Counterpoint to the Five Myths about Sustainability Executives

[#1]

People often ask me about my favorite sources of good information on current and emerging sustainability issues and trends.

I almost always respond that I like GreenBiz.  For example, I always learn several things from reading their Monday update report, and there are frequently great articles and research summaries that are directly related to the work I do and how I do it.  

Case in point - I recently read John Davies’ piece on “The Five Myths about Sustainability Executives.”

I am on the Green Biz Executive Network and have interacted with John quite a bit and enthusiastically support his work, along with the whole Green Biz team. Since I am such an executive, I took special interest in this article and read it a few times to see if it matched my own experience.  It’s really well done, and I do agree with most of John’s points. However, I have to offer a counterpoint on his 4^th Myth regarding a common language around sustainability.

I can sure empathize with his sentiment that we are really Chief Translation Officers. It’s very true that we need to be able to translate the language of sustainability into many forms to put it into context for each part of the company. The most frequent concern I have heard within the McDonald’s System over the past decade is directly related to this issue. People are confused by the language.   They hear “CSR” and “sustainability” and “triple bottom line” and don’t quite get it.  The language is not suited to working with 1.7 million people that work for McDonald’s in a huge variety of geographic locations and functional capacities. So yes, we have to translate this into something they can understand.  

At the same time, I do wish there was a common language.   Other professions have a common language. Why not our field?  So, I don’t think it is a myth. To me, the reality is that the current language we have – and the multiple inherent definitions - is not helpful to the common person.  Even the experts vary on the definitions.  I wish we did not have to translate. Furthermore, I think the lack of a common language is a barrier to progress.  

[#2]

Now I agree that there needs to be mor stability in way things are taught especially when it comes to definitions, and I do agree on the variety of ways people go about trying to rediscover the meaning behind quality food and all the while maintaining a professional business. I am pleased by how mcdonalds incourages the growth of its company and all the while I support your ideas ferventiky. All in all there is always room for improvement, and it starts with one person and the other person next to them listening to their problems. Communication is what runs a business and most relatioships. The next part is financial goals and time being money, people tend to have a problem with that.

[#3]

I agree with all your saying. But communication is half of every business and the rest is cooperation and the 1% is what to do with the money.

Mantainence and resources come into play with big dogs such as yourself.

I take my hate off to you.

But also keep in mind you can't always make people happy.