.
113, page 64. Cook-Greuter (2004).
14. Remarks by E. Neville Isdell, Chairman
7. Michael E. Porter and Mark R. Kramer 24. Susanne R. Cook-Greuter (2004). “Making
and CEO, The Coca-Cola Company (July
(December 2006). “Strategy and Society: the Case for a Developmental Perspec-
5, 2007). Global Compact Leaders
The Link Between Competitive tive,” Industrial and Commercial Training,
Summit in Geneva, Switzerland.
Advantage and Corporate Social Volume 36, Number 7, pages 276-277.
www.thecoca-colacompany.com/
Responsibility,” Harvard Business
presscenter/viewpoints_isdell_gcls.html 25. Susanne R. Cook-Greuter (2004). “Making
Review, page 83; and SustainAbility, Ltd.
the Case for a Developmental Perspec-
(2007 First Edition). Growing 15. World Wildlife Fund-UK (2007). One
tive,” Industrial and Commercial Training,
Opportunity: Entrepreneurial Solutions Planet Business, page 4.
Volume 36, Number 7, page 276.
to Insoluble Problems, page 6. 16. SustainAbility Ltd., The Global Compact
26. See the work of Cook-Greuter, Torbert,
8. John L. Petersen, President and Challenge, page 1.
and Angela Pfaffenberger (December
Founder, the Arlington Institute 17. AQAL, pronounced “ah-kwul,” is short 2006). Exploring the Pathways to
(November 14, 2006). Drawn from his hand for all quadrants, all levels. AQAL Postconventional Personality Develop-
video-conference talk at a University of is comprised of 5 aspects: quadrants, ment, doctoral dissertation, Saybrook
Notre Dame symposium. levels/stages, lines, states, and types— Graduate School and Research Center.
9. SustainAbility Ltd. (2004). Gearing Up: the multiple aspects of reality recog-
27. Susanne R. Cook-Greuter (2004).
From Corporate Responsibility to Good nized in an Integral approach.
“Making the Case for a Developmental
Governance and Scalable Solutions. 18. Barrett C. Brown (in press). “The Four Perspective,” pages 276–277.
28. The Conference Board press release descriptions of the cognitive stage work 45. Michael E. Porter and Mark R. Kramer
(February 13, 2007). “Technology and of Michael L. Commons and Francis A. (December 2006). “Strategy and Society:
Innovation are Changing More-Relevant- Richards (2003). “Four Postformal The Link Between Competitive
Than-Ever Corporate Citizenship Stages,” (Harvard Medical School and Advantage and Corporate Social
Programs.” Department of Education, Rhode Responsibility,” Harvard Business Review.
Island). The mindset percentages come
29. SustainAbility Ltd. (First Edition 2007). 46. World Wildlife Fund-UK (2007). One
from Rooke and Torbert (April 2005).
Growing Opportunity: Entrepreneurial Planet Business, www.wwflearning.org.
“Seven Transformations of Leadership,”
Solutions to Insoluble Problems, pages uk/one-planet-business/resources
Harvard Business Review, page 3. The
4 and 24.
final 5% of Figure 3.2 mindsets are 47. World Wildlife Fund-UK (2007). One
30. Bill Joiner, co-author of Leadership Opportunists, which precede the Planet Business, page 36.
Agility (September 11, 2007). Written Diplomat mindset. In addition to this 48. Soren Eilertsen, Johannah Jones, Chris
comments on the distinction between sample, Harthill has a sample of 1,556 Soderquist, and Brett Thomas (July
stages of development and mindsets: “A consultants, managers, and executives 2006). “Integral Organizational Steer-
person’s stage provides the underlying profiled between 1993 and 2006, pre ing,” pages 22–23, article for the August
‘holding environment’ for their entire dominantly in the UK, with the following 2006 Integral Leader seminar, Integral
belief system, including their values and perecntages: Diplomat 1%, Expert 14%, Institute.
worldview. A person’s mindset about a Achiever 45%, Individualist 25%, Stategist
particular subject, such as sustainability, 12%, Alchemist & Above 3%. 49. Soren Eilertsen, Johannah Jones, Chris
usually refers to a much more discreet Soderquist, and Brett Thomas (July
37. Susanne R. Cook-Greuter (2004). Making 2006). “Integral Organizational Steer-
frame of reference within their overall
the Case for a Developmental Perspective, ing,” page 22.
belief system.” While content-specific
page 277.
mindsets are a subset of the overall 50. Sean Esbjörn-Hargens (Spring 2006).
stage of development, for purposes of 38. Bill Joiner and Stephen Josephs (2007). “Integral Ecology: A Post-Metaphysical
understanding and practical application, Leadership Agility: Five Levels of Mastery Approach to Environmental Pheno-
we consider them together. for Anticipating and Initiating Change, mena,” AQAL Journal, Vol. 1, No. 1,
(San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass), pages page 317.
31. Jane Loevinger (1976). Ego Development:
113, 146, 270, and personal email
Conceptions and Theories, (San 51. Julian Simcox (February 21–22, 2005).
correspondence.
Francisco: Jossey-Bass); Bill Torbert and Harthill, Detailed Descriptions of the
Associates (2004). Action Inquiry: The 39. Bob Anderson (2006). “The Leadership Developmental Stages or Action Logics of
Secret of Timely and Transforming Circle and Organizational Performance.” the Leadership Development Framework,
Leadership, (San Francisco, CA: Berrett- http://theleadershipcircle.com/ presented at the W. Deming Research
Koehler); Susanne R. Cook-Greuter tlccommunity/pdf/TLC_and_ Institute, Eleventh Annual Research
(1999). Postautonomous Ego Organizational _Performance.pdf. Seminar, Fordham University Graduate
Development: A Study of Its Nature and The Leadership Circle 360° is a compe- Business School, Lincoln Center,
Measurement. (Doctoral dissertation, tency-based leadership assessment tool New York.
Harvard University), Dissertation that measures leadership action at two
Abstracts International, 60 (06), 3000. stages of development and links it with 52. University of Notre Dame’s Executive
www.cook-greuter.com/Publications.htm inner beliefs and assumptions. Integral Leadership program.
www.theleadershipcircle.com. www.nd.edu/~execprog/
32. Bill Joiner and Stephen Josephs (2007). executivePrograms/eil/eil.shtml
Leadership Agility: Five Levels of Mastery 40. David Rooke and William R. Torbert
for Anticipating and Initiating Change, (April 2005). “Seven Transformations of 53. Sean Esbjörn-Hargens (Summer 2007).
(San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass). Leadership,” Harvard Business Review, “Integral Teacher, Integral Students,
page 2. Integral Classroom: Applying Integral
33. Sandra Waddock (2006). Leading Theory to Graduate Education,” AQAL
Corporate Citizens: Vision, Values, Value 41. Pacey C. Foster and William R. Torbert Journal, Vol. 2, No. 2.
Added, (New York, NY: McGraw- (2005). “Leading through Positive
Hill/Irwin), Second Edition, Chapter 3: Deviance: A Developmental Action 54. SHIFT Foundation. www.shiftfounda-
Personal and Organizational Vision. Learning Perspective on Institutional tion.org
Change,” in R. Giacalone, C. Dunn & C. 55. Sean Esbjörn-Hargens (Summer 2007).
34. Ken Wilber (2006). Integral Spirituality,
Jurkiewicz (Ed.s) Positive Psychology in “Integral Teacher, Integral Students,
(Boston, MA: Integral Books), Table 2.1,
Business Ethics and Corporate Responsi- Integral Classroom: Applying Integral
page 60.
bility, (Greenwich, CT: Information Age Theory to Graduate Education,” AQAL
35. Sean Esbjörn-Hargens (Spring 2006). Publishing), pages 135-137. Journal, Vol. 2, No. 2; David Rooke and
“Integral Ecology: A Post-Metaphysical William R. Torbert. (April 2005). “Seven
42. Barrett C. Brown (in press). “The Four
Approach to Environmental Transformations of Leadership,” Harvard
Worlds of Sustainability: Drawing Upon
Phenomena,” AQAL Journal, Vol. 1, Business Review; and Integral Life
Four Universal Perspectives to Support
No. 1, page 317. Practice, which can be purchased from
Sustainability Initiatives,” AQAL Journal.
36. In developing Figure 3.2, we drew from Amazon.com.
43. For individual leaders: The Leadership
the work of Cook-Greuter, Torbert, and 56. Two books by A.H. Almaas that explore
Development Profile (LDP, also called
Barrett Brown (2007). “Blazing the Trail the process of self realization include
the SCTi-MAP), www.cook-greuter.com,
from Infancy to Enlightenment, Part II: Essence: The Diamond Approach to
and Harthill www.harthill.co.uk/
Conventional Consciousness and Part III: Inner Realization (1986). York Beach,
leadership_development_profile.htm;
Postconventional Consciousness,” a three- ME: Samuel Weiser, Inc.; and The Point
and ChangeWise© Leadership Agility 360,
part series in which Brown weaves of Existence: Transformations of
info@leadershipagility.com.
together the original descriptions by Narcissism in Self-Realization (1996).
the great developmentalists of the 20th 44. For collective worldviews: Wade Boston. MA: Shambhala Publications.
century on six key developmental lines. Mindsets, www.wademindsets.org
We especially drew from Brown’s