All material on this Web site is protected by copyright, and cannot be reproduced without written permission. Copyrights are held by Barbara Stahura. All rights reserved.
wrote for the corporate Web site. “Literally, our company will grow by cleaning up the world, not by polluting or degrading it.”
Not a typical corporate strategy. Not at all, unfortunately.
When Corporations Behave Like Addicts
With signs of environmental destruction -- from species extinction to global warming -- mounting daily, why aren’t more companies following Interface’s example? According to Bill Veltrop, self-described “generative change architect” and founder of the International Center for Organization Change in Soquel Calif., many large businesses possess addictive characteristics that lead to “collective denial of the negative consequences of what it is they’re addicted to and the myopia that goes along with that.”
If his analogy feels like a stretch, remember: Under the law, corporations are treated as individuals. The law serves to protect living, breathing individuals from personal liability, but it’s fair to ask just how healthy a corporate “individual” has been created.
Veltrop’s list of corporate addictions includes workaholism and downsizing, both of which deplete creativity and awareness, particularly in a time of competitive pressures and economic downturn. These addictions “pretty much disappear their capacity for reflection and creative intention, so that keeps them trapped in the vicious action/reaction cycle,” he explains. “There is less time to step out of the squirrel cage to see beyond next quarter.”
Underlying everything else, however, is the mechanistic worldview held by most corporations. That is, they are designed and expected to function as efficient machines “not built to self-evolve,” says Veltrop. If, instead, corporations were generative -- a design that inherently embraces sustainability, evolution, and improvement, along with the messiness such a view entails -- they would make “the growing of a collective consciousness a strategic imperative, saying it’s healthy for us to be conscious not only of the choices we have in various levels of the system but also to be more conscious of the consequences of our choices.”
While Ray Anderson exemplifies how a conscious corporate leader can inject an organization with a generative worldview and create long-term, top-down change, a growing number of entrepreneurs are using similar philosophies from the start. Many people are familiar with the pioneers: the Body Shop’s Anita Roddick; Tom and Kate Chappell of Tom’s of Maine; and Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield of Ben and Jerry’s Ice Cream. But others are following their example.
Not a typical corporate strategy. Not at all, unfortunately.
When Corporations Behave Like Addicts
With signs of environmental destruction -
If his analogy feels like a stretch, remember: Under the law, corporations are treated as individuals. The law serves to protect living, breathing individuals from personal liability, but it’s fair to ask just how healthy a corporate “individual” has been created.
Veltrop’s list of corporate addictions includes workaholism and downsizing, both of which deplete creativity and awareness, particularly in a time of competitive pressures and economic downturn. These addictions “pretty much disappear their capacity for reflection and creative intention, so that keeps them trapped in the vicious action/reaction cycle,” he explains. “There is less time to step out of the squirrel cage to see beyond next quarter.”
Underlying everything else, however, is the mechanistic worldview held by most corporations. That is, they are designed and expected to function as efficient machines “not built to self-
While Ray Anderson exemplifies how a conscious corporate leader can inject an organization with a generative worldview and create long-
