Is the practice of making a company sustainable a performative act, one motivated by a company's true values, or a move made for profit? And furthermore, does it matter if the effects are all the same? Companies all over the world are starting to align with newer, greener trajectories, and they do it for a myriad of reasons.

Andrew S. Winston is the founder of Winston EcoStrategies, and an author whose latest book, co-authored with Paul Polman, Net Positive: How Courageous Companies Thrive by Giving More Than They Take, examines precisely these questions.

Greg and Andrew discuss what sustainability really means and how it differs and overlaps with ESG. Andrew recounts how the company Unilever has solved problems of sustainability and implemented them on a multinational scale. Greg and Andrew talk about the problem of the terms ballooning to include things originally outside the original definitions, what the future looks like on the sustainability landscape for corporations, and why Andrew is so optimistic about it.

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

Episode Quotes:

The impact of individual actions on the environmental footprints

24:22: The reason an individual can only do so much on their footprint is because they can't control that the grid is 80% coal in their area or whatever. Like the way that they can impact that is how they vote, right? How they support companies that are promoting the right things are not like it's much bigger elements of their lives than just literally what are they buying day to day. They can vote with their feet, and they should, and there's a few things people can do that move their footprint noticeably like eating less meat is the most immediate thing you can do, starting right now. But there's actually not a thousand things that really have any impact. There's a few, there's a handful. What you eat, what you drive, how close to work you live, and a bunch of these decisions don't come every day.

Does sustainability make a company outperform?

12:12: There's been a long correlation between doing well on sustainability and doing well as a business, and the correlation causation there is difficult and impossible to parse. And it's because companies that are good at most things are good at most things.

Climate change and the inequality issue

46:33: The poorest people on the planet are the least responsible for climate and are basically the ones getting hit the hardest. And the people producing all of the emissions over the last 50 to 100 years are the richest; the richest billion or so of us have created the entire problem.

Is the CEO job harder today than it was before?

48:45: I was speaking with a CEO group recently, and they said the CEO job is much harder than it ever was before. Well, clearly, look at what's going on, right? You have to chime in on an LGBTQ law if you're Disney. These are hard things. I can't say I feel too bad for CEOs. The average Fortune 500 CEO makes what, $10–15 million a year? Like they're getting paid a lot. Like they're supposed to deal with the hard problems, and they're now being put to the test. And I'm not saying these things are easy, but I have these debates all the time. People say, 'Well, how come my company doesn't respond to everything? ' They don't have to. But the hard reality is that if you don't say something about an issue, you're still saying something.

Show Links:

Recommended Resources:

Paul Polman
ESG
George Serafeim Faculty Profile at Harvard

Guest Profile:

His Work:

316. The Future is Sustainable feat. Andrew S. Winston

unSILOed with Greg LaBlanc