However, as even multinational corporations are (or seem close to!) approaching their respective sustainability pivot points, the emerging entrepreneurial side of sustainability and social change also deserves attention.

As I wrote in my latest HuffingtonPost piece, I’ve recently added another role to my writing and consulting career mix.  Thanks to my work within the University of Washington’s Foster School of Business, I’ve been seeing sustainable possibilities through undergraduate and graduate level entrepreneurial eyes. All I can say is: Wow!

I look forward to sharing what I learn with you.  In the meantime, here’s an excerpt from Sustainability’s Neglected Frontier: The Young and the Entrepreneurial :

A week ago I spent a day with representatives of the Pacific Northwest’s emerging generation of sustainability and socially-minded entrepreneurs, and it blew me away. To fully disclose, and though the thoughts I share here are my own, I participated in this event in my social media role for the University of Washington’s Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, covering their Environmental Innovation Challenge (EIC). After being at this gathering, I realized that corporate sustainability likely has nothing better than the potential for paradigm shift that bubbles inside the men and women now attending our colleges and universities.

But, back to the actual event. As the 23 student teams made their two-minute pitches early on, it was all my Twitter-happy fingers could do to capture each of their cool ideas and smart thinking. And, I was not the only one impressed. Even the highly experienced Seattle-area entrepreneurs who judged the challenge seemed to have the same feeling as me, which was that our economy will do just fine — as long as we identify, support and encourage this generation of student sustainability innovators. (Many also said something like “Darn, why wasn’t I this smart when I was that age?”)

***

The students I am meeting are incredibly passionate and committed.  Those of us who love our sustainability work have as much to learn from them as we have wisdom to share in return. It may be time to look around and see if there are ways to get involved with your local university’s entrepreneurial programs…

Rodgers’ career experiences and reflections, which I share in this piece, should help you learn more about how your own corporation/organization can draw in, inspire, nurture, engage, and reward its sustainability change agents and leaders (male or female).

And, if you are seeing similar “sustainability as beacon” patterns in your own organization, please let me know!  I’ll follow up on with another article later in the year.

Here’s an excerpt:

To put the three sustainability-encouraging themes Rodgers and I discussed in a nutshell, the advice to other sustainability-striving corporations might most simply be: question assumptions. Don’t assume a particular and set definition of sustainability. Don’t assume your employees/leadership teams leave their home values at the office door (instead, hope and pray they don’t!), and, finally, go way outside of the obvious bounds when brainstorming about potential partners.

Looking back on the past ten years,  I’d say we’ve seen a significant increase in business awareness of the importance of “emotional intelligence.” No longer a topic only for the geeky social scientist or armchair psychologist, smart businesses are starting to put the wisdom of “EQ” into play, both in serving their customers and toward becoming stronger, more resilient organizations overall.

As behavioral scientist and author Daniel Goleman put it in the subtitle of his book, Emotional Intelligence, it can matter more than IQ.  And this is seeming to be the case in sustainable business.

To be clear, Goleman does not think that IQ and EQ are opposing competencies.  Instead, his point, which I find incredibly relevant to sustainable business thinking, is that cognition is simply not enough. What Goleman wrote in this partiucular book (first published in 1995, mind you) seems advanced for its time.

So, let’s first take a look at what the four core abilities of emotional intelligence are:

• Self-awareness
• Self-management
• Social awareness
• Relationship management

Now, when those abilities are considered as sequential phases of learning, it gets interesting.   Seen as phases, these abilities provide a type of map for an organizational (or personal) evolution toward sustainability:

Phase I, Self-awareness: The ability to realize that you are part of the problem.  While many businesses have gotten to this point with regard to sustainability, I suspect there are still plenty of companies that remain willing to sit with it, deny it, and so not move on to…

Phase II, Self-management: The ability to see, control and process thinking and behavior in a more healthy, responsible way.  For instance, seeing and taking control of energy efficiency and working toward healthier employee engagement could contribute much to a business’s success/development, but it must first have realized the need to work on those things.  For a few years now, the green business press has covered both newly formed and long-established companies that have made it at least this far in their journeys. (Let’s hear it for that!)

Phase III, Social awareness: The ability to allow empathy to influence business decisions.  Companies at this phase understand that doing well is not only about them, but that there are also many other human relationships involved – and in a wide range of ways.   As it stands, tackling the environmental/operational issues first in a sustainable business’s journey seems to be the most usual route, while  the raised awareness of how people interrelate with all decisions (hopefully) comes in time.  Tending to diversity, community engagement and social justice, for instance, is likely a lesser corporate priority due to inherent complexity (i.e. it is not the lowest-hanging fruit).  If I were to predict, I’d say this Phase will start to get much more emphasis over the next few years (so check back in 2017, and monitor conference session topics for their attention to the “social” in the meantime).

Relationship management: This is the ability to use the empathy you’ve been practicing at the Phase 3 level to better understand all stakeholders and see/tend to interconnections and innovative teamwork to tackle problems that may even go beyond any one corporation’s borders.  Better communication and more creative partnering and collaboration are heavily in play at this point.  Patagonia is one company leading the way on this front (their recent “Don’t buy this shirt” ad campaign and their founding member status with the Textile Exchange are two examples).

***

So, here we are.  2011 closes with wrap ups and best cases, and 2012 begins with hopeful predictions for the sustainable business movement.  While such lists can certainly inspire, your company may more effectively advance its sustainability action and training practices by examining its unique set of circumstances through the EQ lens.

Wherever you find your business currently rests within the four EQ-related phases, think about how to bring it, sustainably, to the next phase.  If your company is resting comfortably in “self-management,” what do you need to work on to achieve, and get comfortable with, “social awareness,” for example?  Perhaps more importantly, are you willing to not concern yourself with any New Year’s reflection or prediction list for at least a few years? I ask this because having longer-term vision is part of your emotional intelligence learning process.  There is no need for you to get distracted by what everyone else is doing, or not.

So, for 2012, and for the sake of helping to further the sustainable business movement, why not work on your company’s emotional intelligence?  If you do, you will be building, in wise, deliberate phases, toward the dramatic sustainability shift we all want our kids and grandkids to thank us for in the decades to come.

The above quote from Jeff Sommer’s New York Times piece on Nobel laureate economists Christopher A. Sims and Thomas J. Sargent holds universal wisdom.  What if today’s business leaders were willing and became practiced at questioning the assumptions of the models they themselves helped create?

Imagine how much sooner the benefits of  sustainability might have emerged – in terms of operational efficiencies, employee engagement and community relations (to name three) -  if businesses had been thinking the way Sargent and Sims do.  Instead, our economy – up until now – has mainly rewarded people and corporations for doing things generally in line with the way they have always been done, and then… resting on their laurels.  As the sustainable business movement gains momentum, we can clearly see that many an opportunity has been missed, as so many rested.

You may have noticed the continuing theme in what I’ve written in this blog, and for SustainableBusinessForum, HuffingtonPost and The Solutions Journal over the past year or so.  I believe that in order to question assumptions and become the sustainability vanguard, businesses and their big thinkers must get out of line, and gain experience getting “all relational” instead.

Only when we can acknowledge/accept that we may not have seen or addressed the whole picture initially, will we be able to notice how various business systems  relate to, around and through one another.  This is when we will get o the linear + relational solutions, with more emphasis on co-creation and collaborative partnerships being but one example.

This way of considering sustainable business inspires and drives my research and writing explorations.  I have truly appreciated your readership and sharing (via blog post comments, Twitter and Google+) this past year, and look forward to the continuing linear + relational journey, together, in 2012.

I had an interesting conversation today with a friend who is a big thinker on sustainability.  We were bemoaning the fact that sustainability is a topic that can look incredibly boring in the short run, and we (as media and/or sustainable business proponents) are missing a huge opportunity to celebrate and encourage the radical new thinking, boring as it may seem on paper, that is so needed in this movement.  How do we make sustainability sexy, in all its phases and shapes, from compliance to employee engagement to fleet fuel efficiency?  And, this means it has to be sexy enough for the media to want to cover it and sexy enough for younger generations to see sustainability as a very exciting engineering, math and science-oriented career path.  A tall order.

As someone who writes about sustainable business, I am surely guilty of  being attracted to stories about huge new innovations or emerging audiences, for example.  There is something in our culture’s 24/7 news cycle that has jaded us enough that we don’t see some of the foundational work quietly occurring in many industries.  But, the boring stuff really IS moving sustainability in substantial ways, and will eventually serve as models and case studies for all (but perhaps only in hindsight).

Here’s what my friend and I were thinking: if sustainability is about systems, and seeing the long term rather than jumping for the sexiest short-term “green” thing a company or brand can do (or that can be seen in quarterly reports), why don’t we operate more systemically in the way we talk and promote sustainable business?  It is a huge risk and a 180 degree shift from our culture’s modus operandi of delivering and eating up sexy, immediate, celebrity-driven “bits.”  But, sustainability doesn’t happen on the 24/7 news cycle or in always astounding ways.

So, what is always sexy about sustainability and the steps businesses take to move in that direction?  That whoever is leading these charges is taking huge, huge risks to limit themselves to the boring work, with their eyes on a bigger, far in the future, and very exciting prize.  It’s almost an extreme sport to step off the cliff of how things have always been done in a business or ignore the traditional view of what makes for big news coverage, and say.. “you know.. we need to be more deliberate,” or “I see a very exciting long-term result if we start with this small step.”

The thing is, systems thinking involves a future-orientation, and I mean so far in the future that we might not be able to claim “we did it” or be on the cover of The New York Times because we did it.  That is what we have to give up in order to really make a difference in this realm.

But, risk-taking IS sexy.  Think fast cars, steep ski slopes, and extreme skateboarding.

So, how about focusing on the ways never-before-taken risk can lead businesses down whole new paths, into incredible collaborations and toward unanticipated innovation for the good of industries and communities overall? This less-newsworthy stuff has to happen. It is the groundwork.

If we want future generations to look back on the incredible sustainability shift that simply must take place, and be proud of us for helping in that, we have to make boring sexy.

First published in The HuffingtonPost, November 18, 2011.

Quick.  What do you think of when you hear the term “cause marketing”?  If I were to venture a guess, I’d say your mind went right to the color pink and breast cancer.  (It has been only a few weeks since the pink month of October, after all).  While that is just one of many worthy causes, there are plenty of others that also address our world’s significant and continually emerging social and environmental issues.  And smart businesses should be hot on the trail, supporting the causes that most fit their corporate missions and partnering with non-profits.

That said, what if there were one cause that could potentially influence long-term disease diagnoses, decrease carbon emissions, produce calmer, more fit individuals and bring people back to a more local perspective in their daily lives (among other things)? What if that same cause had so many angles to it that many companies and non-profits could partner to support it at the same time, with each still reaping the related benefits along the way?  If you read my last piece, you may have guessed where I’m heading: all these things point to the biking\cycling movement.  The Clif Bar & Company’s CLIF BAR 2 Mile Challenge (2MC) program is a shining example of cause marketing around just that.

Admittedly, it was my own recent return to urban living and the wonders  of getting around by bike (speed! convenience!) that prompted me to take note of 2MC, and I’m glad I did.  Launched in 2007, 2MC continues to encourage people to consider riding their bike for trips that are two miles or less from their homes.  It is about inspiring the average person, not the lycra-suited racer, to think about biking a few of their various weekly trips.  Measured in that way, the 2MC site currently notes that some 65,000 car trips were avoided this year by people choosing to ride their bikes instead of driving their cars, which translates to more than 430,000 pounds of CO2 being saved by those bike trips. (See their “get the facts” video for more information).

So, how does all of this connect with non-profit partners?  Well, 2MC participants are encouraged to register on the site, join a “team” (aligned with one of three non-profit partners in the walk/bike arena) and log their miles as a way to accumulate points. Clif Bar & Company (Clif Bar) is committed to supporting bike advocacy at the grass roots level, and while the various organizations they fund may rotate year to year, their plan is to always give a total of $100,000 annually. The whole program, including the blog, Twitter feed and Facebook page, is run like a lean and mean pedaling machine, with one person, Ryan Mayo, at the handlebars.  His charge is to keep people motivated about biking more, and cheer on each additional mile entered into the database.

I could go on and on, because I see so many good things in this mix.  But, I also got the take of expert Megan Strand, the Director of Communications for the Cause Marketing Form.  She considers 2MC a very innovative mash-up between a message-focused campaign (promoting an overall message — in this case a “fight global warming” one) and a digital voting contest (with pre-selected charities). But, it is this point of Strand’s that seems to mean most for how other businesses and nonprofits could effectively partner in the future: “What I like most about it is that it’s asking consumers to participate in a meaningful way TO the cause (e.g. by getting on their bikes) instead of just casting an online vote.”

Key to this entire endeavor is that Clif Bar sees 2MC as a long-term commitment and journey, with no predetermined, final endpoint.  Instead, they researched and developed the program very carefully, but then moved forward knowing it probably wasn’t perfect.  Mayo and his Clif Bar support team trusted that it would organically refine over time — and it has — integrating the voices, experiences and inputs of participants. After all, as Mayo noted, Clif Bar was “practically born on a bike,” and the fun, freedom and climate change message of the 2 Mile Challenge is very much in line with corporate values. Though it began in pre-digital form with a traveling van, the effort is now mainly online.  Still, where 2MC goes from here could take on many shapes.

Of course, there are reasons biking might not work for all people, and there are plenty of circumstances where none but the most extreme cyclists would bike more than four or five months a year.  And, of course, hauling kids to and fro by bike has many complications.  As well, it would be easy for a 2MC participant to enter miles they didn’t ride. I hear you, naysayers!

However, the point of this program, and my writing about it, is not to preach about biking versus all other modes of transportation, or to make it a political issue.  The point is to get a few more people, every week, to give it a go.  Then, some of those people may be inspired to sign on to the idea of the 2 Mile Challenge (whether they actually log on and enter miles or not).  Those people could then be inclined to talk about what they are doing, and so influence neighbors or friends to consider doing it themselves for their next quick errand … and so on.

Each new enthusiast, no matter the clothes they wear or the type of bike they ride, becomes an ambassador.  Each car trip avoided means that much less carbon goes into the atmosphere, and the biking movement overall raises awareness of how fitness might work its way into a person’s daily life. Given how many societal and environmental ills there are to worry about today, it’s exciting to think that the creative collaboration exemplified by Clif Bar’s 2 Mile Challenge program could inspire attitude adjustments that might just lead to longer term behavioral shifts. The ways in which businesses and non-profits could partner to address similar issues are infinite.  And, while biking isn’t the only social cause of this kind, the 2 Mile Challenge certainly makes an inspiring mind and body-moving case study.

What those involved in greening sports venues are hoping (and getting help from The Green Sports Alliance to do) is that greener consumer behavior might come to be seen as less “Seattle treehugger” and more social norm by these simple nudges that encourage composting, recycling or a similar attitude change.  I could go on and on because I find this challenge so intriguing, but instead let’s just say I spy an opportunity through my gender lens.

If going green is seen as “girly,” why not look to the “girls” who are pro sports fans?  It is not that the percentage of women in those ranks comes close to meeting that number for men, but that the women who ARE fans have a lot of influence over how their households are run, and how their families live their lives.  Women are raising tomorrow’s sports fans, so why not get their help shaping their kids to be the future’s more compost-loving and recycling aware “butts” in stadium seats?

Sustainability is a movement, not something that we’ll see the mass population embrace over night.  If those of us working for change can stand the fact that there will be no immediate and visibly huge shift in consumer behavior in our lifetimes (let’s face it), we should lay some good groundwork for future generations.   In that way, you and I and the sports venues/teams looking to go green might not want to obsess about converting today’s sports fans from their fear of “girly green,” but focus on engaging with those “green girls” who can influence fans to come.

My intention with this column is to introduce concepts, ideas and networks you’ve never noticed before as you wisely develop your sustainable businesses.

Here’s an excerpt from the piece:

Sustainability and women are inextricably linked.  This is not because of soft inclusive reasons, but for hard inclusive business reasons.  If interconnecting systems of operations, production, shipping, community involvement, environmental responsibility, and more are what we seek, the wider the variety of brains and human traits involved in corporate decision-making, the better. While we have a long tradition of rewarding linear and independent thinking, sustainability will demand a new priority on the relational and interdependent.

I often write about sustainability hidden in plain sight, in terms of what a person or company may already be doing that could be or help drive further sustainability.  In the same way, women are the best sustainability “marketers” hidden in plain sight.  If you want to convince your city to bike or walk more, get to know its women.  As well, if you want to sell more fuel-efficient cars or energy efficient appliances, start by engaging with women.

You may not see their faces when you first think about those topics, and they may not be the ones your ad campaigns directly target, but in most cases, women are the ones to reach for the purposes of their influence on the broader market.  And, all of what we know about marketing “things” to women can now be put to incredible use in encouraging sustainable behavior and practices.  And this is what drives my work today.

Though my writing and consulting career was founded in ten plus years of women’s market research and understanding (I co-authored the book Don’t Think Pink), my focus in more recent years has been on sustainable business and human behavior.  I am driven to better understand how to inspire and engage more people (of whatever gender) to think, live and do business through a lens of sustainability.  What my combined women’s market and sustainable business knowledge tells me is that women hold the key.

But, this is not about having women-only events or about slapping a pink ribbon with an Energy Smart sticker on a refrigerator.  Instead, it may be more about launching a business reminder campaign similar to the “Buy Local First” effort, called: Think Women First.

Why?  Because, women will connect you to what’s important, they’ll let you know which key words to use, what tone to take, which of their values your product or cause needs to reach, and – the bonus – you’ll start to understand how to better connect with men and children on the same topics.  As I have long emphasized in my marketing to women articles and presentations: understand and serve women well, and you will reach everyone better.

This doesn’t mean that women and men exist in separate, polarized camps.  Like all things sustainable, you can’t say, “let’s tackle the women’s side” this year and then address the men’s market next year, because they are connected.  Getting to know women, first, however, will speed your way into the hearts and minds of everyone else.

And, this isn’t just about reaching consumers, either! It’s also about changing organizational culture and leadership. In my recent research on corporate sustainability leadership, a similar relationship emerged, where relational traits, those long considered “softer” or more “feminine” take the lead. In other words, a business or organizational leader’s relational traits contribute to their success in doing their jobs, building teams and integrating sustainability throughout.  It is not one (relational) way of thinking as opposed to the other (linear). Instead: Think Relational First.  When leaders start there, their linear and pragmatic thinking then knows where to go and how to best be applied.

Am I passionate? Yes. In recent weeks, I’ve started to see so much potential for “Thinking Women/Relational First,” it’s crazy.  What excites me most are the mass consumer influencing possibilities.  My favorites include: 1) biking (get more women on bikes to get more people on bikes, then with more people on bikes, you see a decrease in obesity and carbon emissions); 2) the greening of sports (if you want more people to recycle/compost at the stadium, make sure you are talking to women first, then you may just get more people recycling/composting at home); and 3) college campuses (get women engaged with sustainability there, get a lot more future professionals and citizens who have sustainability embedded in their ways of living and working).

So, this is not a women’s story or a women’s issue, and I will have no pink come into contact with this post.  Instead, this is solid sustainable business wisdom that comes from someone who knows, and I am here to help.  What could “Think Women/Relational First” (but not only) do for your business?

When you think about corporations doing things right, your mind doesn’t immediately  think of a candy bar, but maybe it should.  In the course of my research on the attributes of corporate sustainability leaders, I came across a reference to Deborah Cadbury’s recently published book, Chocolate Wars.  And, reading it has given me a better view of The Quaker way of business, which may hold great insights into early corporate social responsibility.

For example, for the Quaker capitalists of the nineteenth century, reckless or irresponsible debt was considered “shameful.” Furthermore, the group’s directives ensured that no man “should launch into trading and worldly business beyond what they can manage honourably.” Scan any New York Times front page from the past few months (years?) and you’ll wish a lot of twenty-first century capitalists, and congresspeople, were living by these same rules.

Other interesting nuggets from Cadbury’s book include her note that Quaker capitalism was extremely successful. In the early nineteenth century, 4,000 Quaker families ran 74 Quaker British banks and more than 200 companies.  As well, Cadbury writes that for the nineteenth century Quaker, business ownership came “with a deep sense of responsibility and accountability to those involved.” That deep sense of responsibility is harder to find today.  In the face of tantalizing stats and figures about money making, human stakeholders can be too easily be ignored by corporate decision-makers.

The big worry with Kraft’s acquisition of Cadbury in early 2010, and with other large corporations taking over small companies today, is that it is easy for the larger entity to destroy the spirit of the firm they takeover.  But, what’s “spirit” when you’ve got Wall Street looking over your shoulder?  (On that note, you may want to read a great Atlantic piece by Adam Werbach on PepsiCo and their Refresh project.)

The Quaker businesspeople had the concept of truly shared stakeholding and corporate responsibility in their blood, and they succeeded.  As Cadbury writes, their nineteenth century entrepreneurialism “illuminated a different work ethic on a more human scale between master and man.” What I’m wondering is this: how did corporations become so removed from the human factor, and are we doing all we can to get back there?