There is a common failure pattern we’ve seen in organisations trying to become more sustainable.
It goes like this.
- The leaders are under pressure
to show they are making their firm more sustainable. They set objectives and targets.
- Teams are assigned to do work.
They carry out research and identify a series of projects.
- Leaders are also concerned
with financial impact, and set short payback criteria for project approval as prudent financial practice.
- None of the identified projects
can meet the hurdle rates required and no projects are approved.
This creates a tension between the stated objective of the organisation and the ability for people to actually initiate projects that will allow the company to meet its goals.
The conflict in this situation cannot be resolved technically – solutions that reduce emissions often have a 5+ year payback while companies have a 2-3 year payback requirement.
Instead, we need to question our assumptions – an approach suggested by Goldratt in the theory of constraints (TOC) literature.
If we don’t – the situation will stay the same as it is now, locked into position by opposing forces, until something else happens to break the deadlock, like a crisis, change in leadership or strategic re-evaluation.
What we need to do is relax this tension – identify the sources of conflict and then think our way out of the situation.
How would you go about doing that?
Handcrafted insight 