Post on 29-Jan-2023
THE ECOLOGICAL WORLDVIEWS AND POST-CONVENTIONAL ACTION LOGICS OF GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY LEADERS
by STEVEN SCHEIN
ABSTRACT
This is an empirical study of ecological worldviews and action logics of global
sustainability leaders. Although a body of research has emerged in recent years focused on
corporate sustainability practices at the organizational level, the literature has paid less
attention to corporate sustainability at the individual level. As a result, little is known about
the deeper psychological motivations of sustainability leaders and how these motivations
may influence their behavior and effectiveness as change agents.
This study was based on theoretical insights from several social science disciplines
including ecopsychology, integral ecology, environmental sociology, and developmental
psychology. Drawing on interviews with 65 leaders in more than 50 multinational
corporations, NGOs, and consultancies, the study presents three major propositions that
illuminate specific ways that ecological worldviews and action logics are developed and
expressed by sustainability leaders. Specific findings include five experiences that shape
ecological worldviews over the lifespan and six ways that post-conventional action logics
are expressed by sustainability leaders. Findings also include how the complexity of
sustainability is driving highly collaborative approaches to leadership. Insights from this
research can be integrated into leadership development programs in a wide range of public
and private institutions and will be of interest to a range of sustainability scholars, social
science researchers, sustainability executives, and social entrepreneurs.
Key Words: Sustainability leader, ecological worldviews, action logics, ecopsychology, developmental theory, new ecological paradigm, ecological self, corporate sustainability
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Toward the end of my doctoral studies, my wife and I travelled to India and Nepal to
visit our daughter, who was studying in Kathmandu. One morning before dawn, we found
ourselves on a small rowboat on the Ganges River in the ancient city of Varanasi. As the
sun rose along the eastern shore, we placed floating candles on the river, praying and
chanting with our Hindu guide. At one point, I turned to my wife and said, “I feel as though
my dissertation committee is along with me.” Although she had become accustomed to
how often I brought them up during the previous year, I don't think she expected me to
mention them at precisely that moment! When she asked me what I meant, I explained
how they were each connected to India, and to me, in different ways.
My chair, Fielding President Dr. Katrina Rodgers, was about to give a keynote
address on ecological leadership at a management conference in New Delhi.
Anthropologist Dr. David Willis, my first faculty reader, was conducting research on a
spiritual community in Southern India. My second faculty reader, human development
scholar Dr. Judy Stevens-Long, had recently begun a new book about several of the
world’s most important religious texts, including the Bhagavad Gita. My external
examiner, MIT sustainability scholar Dr. Jason Jay, just celebrated the birth of his daughter
Uma, which means mother goddess Durga in Hindu mythology. My student reader, Julie
Huffaker, traveled and meditated in India years ago and had shared with me how deeply the
trip had affected her life.
I mention these connections to India for several reasons. First, they offer insight into
the interdisciplinary breadth and depth of the five individuals that comprised my
committee. Each of these individuals are not only highly respected scholars in multiple
iv
disciplines that include hermeneutics, cultural anthropology, human development,
leadership, organization development, and sustainability; they are great teachers.
However, this is not why I was thinking about them that morning on the Ganges. I
was thinking how each of them helped me see and feel so much more of the human story of
this ancient civilization while floating down the river. I realized at that moment that my
doctoral studies had given me much more than a PhD, they had greatly enhanced the way I
will experience the rest of my life. At 54 years of age, this is no small gift. I am very
grateful for the guidance of these five individuals during my dissertation journey.
I thank the many Fielding faculty members from whom I learned much. I also express
my gratitude to several scholars outside of Fielding with whom I developed friendships.
The many conversations I had with each of them at pivotal moments helped me back out of
more than a few corners and open new doors. Dr. John Bowling, Dr. Barrett Brown, Dr.
Richmond Fourmy, Dr. Sean Esbjorn-Hargens, Dr. Annick Hedlund de-Witt, Dr. Hilary
Bradbury Huang, Dr. Elliot Maltz, Dr. Aliki Nicolaides, Dr. William Torbert, and Dr.
Nancy Wallis. I also want to thank the 65 sustainability leaders that took the time to be
participants in my research as well as a circle of close friends that took walks in the woods
and listened patiently as I worked out ideas. Ben Bellinson (and his giant dog Nelson),
Dana Carmen, Aaren Glover, Matt Hough, Stephen and Sarah Marshank, and Robert
Townsend.
Finally, I offer a deep bow to my family. My three amazing children, Casey, Maggie,
and Teddy, ages 23, 21, and 19; each of them are stepping into their own worldviews in
such wonderful ways these days. My partner of 28 years, Patty Samera Schein, thank you
for being alongside me, behind me, and putting up with me, while I wrote this dissertation.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE: THE STUDY ............................................................................................................ 1 Reframing Sustainability ...................................................................................................................... 1 Theoretical Framework: Ecological Worldviews and Action Logics...................................... 2 Research Questions ................................................................................................................................ 3 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Definitions ................................................................................................................................................. 4 Significance of the Research ............................................................................................................... 5 Researcher Worldview and Personal Motivation .......................................................................... 7 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 8
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .................................................................... 9 Introduction............................................................................................................................................... 9 The Ecological Worldview Literature............................................................................................... 9
Interpretations of Worldviews ........................................................................................................ 9 Ecological Worldviews .................................................................................................................. 11 A New Ecological Paradigm ......................................................................................................... 14 The Ecological Self ......................................................................................................................... 17
Developmental Theory and Action Logics .................................................................................... 19 Studies Integrating Developmental Theory and Ecological Worldviews ........................ 21
The Sustainability Leadership Literature ....................................................................................... 23 Great Man Theories of Leadership ............................................................................................. 24 Interior Theories of Leadership .................................................................................................... 25 The Environmental and Sustainability Leadership Literatures ........................................... 27
Integrating Developmental Theory, Ecological Worldviews, and Sustainability .............. 28 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 32
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY AND DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANTS .... 34 Introduction............................................................................................................................................. 34 Research Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 34
Qualitative Approach ...................................................................................................................... 34 Data Collection ................................................................................................................................. 35 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 35 Analyzing Interview Texts Through Hermeneutic Turns ..................................................... 36 Sampling Strategy and Recruitment of Participants .............................................................. 37
vi
Description of Participants ................................................................................................................. 38 Small Size of Sustainability Departments ................................................................................. 39
Results from the Pilot Study .............................................................................................................. 40 Integrity During The Research Process .......................................................................................... 41 IRB Approval ......................................................................................................................................... 42 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 42
CHAPTER FOUR: ECOLOGICAL WORLDVIEWS ................................................................... 43 Introduction............................................................................................................................................. 43 Theme 1: Experiences that Shape Ecological Worldviews Over the Lifespan ................... 44
Family of Origin and Early Childhood Experiences in Nature ........................................... 45 Environmental Education, Teachers, and Mentors ................................................................. 47 Seeing Poverty and Environmental Degradation in Developing Countries .................... 49 Perceiving Capitalism as a Vehicle for Environmental Activism ...................................... 50 A Sense of Spirituality and Service ............................................................................................ 52
Theme 2: Expressions of Ecocentric Worldviews ..................................................................... 54 An Awareness of Ecological Embeddedness ........................................................................... 55 An Awareness of the Fragility of Planetary Ecosystems ...................................................... 56 A Belief in the Intrinsic Value of Nature .................................................................................. 58
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 60 CHAPTER FIVE: EXPRESSIONS OF POST-CONVENTIONAL ACTION LOGICS ... 61
Introduction............................................................................................................................................. 61 Theme Three: Expressions of Post-conventional Action Logics ............................................ 62
Awareness of Diverse Worldviews and Contexts ................................................................... 63 Thinking in Decades: Future Generations and Historical Context .................................... 66 Enhanced Systems Consciousness .............................................................................................. 68 Planet-Centric Circles of Identity and Care .............................................................................. 71 An Inquiring Stance with Greater Vulnerability ..................................................................... 73 Highly Collaborative Approaches to Leadership .................................................................... 75
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 80 CHAPTER SIX: IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY AND PRACTICE ................................... 82
Introduction............................................................................................................................................. 82 Implications of Theme One ........................................................................................................... 84 Implications of Theme Two .......................................................................................................... 86 Implications of Theme Three ........................................................................................................ 89
vii
Future Research ..................................................................................................................................... 95 Limitations to the Study ...................................................................................................................... 97 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 98
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 100
viii
LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Disciplines/Theorists that form Ecological Worldview Literature…….. 12 Table 2. The Dominant Social Paradigm vs. The New Ecological Paradigm…… 16 Table 3. Descriptions of the Ecological Selves…………………………………. 23 Table 4. Description of Leadership Action Logics.…………………………………. 26 Table 5. Summary of Frameworks from the Literature Review…………………. 31
ix
LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A. Corporate Sustainability Leadership Qualitative Interview Questions... 108
Appendix B. Ecological Worldview Qualitative Interview Questions………............. 109
Appendix C. Fielding Graduate University Informed Consent Form………………. 110
x
CHAPTER ONE: THE STUDY
Reframing Sustainability
As midsize mammals dependent on the earth’s ecosystems for life, human beings
now face the most serious and complex set of ecological problems in our history. Driven
by our ecologically unsustainable way of life and the dramatic increase in our global
population, these problems include an increasingly less predictable climate and a wide
range of interrelated social, environmental, and economic problems. Compounded by
growing water scarcity, deforestation, species extinction, and ocean acidification, our
ability to thrive is threatened (Barlow, 2007; Brown, 2010; McKibben, 2010).
Although we have been saturated with scientific information describing the
ecological crisis, it has not significantly changed the behaviors responsible for the serious
problems we face. Although some progress has been made in the public sector, government
leaders have been unable to advance ecological sustainability in a comprehensive manner.
Despite a growing awareness of the environmental issues in the private sector, the quarterly
earnings report is still the major driver in the corporate world. As a result, CEOs with
sustainability at the top of their agenda are few and far between. It appears that more
information from the natural sciences is not enough. Perhaps the social sciences can now
make a vital contribution by reframing ecological issues, especially for sustainability
leadership (Esbjorn-Hargens & Zimmerman, 2009; Hedlund-de Witt, 2012; Hulme, 2009;
Obrien 2006; Rogers, 2012).
Recent literature has explored how multinational corporations can play an important
role in solving the planet’s great ecological challenges. However, it focuses primarily on
2
overall corporate strategies and best green business practices. While a significant body of
research has emerged in recent years focused on corporate sustainability at the
organizational level (Lazlo & Zhexembayeva, 2011; Maltz & Schein, 2013; Porter &
Kramer, 2011), the literature has not paid enough attention to sustainability leadership at
the individual level. As a result, little is known about the deeper psychological motivations
of sustainability leaders and how this may relate to their effectiveness and capacity to lead
transformational change (Brown, 2012; Visser & Crane, 2010).
Theoretical Framework: Ecological Worldviews and Action Logics
Reframing the traditional natural science dialogue in the context of sustainability will
require a new type of integration with certain social science disciplines that can add
valuable new insights. These include developmental psychology, eco-psychology, deep
ecology, integral ecology, ecological economics, and environmental sociology.
At the intersection of these disciplines lies a phenomenon known as worldview,
which can be thought of as our entrenched ways of seeing the world. Worldview has been
defined as the “cognitive, perceptual, and affective maps that people continuously use to
make sense of the social landscape and to find their ways to whatever goals they seek. They
are developed throughout a person’s lifetime through socialization and social interaction.
They are encompassing and pervasive in adherence and influence. Yet they are usually
unconsciously and uncritically taken for granted as the way things are” (Hart, 2010, p.2). In
relation to ecological sustainability, worldviews can act as blinders that limit our perception
of the natural world.
Ecopsychologists and environmental sociologists characterize most worldviews as
anthropocentric, reflecting a belief that human beings can ultimately control nature through
3
technological and economic advances. Conversely, ecocentric worldviews express a belief
that human beings are dependent on and literally embedded in the Earth's ecosystem
(Capra, 1996; Meadows, 2008; Naess, 1989).
Within the developmental psychology and leadership literatures, an important
component of worldview is called action logics, which is the frame through which people
translate their thoughts, feelings, and perceptions into actions (Torbert, 2004). Action
logics may be conventional and less complex or post-conventional and more complex
(Cook-Greuter, 2004; Kegan & Lahey, 2009; Rooke & Torbert, 2005). Based on decades of
research on corporate leadership, Torbert and Herdman-Barker (2008) have shown how
leaders with post-conventional action logics have enhanced capacities to transform
organizations.
This study explores how ecological worldviews and action logics have the power to
enhance our understanding of the psychological dimensions of sustainability leadership. It
suggests that these two concepts have been missing from the field and sets the stage for the
two research questions.
Research Questions
How do sustainability leaders describe their worldviews and motivation for their work? Do the descriptions by sustainability leaders of their worldviews and their motivation for sustainability reflect specific action logics?
Methodology To answer these questions, a multiphase qualitative design was deployed.
Interviews took place with 65 sustainability practitioners, predominantly senior executives
from multinational corporations, with smaller samples from private companies, NGOs, and
4
consultancies. Thematic analysis and hermeneutic methodology was used to analyze and
interpret the qualitative interview data. This process resulted in three major themes, each
of which are supported by three to six findings. A complete description of the research
methodology is provided in Chapter 3.
Definitions
Several key terms and concepts are used throughout this study. Below
operationalized definitions are provided.
Sustainability – The ability to meet the needs of the present generation of
human beings without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
needs. This refers to ecological, social, and economic needs.
Corporate sustainability - The ability of corporations to produce, distribute,
and dispose of goods and services without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their needs. Also called corporate social responsibility (CSR),
green business, corporate stewardship, natural capitalism, and shared value.
Green business – The strategies, products, and approaches in business that
emerged as a result of the growing awareness of the impact of business on nature.
Sustainability leaders – The individuals inside of corporations, NGOs,
governments, and other types of institutions whose primary responsibility is
developing and leading sustainability initiatives. Sustainability leaders can be at the
Chief Sustainability Officer, Vice President, Director, and Managerial level.
Sustainability leadership - The academic discipline focused on sustainability
leaders and sustainability departments within institutions.
5
Worldview – The cognitive and perceptual maps that people continuously
use to make sense of the world (Hart, 2010).
Ecological worldview –The cognitive and perceptual maps that people
continuously use to make sense of the natural world. They can be thought of as the
deep mental patterns for how people see relationships within the natural
environment. Includes the way people think about the relationship between society
and nature as well as their individual relationship with nature.
Action logics - The stages of increasing mental complexity adults can
potentially move through across their life span. Action logics are also called
mindsets, stages of consciousness, centers of gravity, mental patterns, meaning-
making systems, and orders of consciousness. They can be thought of as the frame
through which people translate their thoughts, feelings, and perceptions into actions.
They affect what people can be aware of, reflect on, and act on (Cook-Greuter,
2004; Kegan, 1994; Torbert, 2004).
Post-conventional action logics – This broad category refers to the more
advanced stages of adult development characterized by a greater understanding of
complexity and interdependency of systems. Post-conventional is also referred to
as later stage and postformal by developmental theorists (Brown, 2012; Cook-
Greuter, 2004; Esbjorn-Hargens, 2005; Kegan, 1994; Torbert, 2004).
Significance of the Research
During the last decade, the sustainability position inside multinational corporations
has grown in influence. Beginning with the appointment of the first Chief Sustainability
Officer in 2004 (Weinrub, 2011), the position has grown from the managerial level to
6
Director to Vice President to the Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO). Today there are
senior sustainability executives in hundreds of the world’s largest multinational companies.
In many cases, the Chief Sustainability Officer now reports directly to the Chief Executive
Officer (CEO). These are highly influential individuals inside of highly influential
companies.
Despite this, the literature has not focused enough attention on corporate
sustainability at the individual level. There have been a few theoretical studies that have
attempted to integrate ecological worldviews and action logics in the context of
sustainability leadership (Esbjorn-Hargens & Zimmerman, 2009, Boiral, Cayer, & Baron,
2009). In terms of empirical research, there have been even fewer studies. Those that have
been conducted have made significant new contributions but have been based on small
sample sizes (Brown, 2012; Hedlund-de Witt; 2012, Rogers, 2012).
This study begins to fill this gap. It seeks to provide answers to questions such as
the following: What are the deeper motivations of individuals that lead sustainability within
multinational corporations? What are their ecological worldviews, from where did these
views originate, and how are they shaped over time? How do they think about their work in
sustainability and what does this reveal in terms of their action logics? How have their
action logics and work in sustainability influenced their approaches to leadership?
A major contribution of this study is that it serves to empirically ground key
theories from the ecological worldview and developmental psychology literatures in
sustainability leadership practice. By doing so, it sets the stage for social science
researchers from several social science disciplines to pursue a major new line of inquiry:
sustainability leadership development. By contextualizing the research at the intersection
7
of the ecological worldview, developmental psychology, and sustainability leadership
literatures, this study should be of interest to a wide range of sustainability educators, social
science researchers, sustainability executives, and social entrepreneurs. Insights can be
integrated into leadership development programs in a wide range of public and private
institutions to help sustainability leaders reframe and more effectively confront global
challenges.
Researcher Worldview and Personal Motivation
By considering the underlying assumptions, past experiences, and philosophical
worldviews, researchers can become more aware of why they choose their methodologies
for a research project (Creswell, 2009). Among possible philosophical worldviews, I
describe mine as constructivist and transformative (Marshall & Rossman, 2011; Creswell,
2009). The constructive aspect stems from my desire to interpret and make sense of a
subjective and complex phenomenon: the way sustainability leaders develop and express
their ecological worldviews and action logics. The transformative aspect is to make
explicit my values regarding ecological sustainability and my intention for the research to
become actionable in the context of global leadership practice. This desire stems from my
personal motivation as a sustainability educator and practitioner over the last decade.
Since first reading the scientific research on the potential impacts of climate change
on the earth’s ecosystems, I have been interested in the relationship between business and
the environment. As a university business professor, I have been teaching and developing
sustainability related curricula since 2004. My work has focused on how the environmental
and social sciences can be integrated into business curriculum and corporate leadership
development programs.
8
In addition to reading the environmental and sustainability literature, my education
has included starting a small organic farm and studying with a series of teachers in the
fields of botany, permaculture, organic farming, and forest stewardship. This experience
has allowed me to see the natural world more clearly and understand how far out of balance
we’ve become as a global society. I have come to better understand the interconnectedness
of our climate, food, soil, energy, water, and waste, and their relationship to our planetary
ecosystems, our health, and our global economy. By presenting the findings from this
dissertation research, I hope to add new actionable insights to the field of sustainability
leadership in the service of ecological sustainability.
Conclusion
In this chapter, an overview of the study and the theoretical framework were
presented. The two research questions that guided the study and the significance of the
research were described. Consistent with the constructivist and transformative nature of
this study, I also described my researcher worldview and personal motivation for
conducting this research (Marshall & Rossman, 2011; Creswell, 2009).
In the chapters that follow, the literatures that form the theoretical framework will
be reviewed in depth and specific gaps the study was designed to address will be
highlighted in Chapter 2. Then in Chapter 3, the qualitative research methodology will be
described including the approaches to data collection, sampling and recruitment of
participants, and data analysis. In Chapters 4 and 5, the findings from the study will be
presented, including more than 100 separate quotations from the semi-structured
interviews. Finally, in Chapter 6, the significance of the study and the theoretical
implications will be discussed, including several suggestions for future research.
9
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
In response to the growing awareness of the earth’s ecological crises, countless
books and articles informed by research from the natural sciences have been published
since the early 1970s. However research into how the social sciences can help reframe how
we view ecological issues and advance the field of sustainability leadership is just
beginning. The literatures of ecological worldviews, developmental psychology, and
sustainability leadership can help reframe the natural science discourse and create new
insights for sustainability leaders. Taken together, these three literatures form the
theoretical framework for this study.
The Ecological Worldview Literature
The literature about ecological worldviews is made up of various disciplines (see
Table 1). The general concept of worldviews and how it has been defined by three of the
social science disciplines will first be examined. Next, the concept of ecological
worldviews is discussed through the lens of several subdisciplines. The constructs of a new
ecological paradigm and the ecological self will then be analyzed to enhance our
understanding of ecological worldviews.
Interpretations of Worldviews
The social psychologist Koltko-Rivera (2004) defines worldviews as a set of
assumptions about physical and social reality that can have powerful effects on cognition
and behavior. Worldview can also be characterized as one's total outlook on life, society,
and its institutions. Highlighting the esoteric nature of worldviews, Koltko-Rivera (2004)
10
adds that worldview is often hidden in the literature because it is called other things
including values, paradigms, and beliefs.
From a sociological perspective, Ray and Anderson (2000) situate the term in the
context of values and culture in the United States. They define worldview as “the content
of everything you believe is real - which includes God, the economy, technology, the
planet, how things work, how you should work and play, your relationship with your
beloved - and everything you value” (p. 17). Ray and Anderson (2000) observe that
changes in worldview do not happen often because it changes virtually everything in our
consciousness. They describe this as a sense of who you are and what you are willing to
see, including your priorities for action. Their seminal book, The Cultural Creatives, is a
large-scale sociological survey that divides Americans into three large cultural groups
essentially based on their respective worldviews. Although a complete discussion of the
implications of their work is beyond the scope of this dissertation, it is relevant to
understanding many of the challenges American society has faced over the last decade. As
relates to ecological sustainability, their research helps explain why people from opposing
political parties disagree about environmental policy.
In the field of developmental psychology, we see extensive use of the worldview
concept. Developmental stage theorists and consciousness researchers have periodically
used the term worldviews synonymously with the concepts of meaning-making systems,
action logics, stages of development (Cook-Greuter, 2000, 2004; Torbert, 2004), and
orders of consciousness (Kegan, 1980, 1994). Goldhaber (2000) outlines three families of
worldview theories that are relevant to the study of human development: the mechanistic
worldview, the organismic worldview, and the contextualist worldview, where each family
11
puts forth different theoretical images of human development. Overton (2006)
characterizes worldviews as narratives that ultimately evolve to become an overarching
paradigm constellated by a set of interwoven and coherent set of concepts.
Finally, ecological economists Beddoe et al. (2009) describe how “our current
socio-ecological regime is a set of interconnected worldviews, institutions, and
technologies that all support the goal of unlimited growth of material production and
consumption as a proxy for the quality of life” (p. 1). Former World Bank economist Daly
(1996) calls for a pre-analytic vision or worldview in making the distinction between
qualitative development versus quantitative growth, which is the core idea underlying the
idea of his theory of steady-state economics. Having explored how the overall worldview
concept has been used by three of the social sciences, the next section will introduce the
concept of ecological worldviews.
Ecological Worldviews
Ecological worldviews were described as early as the 13th century by St. Francis of
Assisi, who said that all humans were responsible for protecting nature as part of their faith
in God. The transcendentalism of Emerson and Thoreau in the 19th century and more
recently Thomas Merton in the early 20th century have also contributed to our
understanding, each suggesting new ways of thinking about the natural world. More
recently, philosophers including White (1967) and Naess (1989) introduced ecological
worldviews into academic discourse. Since then, social scientists from various disciplines
have explored the nature and implications of ecological worldviews, resulting in a large
and growing body of literature as noted in Table 1.
12
Table 1 – Disciplines and Theorists Who Comprise the Ecological Worldview Literature Discipline Theorists Key Concepts and Themes Eco-psychology Roszak
Hillman O’Connor Conn Kahn
Psyche and gaia Anthropocentricism of psychology Ecopsychology, health, and well-being Developing sensory awareness Human relationship with technology
Deep Ecology Naess Sessions Drengson Devall Fox Macy Abram
Deep vs. shallow ecology - ecological maturity Ecological self Technocratic vs. planetary-person paradigm Ecocentricism vs. anthropocentrism Ecological transpersonal philosophy Ecological self - paradigm shift Ecological embeddedness
Environmental Sociology Systems Thinking
Dunlap Hedlund de-Witt Bragg Kempton Bateson Meadows Capra
New ecological paradigm NEP critique/worldviews by discipline Constructionist theory/expanded self-concept Environmental values Ecology of mind Limits to growth Systems thinking - web of life
Ecological Economics
Beddoe Costanza Daly
Redesign dominant socio-economic regime Valuing natural capital Steady-state-economy, pre-analytic vision
Social Views on Climate change
Obrien Hulme
Framing climate change debate Social meanings of climate change
Integral Ecology Indigenous Studies
Hedlund de-Witt Esbjorn-Hargens Four Arrows Hart
Integral perspective on worldviews Ecological selves framework Indigenous education / paradigm shift Indigenous worldviews and research
Developmental Psychology and Sustainability Leadership
Boiral et al. Brown Rogers Hedlund de-Witt
Action logics and environmental leadership Conscious leadership for sustainability Corporate Ecological Selves Integral worldview framework
Environmental sociologist Hedlund-de Witt (2012) notes that research into
worldviews has historically been underemphasized. By observing that approaches to
environmental issues from academia, public policy, and the corporate sphere have not
integrated interior perspectives, she highlights the potential for worldview research. These
interior perspectives include psychological dynamics, emotional responses, and cultural
13
values. Citing Koltko-Rivera (2004), she makes the distinction between environmental
attitudes and worldviews. Attitudes are the collection of beliefs, affect, and behavioral
intentions a person holds regarding environmentally related activities. The more
encompassing concept of worldview refers to the foundational assumptions and perceptions
regarding the underlying nature of reality.
Integral ecologists Esbjorn-Hargens and Zimmerman (2009) use the term in a
cultural and developmental context. They observe that within the environmental
movement there are three large groups of worldviews known as traditional, modern, and
postmodern. Here they are using the word worldview to refer to politics, religion, and
culture. They state that the failure to differentiate amongst worldviews prevents
environmentalists from effectively communicating with each other and, more importantly,
moving toward solving the world's major environmental problems.
These authors break new ground by exploring the relationship between ecological
worldviews and stages of consciousness. They state their intention as “the study of
interiors and the development of those interiors so that environmentalists will acknowledge
that environmental issues arise differently for people depending on their worldview” (p.
38).
The integral approach suggests leaders need an understanding of stages of
consciousness so that they can communicate with people that hold a variety of worldviews.
They make a compelling case that a successful approach to ecological sustainability is
dependent on the development of a world-centric identity. They observe that this stage
development has been largely ignored in environmental and ecological research and in
traditional academia in general.
14
In addition to the theoretical lenses cited above, social scientists have looked at the
nature of ecological worldviews through various constructs. Amongst the most prominent
are the new ecological paradigm and the ecological self. By exploring the literature
focused on these two constructs, an expanded understanding of ecological worldview
emerges.
A New Ecological Paradigm
Underlying the various interpretations of ecological worldviews by the social
sciences is the tension between anthropocentric and ecocentric worldviews. Eco-
psychologists and environmental sociologists characterize most worldviews as
anthropocentric reflecting a belief that human beings can ultimately control nature through
technological and economic advances. An anthropocentric worldview also reflects a belief
that human beings are at the center of the universe and the most significant species on
earth. It assumes that all phenomena in the world should be interpreted in terms of human
values and experiences.
On the other hand, a person with an ecocentric worldview expresses a belief that
human beings are dependent on and literally embedded in the Earth's ecosystem. An eco-
centric thinker sees the earth’s biosphere at the center, with humans as one of many
thousands of species that have arisen and are dependent upon the earth’s living systems for
survival (Abram, 2010, Capra, 1996; Meadows, 2008; Naess, 1989).
The Canadian novelist and environmental activist Margaret Atwood helps make the
difference between these two worldviews clear. She observes that the green movement is
not a movement to save nature, but actually a movement to save the human race. She adds
that nature in all of its evolutionary biodiversity will prevail long after the human race; and
15
humans, an unusual midsize mammalian species, may disappear from the planet. An
ecocentric worldview means having a basic understanding of non-human organisms and
their ecosystems. It requires that we apply what we learn about how human activity
impinges on ecosystems so as to do less harm and live sustainably in our ecological niche
(Goleman, 2009).
Building on the distinction between anthropocentric and eco-centric worldviews,
the notion of a new environmental paradigm (NEP) was first coined by Dunlap and Van
Liere (1978). Influenced by the publication of Limits to Growth (Meadows et al., 1972) and
the growing environmental movement, these two young sociologists described their
motivation as stemming from a shift in their own worldviews from the existing dominant
social paradigm.
They began to conceptualize a new environmental paradigm based on the three
major themes found in the environmental literature: existence of ecological limits to
growth, importance of maintaining the balance of nature, and rejection of the
anthropocentric notion that nature exists primarily for human use. They introduced a new
survey instrument that was widely adopted in the research community during the 1980s and
produced numerous studies. Then based on new information from the natural sciences and
the growing awareness of deforestation, loss of biodiversity, and climate change, they
expanded their instrument in the late 1992 and renamed it The New Ecological Paradigm
Scale (Dunlap, 2008).
16
Table 2 - The Dominant Social Paradigm vs. The New Ecological Paradigm
DOMINANT SOCIAL PARADIGM NEW ECOLOGICAL PARADIGM
Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs
When humans interfere with nature it often produces disastrous results
Humans were created to rule over the rest of nature
Despite our abilities, humans are still subject to the laws of nature
Plants and animals exist primarily to be used by humans
Plants and animals have as much right as humans to exist
Human ingenuity will ensure that we do not make the earth unlivable
We are approaching the limit of the number of people the earth can support
The earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to develop them
The earth is like a spaceship with only limited room and resources
The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with impacts of modern industrial nations
In order to maintain healthy planetary ecosystems, we need to change our sources of energy and develop a “steady-state” economy
The so-called ecological crisis facing humankind has been greatly exaggerated
If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major ecological catastrophe
Note: Adapted from Boiral et al., 2009; Brown, 2012; and Dunlap et al. 2000.
Based on the extensive use of the NEP survey by social scientists, the idea of a new
ecological paradigm has generated significant dialogue over the last three decades.
However, findings about ecological worldviews based on the NEP survey have been
criticized from a psychological perspective (Boiral et al., 2009; Brown, 2012; Hedlund-de
Witt, 2012).
The major criticism of the NEP is that it is primarily a measure of values and beliefs
on a societal level and does not get at deeper individual eco-psychological constructs. This
is due in large part to the instrument being originally designed as a sociological survey.
This is also due to the psychological dimensions of ecological worldviews being
17
underrepresented in the social science literature in general, as Hedlund-de Witt (2012) and
Esbjorn-Hargens and Zimmerman (2009) have noted. However, this is where
developmental theory may help shed light into the deeper nature of ecological worldviews.
As a next step in this exploration, an overview of the construct of the ecological self is
presented in the next section.
The Ecological Self
The ecological self is the primary eco-psychological construct that has been
explored by the social sciences over the last 40 years. The first explicit reference to the
ecological self was made by Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess in the 1970s in his work
on the philosophy of deep ecology. Since then, the concept of the ecological self has been
explored by three primary disciplines: deep ecology (Abram, 2010; Macy 2007; Seed,
Macy, Fleming, & Naess, 1988), eco-psychology (Kahn, 1999; Roszak, Gomes, & Kanner,
1995), and integral ecology (Esbjorn-Hargens & Zimmerman 2009).
Among the deep ecologists, Naess (1989), Shepard (1973), and Devall (1995)
explore the ecological self from a developmental perspective, although without making
reference to stages. Building on the concept of many-sided maturity, Naess (1989)
observes that a person can be mature in social relations but have an adolescent ecological
self. Shepard (1973) describes a potential state of consciousness where the epidermis of the
skin is like the surface of a pond with a felt sense that nature is continuous within us. This
capacity to comprehend that human beings are part of the greater ecosystem may signal a
later stage of an ecological worldview. Integrating a more developmental perspective,
Devall (1995) concludes that we underestimate our self-potential by not appreciating our
18
ecological self. He contends that the ecological self is part of the transforming process that
is required to heal ourselves in the world.
Eco-psychologist Sewall (1995) supports the idea that the ecological self matures
through the recovery and development of our sensory systems, which she calls “exquisitely
evolved channels for translating the in here and the out there” (p. 203). She recommends
five perceptual practices for perceiving our ecological conditions. Through these practices
inner and outer worlds become arbitrary and the mature ecological self perceives its
permeability. Empathy for and identity with the broader ecosystem are outcomes of these
changes in perception. Conn (1995) describes an ecologically responsible construction of
the self as part of a counseling practice based on the direct experience of
interconnectedness of nature.
Australian environmental psychologist Elizabeth Bragg (1996) explores the concept
of the ecological self through the lens of what she calls constructionist psychological
theory. The ecological self is a foundational construct of eco-psychology, but she suspects
that an expanded self-concept can affect the functioning of an individual in the
environment. Her research seeks to explore how self-constructs can be changed.
Although she does not specifically refer to stages of development, her theoretical
analysis generally supports an integration of eco-psychology and constructive
developmental psychology. By doing so, Bragg suggests that a developmental perspective
is needed to enhance our understanding of ecological worldviews. In constructionist theory,
the self is not treated as a psychological entity that exists empirically (as often implied by
western psychological theories of self) but as a construct co-created by culture, society, and
19
individuals at a particular time and place. This is consistent with the systems, dialectical,
ecological, and contextual views of human development (Stevens-Long & Michaud, 2006).
Bragg notes three reasons why this developmental theory has considerable
relevance to the concept of the ecological self. First, developmental theory is based on a
more ecological or systems view of the person. Secondly, it offers some understanding of
how an expanded construct of self might affect the individual. Third, developmental theory
may lead to suggestions about how constructs of the self can be changed. Now that the
ecological worldview literature and the constructs of a new ecological paradigm and the
ecological self have been reviewed, developmental theory and research are explored in
relation to these key themes.
Developmental Theory and Action Logics
In this section an overview of developmental theory and action logics is presented.
Then the few studies that have attempted to integrate developmental theory with ecological
worldviews are reviewed. Certain gaps and new avenues for the integration of
developmental theory and ecological worldviews are then suggested that foreshadow this
research.
Although there are early references to the development of self in ancient religion
and philosophy, the modern concept of development of self through differentiated stages
was pioneered by child psychologist Jean Piaget (1948, 1954). Building on his work,
Kohlberg (1969) and Loevinger (1977) then expanded the study of childhood stage
development to adults, followed by Kegan (1980), who added the term constructive
developmental to the psychological literature. Since then, developmental theorists
including Cook-Greuter (2004), Kegan (1994), and Torbert (2004) have made significant
20
contributions to our understanding of how adults construct knowledge about the world
around them through specific hierarchical stages of increasing complexity across their
lifespan. Collectively, their research has shown that there is a pattern to the stages of
consciousness that adults can potentially traverse over the course of their lives. Research
further shows that each stage can only be reached by journeying through an earlier one.
Once a stage has been realized, it becomes a permanent part of how individuals interpret
the world around them (Cook-Greuter, 2004; Torbert, 2004).
In his work on moral development, Kohlberg (1969) first used the term
conventional and post-conventional to refer to two broad stages of moral development.
Since then, developmental researchers have subdivided stages of consciousness into three
levels known as preconventional, conventional, and postconventional. Pre-conventional
stages are associated with impulsive, opportunistic, and lower levels of psychological
maturity. Conventional stages are characterized by conformance with wider social
conventions and achieving expertise and efficiency. Finally, post-conventional stages are
characterized by an attempt to reframe problems with a broader understanding of
complexity and interdependency of systems (Boiral et al., 2009; Torbert, 2004).
In the domain of corporate leadership, William Torbert and his colleagues have
done extensive field research using the term action logics to define stages of development.
Based on his empirical research over several decades, Torbert (2004) has found that leaders
with post-conventional action logics have enhanced capacities to transform organizations.
Cook-Greuter (2004) describes these stages as the recognizable stories human
beings tell about who they are, what is important to them, and where they are going. She
explains that these stages are coherent systems of how people make meaning of their lives
21
and that these systems evolve in complexity throughout one's life. She concludes that it is
“at the heart of what drives human beings” (p.276). McCauley, Drath, Palus, O’Connor,
and Baker (2006) observe that developmental stage theories share certain basic
assumptions. These include the notion that reality is mentally constructed and that there
are identifiable patterns that describe how individuals construct reality. These patterns can
be called stages, levels, or action logics and each stage affects what an individual can be
aware of, reflect on, and act on. Generally, the progression is towards more advanced
stages and leads to a more complex understanding of the world.
Although developmental theorists have explored how adults construct general
knowledge about the world around them, how adults construct and interpret the ecological
world around them has received much less attention. As a result, when reviewing the
above descriptions, we find no specific reference to ecological worldviews.
However, there have been a few studies that attempt to integrate ecological worldview,
ecological selves, and developmental theory. These will be reviewed in the next section.
Studies Integrating Developmental Theory and Ecological Worldviews
Few studies attempt to integrate developmental theory with ecological worldviews.
In this section, these studies are summarized and possible links with action logics as
researched by Torbert (2004) and Rooke and Torbert (2005) are explored. The most robust
attempt to integrate developmental theory and ecological worldviews comes from integral
ecology. As noted earlier, integral ecologists Esbjorn-Hargens and Zimmerman (2009)
suggest that environmental issues arise differently for people depending on their stage of
development. They hypothesize that leaders can learn to tailor their communication to
people that hold a variety of worldviews.
22
Esbjorn-Hargens and Zimmerman (2009) introduce a framework of ecological
selves based on the capacity to take in additional perspectives and identify with
increasingly complex levels of the natural world. As part of their model, they provide
detailed descriptions of the ecological selves that embody the various ecological
worldviews that individuals can hold. By doing so these authors have created one of the
only typologies of ecological worldviews.
However, while the model of ecological selves and associated worldviews supports
several key assumptions of developmental theory, it does not appear to be in alignment
with others. For example, the model outlines identifiable patterns of how individuals
interpret the natural world and that each pattern affects what an individual can be aware of,
reflect on, and act on. Later patterns reflect a more complex understanding of the natural
world.
However, their theory that each of these patterns can exist within all individuals is
contradicted by two key aspects of developmental theory. First is the evidence that shows
stages are hierarchical. Second, is the percentage distribution of adults at each stage based
on large-scale studies (Cook-Greuter, 2000; Kegan & Lahey, 2009; Torbert, 2004). Lastly,
they do not hypothesize how individuals develop their ecological worldviews. These
problems represent gaps in their theoretical proposition. While Esbjorn-Hargens and
Zimmerman (2009) make the valuable contribution of elucidating different patterns of
ecological worldviews that theoretically exist at each stage of development, the theoretical
model of the ecological selves needs to be refined further by empirical research.
23
Table 3 – Descriptions of the Ecological Selves
Stage Name Ecological Worldview
Eco-Guardian
Limited understanding of nature Subject to nature-based rituals Nature mysterious and dangerous
Eco-Warrior
Aggressive stance towards nature Impulsive and heroic view of self in relationship to nature
Eco-Manager
Passes laws and establishes institutions to protect nature Conformance with societal norms
Eco-Strategist
Explores nature through scientific lens Conserves resources for consumption Strong belief in technological nature
Eco-Radical
Sees the intrinsic value of nature Promotes ecological justice Seeks to overcome oppression
Eco-Holist Honors and integrates multiple approaches to natural environment Beginning to think multidimensionally about nature
Eco-Integralist
Understands and embraces the complexity of nature in all its life forms Expanded vision to what is possible
Note: Table adapted from Esbjorn-Hargens & Zimmerman (2009) and Rogers (2012)
The above discussion and analysis serves to highlight the paucity of theoretical and
empirical research by developmental stage theorists into the nature of ecological
worldviews, especially in the context of sustainability leadership. However, before
exploring these limitations further, the third literature that forms the conceptual framework
for this study is introduced in the next section.
The Sustainability Leadership Literature
In addition to the ecological worldview and developmental psychology literatures,
the conceptual framework for this study is informed by the sustainability leadership
literature. This literature also forms the primary area of praxis for this study. First, a brief
24
history of the leadership literature during the 20th century is provided. Then the focus is
narrowed to the two streams of the leadership literature that pertain most closely to the
study, both of which began to appear in the 1970s. The first is the subset of the leadership
literature that focuses on the interior development of leaders and the second focuses on
environmental leadership. Following these two formative threads in the leadership
literature, the sustainability leadership literature that emerged in the early 1990s is then
described. Finally, the few studies that are located at the confluence of these three streams
of the leadership literature where the study is located are then analyzed.
Great Man Theories of Leadership
During the early part of the 20th century, control and the centralization of power
were primary themes in the leadership literature (Northouse, 2013). Modern leadership
theory then began to emerge in the 1940s based on principles of scientific management and
the “rational man” (Rost, 1997). Then in the middle part of the 20th century, traits and
styles became a primary focus for defining leadership (Bass, 1990). Also during this time
transactional and transformational theories of leadership focused on the ability of leaders to
motivate their workers (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977). These theories became known as
“Great Man’ theories of leadership. Over the past 50 years, leadership scholars have
conducted more than 1000 studies in an attempt to determine the styles, characteristics, or
personality traits of great leaders (George, McLean, Mayer, & Sims, 2007).
The major assumptions underlying these great man theories were that leaders were
born and not developed. Further, that these great leaders possessed extraordinary
capacities including charisma, intelligence, and social skills. Significant alternatives to the
great man theories of leadership emerged in the 1970s. Two of the most significant are
25
theories that focused on the interior development of leaders and a second focused on
environmental leadership. These two subsets of leadership theory are discussed next.
Interior Theories of Leadership
By proposing that the real work of a leader is to ask himself/herself the question;
How can I best use myself to serve? Greenleaf (1977) proposed a new type of leadership
ethic focused on service to others. In doing so, he catalyzed a family of leadership theory
based on interior and even spiritual dimensions. Three of these theories that have made
significant impacts on the literature are highlighted below.
First in this category of interior leadership theories is the work of Peter Senge and
his colleagues (1990). Building on the work of Argyris and Schon (1977), Senge
introduced mental models and systems thinking to the leadership literature. His research
found that leaders who developed more complex ways of thinking were more flexible,
creative, and ultimately better able to anticipate the challenges of the future.
Second, the work of Goleman and his colleagues (1998, 2002) added a new
perspective on the interior development of leaders through their work on emotional
intelligence. Their research strongly suggests that leaders with greater self-awareness are
better equipped to deal with the social complexity of organizations.
In a third body of research, Torbert and his colleagues integrated developmental
psychology with the leadership literature (Rooke & Torbert, 1998, 2005; Torbert, 2004).
As part of their multi-decade research into stages of development in the context of
organizational leadership, Torbert and his colleagues created descriptive labels designed to
capture key aspects of each stage of consciousness. These stages are called action logics in
an effort to capture how each stage becomes the logic that governs how people act. Action
26
logic is thus the frame through which people translate their thoughts, feelings, and
perceptions into actions.
Table 4 - Description of Leadership Action Logics Stage Name Description of Leadership Action – Logics Opportunist Short-time horizon, flouts power and sexuality, rejects feedback,
hostile humor, deceptive, manipulative, externalizes blame, punishes, "eye for an eye" ethic.
Diplomat Observes rules, avoids inner and outer conflict, conforms, suppresses own desires, loyalty to group, seeks membership, right versus wrong attitude, appearance/status conscious, tends toward clichés.
Expert Interested in problem-solving via data, critical of others and self, chooses efficiency over effectiveness, perfectionist, values black-and-white-based decisions, wants to stand out, dogmatic, accepts feedback only from "objective" sources.
Achiever Results and effectiveness oriented, long-term goals, concerned with issues of ethics and justice, deliberately prioritizes work tasks, drawn to learning, seeks mutuality and relations, aware of personal patterns of behavior, feels guilt if does not meet own standards, blind to our own shadow, chases time.
Redefining Collaborative, tolerant of individual differences, aware of context and contingency, may challenge group norms, aware of perspective and shadow, inquiring and open to feedback, seeks independent, creative work, attracted by difference in change, historical context.
Transforming Process oriented, strategic time horizon, systems conscious, enjoys a variety of roles, recognizes importance of principle and judgment, engaged in complex interweave of relationships, very aware of own personal traits and shadow, high value on individuality, growth, self-fulfillment, particular historical moments.
Alchemical Alert to paradigms of thought and action, embraces common humanity, dispels notions of heroic action, deeply internalized sense of self, knowledge held with empty mind, sees light and dark, treats time and events as symbolic, metaphorical (not linear, literal).
Note: Table adapted from The Global Leadership Profile Report from Action Inquiry Associates (2013)
A few studies have attempted to integrate action logics with the emerging
environmental and sustainability leadership literature. In the next section, a brief overview
of the environmental and sustainability leadership literature is provided and then these
studies are reviewed.
27
The Environmental and Sustainability Leadership Literatures
With the passage of the first national environmental laws in the US in the early
1970s and an awareness of the environmental impacts of economic growth, the literature
about corporate social responsibility began to appear. The first formally recognized
definition of sustainability was produced in 1987 by the Brundtland Commission that stated
that sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (World
Commission on Environment and Development, United Nations, 1987). Since then the
sustainability leadership literature has been situated at the intersection of the corporate
social responsibility, sustainable business, and the environmental leadership literature
(Ferdig, 2007; Lazlo & Zhexembayeva, 2011; Hawken, 1994; Maltz, & Schein, 2013;
Porter & Kramer, 2011; Shrivastava, 1995).
Pointing to the interior developmental nature of sustainability leadership, Ferdig
(2007) observes that sustainability leaders are informed by an expanded view of how the
complex universe operates. Implicitly referring to a post-conventional worldview, she
states that being a sustainability leader means letting go of the ego-driven certainty of right
answers and genuinely engaging with different points of view. She observes that a
sustainability leader “understands that everything is connected to everything else, that we
live in a dynamic, ever-changing universe, and that no single action occurs in isolation but
is inextricably linked, often invisibly, to every other action” (p. 32).
Rogers and Hudson (2011) argue that an interior shift like change in worldview is
much more than just environmental accounting and green business practices. Making
reference to the enormous complexity of the sustainability challenges, they observe that
28
“just as important is what goes on inside people's heads when they formulate the nature of
the problem which calls for choices. This formulation is often a matter of deep, hidden
assumptions and mindsets, not just the setting up of a spreadsheet of pros and cons,
algorithms, and formulas” (p. 7).
Within the environmental and sustainability leadership literature, there have been at
least three studies that bring together the ecological worldview and developmental
psychology literatures. These three studies comprise the multidisciplinary subset of the
sustainability leadership literature that most closely pertains to this study. These studies
are reviewed in the next section.
Integrating Developmental Theory, Ecological Worldviews, and Sustainability
The first theoretical study found in the sustainability literature that is based on an
action logics and ecological worldviews is by Boiral et al. (2009). These authors note that it
is often assumed that “all green managers spontaneously share the same values, the same
worldview, and the same way of managing environmental issues” (p. 480). With a focus on
environmental leadership behavior, the authors use action logics (Torbert, 2004) to
hypothesize specific potential behaviors of leaders at each stage of development.
Boiral and his colleagues conclude that the characteristics associated with post-
conventional action logics are most closely aligned with the demands of sustainability
leadership. They conclude that post-conventional consciousness equips individuals to
navigate the complexity of sustainability issues and mobilize individuals for environmental
causes within organizations. However, they acknowledge that their hypothesis remains
largely unexplored from an empirical standpoint. They also observe that the absence of
ecological worldviews in the developmental literature is due in part to the psychometric
29
instruments being developed in an era when ecological issues were less salient (Boiral et
al., 2009).
In a recent empirical study, Brown (2012) examines how leaders with post-
conventional action logics designed sustainability initiatives. Among his findings were that
they design from a deep inner foundation, use systems thinking, access non-rational ways
of knowing, and adaptively manage through dialogue with the system. However, he notes
that the lack of large-scale, empirical research currently makes it difficult to draw specific
conclusions about the nature of sustainability leadership. He suggests, “research on the
values associated with sustainability leadership is limited and incomplete. The more we
understand what values undergird the behaviors required to lead sustainability initiatives,
the easier it will be to cultivate them” (p. 70). He concludes the academic discipline of
sustainability leadership is still in the very early stages.
The most recent study found in the sustainability leadership literature, Rogers
(2012) explores the connection between the individual worldviews of multinational
executives and their ability to confront global environmental challenges. Using the
framework of ecological selves as a theoretical lens, Rogers found that executives were
able to identify specific moments that led to a different way of thinking about the
environment. While certain executives characterize these changes as epiphanies, others
described a more gradual evolutionary shift. All of the executives reflected on these shifts
as being a permanent change in the way they conducted their professional lives.
In a tentative connection with developmental stages and ecological worldviews,
Rogers reported that those executives that experience these behavioral changes
demonstrated worldviews that appear to be on the more advanced end of the ecological
30
selves spectrum. She found that these executives demonstrated a more highly developed
sense of complexity, systems thinking, and interdependence. Rogers speculates that further
use of the ecological selves framework, and possibly the development of a new instrument,
could lead to new insights and a deeper understanding about how leaders develop advanced
capacities to confront the global environmental challenges.
A summary of several of the major frameworks from the ecological worldview,
developmental psychology, and sustainability leadership literatures is presented in Table 5.
A conclusion to the literature review including the specific gaps identified then follows.
31
Table 5 – Summary of Frameworks from the Literature Review
Action Logics
Paradigm Ecological Selves
Sustainability Leadership Implications
Diplomat - focus on socially expected behavior, avoiding conflict, loyalty to chosen group
Anthropocentric conformance with dominant social paradigm (DSP)
Eco-Warrior Aggressive stance towards nature Impulsive and heroic view of self in relationship to nature
Supports environmental initiatives due to a concern for appearances
Expert - focus on expertise, logic, procedure, and rational efficiency
Ethnocentric Still maintaining a strong belief in DSP
Eco-Manager Passes laws and establishes institutions to protect nature
Focus on compliance with environmental laws. Sustainability as a technical issue
Achiever - focus on results, goals, effectiveness, and success
World-centric Early ecocentric Beginning to become aware of new ecological paradigm (NEP)
Eco-Strategist Conserves resources for long-term consumption
Sustainability as the ultimate strategic challenge Focus on sustainability measurements
Redefining - focus on self in relationship to the system
Ecocentric Early planet centric Belief in NEP
Eco-Radical Sees the intrinsic value of nature and ecological justice
Sustainability as a responsibility to the planet
Transforming – focus on transforming the system
Planet centric Highly Eco-centric Highly committed to NEP
Eco-Holist Understands the complexity of nature
Sustainability requires a complex approach integrating culture, psychology, & natural science
Alchemist - focus on interplay of awareness, thought, and action
Cosmos centric Deep experience of ecological embeddedness
Eco-Integralist Celebrates oneness with nature
Reimagining the purpose of business to regenerate the Commons
Note: Compiled from the research of Boiral et al. (2009), Brown(2012), Dunlap(2008), Esbjorn-Hargens (2005), Lynam (2012), Rogers (2012), and Rooke & Torbert (2005)
32
Conclusion
This dissertation study is based on the assumption that more information from the
natural sciences is not enough to change the behaviors that are responsible for the serious
ecological problems confronting humanity. It proposes that the social sciences have the
power to reframe ecological issues and advance sustainability leadership. This reframing
requires a new level of integration of theories from the ecological worldview,
developmental psychology, and sustainability leadership literatures. The preceding review
of these literatures takes a substantive new step towards this integration.
The review revealed at least three specific gaps in the literatures. First, there is
considerable confusion and lack of agreement amongst the social sciences as to a common
understanding of ecological worldviews. Secondly, there is only a small body of
theoretical research that looks at ecological worldviews and action logics in the context of
sustainability leadership. Thirdly, there is even a smaller body of empirical research into
ecological worldviews and action logics and its implications for sustainability leadership.
Empirical studies that integrate the main theories underlying these disciplines are thus
rare. Despite extensive empirical research into action logics and stages of human
consciousness over several decades, there is little research exploring how ecological
worldviews and action logics are developed and expressed in sustainability practice. This
review of the literature revealed only one empirical study that integrated developmental
theory and focused specifically on the ecological worldviews of corporate sustainability
leaders, and this was in a single company with a small sample (Rogers, 2012).
There are several possible explanations for these gaps. One possible explanation is
the highly anthropocentric nature of the entire field of Western psychology, where research
33
into consciousness development has centered mainly on the human being and his
relationship to himself and others, with little attention to his relationship with the natural
world. Moreover, there appears to be an overall lack of familiarity with developmental
stage theory within the leadership and social sciences in general. Finally, leadership
research has placed a continued focus on external behaviors and best practices, especially
in regard to sustainability leadership theory and practice. All three of these explanations
help us understand the paucity of research that integrates ecological worldviews and action
logics.
Whatever the causes, the ecological challenges facing humanity call for a new level
of interdisciplinary approach and innovative research from the social sciences. In response
to these gaps in the literature and the scarcity of empirical research described, this study
was designed to interview a robust sample in order to add to the existing body of
knowledge. In the next chapter, the research methodology is presented.
34
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY AND DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANTS
Introduction
In this chapter an explanation of the research methodology and a description of the
sample population is provided. First, a detailed description of the research design including
the qualitative approach, methods of analysis, and issues of validity is described. Next, the
sampling recruitment strategy and a detailed description of the research participants are
provided. Lastly, researcher integrity and ethics of the study are discussed.
Research Methodology
Qualitative Approach
To answer the two questions that guided this study a multi-phase qualitative design
was chosen for several reasons (Creswell, 2009). First, a qualitative approach aligned with
the goal of the study to provide a “deeper picture than the variable based correlations of
quantitative studies” (Silverman, 2006, p. 26). Secondly, the use of semi-structured
interview questions allowed for a wider range of data collection. Third, although
quantitative instruments are often used to study the field of leadership, qualitative studies
are increasingly used, especially to study interior dimensions of leadership. Fourth, based
on the constructivist and transformative stance of the researcher, a qualitative study best
captured the spirit of the research (Creswell 2009). Given the inquiry into the ecological
worldviews and action logics on which this study is based, a qualitative approach was
determined to be most appropriate.
35
Data Collection
The first phase of data collection took place over an 18-month period during 2011-
2012. Utilizing a 10-question survey organized into four areas, semi-structured phone and
face-to-face interviews with 50 corporate sustainability leaders using principles of
naturalistic inquiry were conducted (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The four areas of inquiry
were general background, leadership development, culture change, and measuring success.
The interviews typically lasted from 30 to 45 minutes and were transcribed during or after
the interview (see Appendix A for list of questions).
The second phase of data collection took place during 2013. Using a new set of
questions derived from the literature review, semi-structured phone interviews with an
additional 15 sustainability leaders were conducted. These interviews were designed to
generate greater insight into how these participants describe their ecological worldviews.
The interviews for this phase typically lasted from 30 to 45 minutes and were recorded
during the phone interview and subsequently transcribed (see Appendix B for list of
ecological worldview interview questions).
Data Analysis
In order to analyze and interpret the qualitative data, a multi-step thematic analysis
process was utilized (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Creswell, 2009; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The
following describes the general procedure. All interview transcripts were organized by
name of participant, organization, and date of interview for easy reference. First, each
transcript was reviewed multiple times trying to get a general sense of the information
being conveyed. During this initial review, the most interesting and surprising aspects of
the interviews were also identified.
36
Then keeping the first research question in mind, an inductive thematic analysis process
(Braun & Clarke, 2006; Creswell, 2009) and hermeneutic methodology (Bentz & Shapiro,
1998; Rogers, 2013) was deployed to further analyze the interview texts. After additional
rounds, color-coding notes in the margins and identification of initial themes also occurred.
Coding of data using Marshall and Rossman’s data reduction process (2011) also occurred
as various key words and phrases evolved into descriptive themes and findings that
addressed the first research question. During the final rounds of analyses, findings were
organized under two major themes that were supported by eight groups of diverse
quotations as specific evidence (Creswell, 2009). Lastly, the themes and findings connected
into a narrative storyline to present the data related to the first research question as will be
described in Chapter 4.
Then with the second research question in mind, the above procedure was repeated. A
deductive hermeneutic methodology was utilized to analyze and interrogate the qualitative
data based on the action logics framework as described in the literature review. By
highlighting key phrases, structures of thought, and patterns in the textual data, expressions
of specific action logics were identified in each transcript. During the final rounds of
analysis, one more additional major theme supported by six groups of quotations as
evidence was identified (Creswell, 2009). Lastly, the themes and findings were connected
into a narrative storyline to present the data related to the second research question as will
be described in Chapter 5.
Analyzing Interview Texts Through Hermeneutic Turns
Hermeneutics can be defined as the art and science of interpretation of texts. As
part of their qualitative research method called mindful inquiry, Bentz and Shapiro (1998)
37
describe a type of multi-level discourse researchers can have with their interview
transcripts. In the context of qualitative research, hermeneutics can also provide a
compelling framework for constructing new theories and methods (Rogers, 2013). As part
of her explanation of methodological hermeneutics, Rogers (2013) describes a multi-level
interpretive process designed to support historical context and social change.
As a means of more deeply exploring the two research questions, interview
transcripts were analyzed through a series of hermeneutic turns. This involved becoming
more aware of the context of each participant at the time of each interview, my intention
and context at the time of each interview, and the current context within which the data
were being analyzed. It also led to an awareness of the context of the theories that were
being used to analyze the interview texts. In particular, hermeneutic methodology allowed
for a deeper exploration of the second research question involving the expression of action
logics in the interview texts.
Sampling Strategy and Recruitment of Participants
Purposive sampling is often used to explore specific phenomenon within
specialized populations (Babbie, 2002, Quinn & Dalton, 2009). Based on corporate
sustainability as the primary praxis for the study, a purposive sampling strategy focused on
senior sustainability executives at multinational companies was deployed.
Participants for the study were recruited by attending nine different national and
international corporate sustainability conferences over a period of 3 years between 2011
and 2013. At these conferences, relationships with senior sustainability leaders and
consultants from a wide range of corporations and NGOs were cultivated.
38
A snowball sampling strategy was also deployed (Babbie, 2002). During the initial
interviews, sustainability executives referred their colleagues at other corporations or
NGO’s, who then became additional participants in the study. This snowball phenomenon
also resulted from my attendance at the national conferences where I was introduced to
additional participants.
Description of Participants The sample consisted of 65 senior corporate sustainability executives and consultants.
Of these 65 participants, 45 held senior-level positions in multinational companies at the
Chief Executive Officer, Chief Sustainability Officer, Vice President, Director, or Manager
level. There were 2 CEO’s of public companies, 6 Presidents of private companies, 6
CEO’s of sustainability-related NGOs, and 8 sustainability consultants.
A partial list of the companies included Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft, Clorox,
Miller-Coors, Sprint, AT&T, Motorola, AMD, Waste Management, 3M, Mattel, Starbucks,
Nike, SC Johnson, Seventh Generation, Coca-Cola, Ford, GE, Price Waterhouse Coopers,
Sun Microsystems, Green Mountain Coffee, and Ben and Jerry’s, which is a subsidiary of
Unilever.
Their job titles ranged from Chief Sustainability Officer, VP of Global Citizenship,
VP of Environment and Water, Director of Sustainability and Stewardship, Director of
Natural Resources, Director of Social Mission, and Manager of Product Integrity. A few of
the most interesting titles were Director of Stakeholder Mobilization, Director of Coffee
Community Outreach, and Director of Corporate Consciousness.
Several of the interviews took place at conferences or at the corporate headquarters of
the participants’ companies located throughout the United States. The locations of their
39
headquarters ranged from Starbucks, Microsoft, and Nike in the Pacific Northwest to
Mattel, Hewlett Packard, and Clorox in California. Sustainability executives for Ben and
Jerry’s, Seventh Generation, and Green Mountain Coffee are located in New England,
while executives from Sprint, Ford, Motorola, and SC Johnson are located in the Midwest.
Texas is where participants from Waste Management and AMD are located and Coca-Cola
executives are located in Georgia. Although they were all based in the United States at the
time of the interviews, a large percentage of these executives have significant international
experience, many having worked in global settings for extended periods.
All the participants had at least 5 years experience coordinating and communicating
sustainability-related initiatives to a broad range of internal and external stakeholders
including their employees, supply chains, NGO partners, and customers. Many of the
participants had been working closely with corporate sustainability initiatives for more than
10 years and had held multiple senior positions in more than one multinational corporation.
Many have worked in both the private and public sector. As will be described in Chapter 4,
several had made the move from environmental NGOs to executive positions with
multinational corporations.
Small Size of Sustainability Departments Although this study was not designed to systematically survey the size of
sustainability departments within these companies, the interviews allowed me to better
appreciate that the majority of these executives were leaders of relatively small teams.
Most of these companies have more than 10,000 employees worldwide, several with
50,000+, and a few with 100,000+ employees located in dozens of countries throughout the
world. In terms of suppliers in their global supply chains, the numbers reach similar levels.
40
However, in most cases these executives were in departments with less than ten total
employees focused exclusively on sustainability. Considering the global scale of their
companies, the complexity of sustainability initiatives, and the challenges of coordinating
and communicating with a wide diversity of stakeholders, the ratio of the number of people
on these sustainability teams is extremely small. Understanding this context for my
participants was relevant for my study, as will be described in the following chapters.
Results from the Pilot Study Over a 4-month period from March-July 2013, a pilot study was conducted where
various research designs were explored and quantitative and qualitative data were
collected. In addition to conducting semi-structured interviews with global sustainability
leaders, how certain quantitative instruments might help answer the research questions was
explored. These instruments were the New Ecological Paradigm Scale from the field of
environmental sociology and the Global Leadership Profile from the field of developmental
psychology.
Over a period of several months, the background of these instruments was reviewed
and pilot data using both instruments from a separate sample of leadership consultants and
academics were collected. After further examination of how these quantitative data related
to the dissertation questions, the decision was made to explore this part of the data in post-
doctoral research. There were several reasons for this decision. First was the recognition
that this portion of the pilot data addressed a different set of research questions. Second
was the recognition that these data were based on a separate sample and would not be
generalizable to the primary sample of global sustainability executives.
41
Lastly, it became clear that the tentative findings from the use of these instruments
for the purpose of studying ecological worldviews would be a description of their
limitations, which will need to be developed with further research. This decision allowed
for additional interviews aimed at further answering the two research questions. As one
final step in the pilot study, a preliminary thematic analysis of the interview transcripts was
conducted and more than 25 initial themes and subthemes were generated for further
analysis during the next stage of the study.
Integrity During The Research Process In order to ensure a high degree of validity throughout the data collection and
analysis phases of the study, a strategy of integrity was deployed. First, validity was
considered as a process in itself and periodically leading qualitative research texts were
reviewed in an effort to maintain mindfulness throughout the duration of the study
(Creswell 2009, Lincoln and Guba, 1985, Marshall & Rossman 2011, Strauss and Corbin,
1998). Secondly, reflexivity was maintained by engaging in the practice of triple-loop-
awareness as part of developmental action inquiry (Tobert, 2000). By doing so, my
intention was to constantly self-reflect, both implicitly and explicitly upon the multiple
dimensions upon which the study was conducted (Marshall & Rossman, 2011). Third,
scholars and practitioners with various forms of expertise relevant to the research were
continually sought out and their feedback was solicited during the study. Lastly, I
endeavored to be aware of my own worldview and how that may have had an influence
during the qualitative interviews or during the analysis of the data.
42
IRB Approval
Approval for this dissertation research was obtained from the Fielding Institutional
Review Board in February of 2013. As part of the introductory email to all research
participants, a detailed explanation of the research and a copy of the informed consent letter
were included. This ensured that all research participants fully understood the purpose and
full scope of the research and gave their consent as participants in the study. See Appendix
C for a copy of the informed consent letter.
Conclusion
In this chapter, details of the research methodology were provided including data
collection, sampling and recruitment strategy, description of the participants, and the
approaches to data analysis. Results from the pilot study and how integrity was maintained
during the research process were also described. In the next two chapters, findings from the
study will be presented. In Chapter 6, their significance and theoretical implications will be
discussed.
43
CHAPTER FOUR: ECOLOGICAL WORLDVIEWS
Introduction
In this chapter, findings are presented that relate to the first research question: How
do sustainability leaders describe their worldviews and motivation for their work?
As a means of exploring this question, interviews took place with 65 sustainability
leaders, the majority of whom occupy senior executive positions in multinational
companies. Although many of the participants were met face-to-face at conferences, most
of the formal interviews took place over the phone. All of the interviews were transcribed
either during or immediately after the interviews took place.
Generally conversations started with a short warm-up. Then the semi-structured
portion of the interviews began with general background questions such as; When did you
first become interested in sustainability? How did you become involved with sustainability
within your organization? Where do you think your deeper motivation comes from in
regards to sustainability? (see Appendix A for the complete list of interview questions).
Conducting these interviews allowed for general initial insights into the
backgrounds of the participants and the underlying motivation for their work in
sustainability. An inductive thematic analysis process was then administered (Braun &
Clarke, 2006; Creswell, 2009) and a hermeneutic methodology was used (Bentz & Shapiro,
1998; Rogers, 2013) to analyze the transcribed interview texts. After numerous rounds of
coding, sorting, and hermeneutic turns, specific groups of key words and phrases were then
identified that led to eight supporting findings for two major themes.
44
Theme 1: Experiences that Shape Ecological Worldviews Over the Lifespan
- Family of Origin and Early Childhood Experiences in Nature
- Environmental Education, Teachers, and Mentors
- Seeing Poverty and Environmental Degradation in Developing Countries
- Perceiving Capitalism as a Vehicle for Environmental Activism
- A Sense of Spirituality and Service
The first major theme that stood out during the interviews was that almost all the
participants described personal experiences they attributed to having shaped their
ecological worldview. This generally occurred when they were asked about their
backgrounds and motivations concerning sustainability. Most of them traced their
worldviews back to specific points in time, people, places, or events that made a significant
impression on their lives. They shared stories at length and with little prompting. Many of
them became animated when telling stories about their childhoods, their families, and their
travels abroad to developing countries in Central and South America, Africa, and Asia.
Although the interviews were not designed to examine the biography or lifeline for
each of the participants, a chronological sequence did suggest itself in the data. The first set
of interview excerpts generally referred to the K-12 years in the lives of the research
participants. The next set of quotations that supported the second finding corresponded to
their college and graduate school years. The third set of quotations was about experiences
that the participants had while traveling in foreign countries as young adults. The next set
of quotations described experiences in their 30s for the most part. The last set of quotations
related to spirituality and a sense of service and appeared to be a reflection of their current
lives, which would correspond to their late 30s, 40s, or early 50s for most of the
45
participants. The possible developmental implications of this chronological sequence will
be explored in Chapter 6. Next, a detailed presentation of the qualitative data supporting
the individual findings for the first theme is presented.
Family of Origin and Early Childhood Experiences in Nature
In response to initial background questions, phrases such as growing up, how I was
raised, ever since I can remember, and when I was a kid appeared in many of the interview
transcripts. These first three interview excerpts all point to how early childhoods in rural
environments influenced worldviews. Each of these three mid-career senior sustainability
executives attributed their early environmental worldview and eventual career paths in
sustainability to their childhoods:
Growing up my family had a very sustainability-minded approach. My parents were composting and reusing grocery bags before it was mainstream. My parents were much ahead of their time. I grew up that way. I also spent a lot of time outdoors and developed a deep appreciation for nature…. So I think it influenced me to become an environmentalist.
When I was a kid my grandfather had an apple orchard. We would spend summers going from one grandparent to the other. We just played outside in the apple orchard that was maybe sixty acres or something. There were all these cows around. You just kind of learned about the role of growing food in a way that just kind of enveloped me… That was just how I was raised. I was raised in a rural, small town in Vermont and was like most boys in rural America at the time. I was outside all the time. I also did a lot of fishing and hunting when I was young. My father's family influenced my upbringing. We gardened a ton. I did canoe trips with scouts and all that sort of thing.
In addition to going to the park with his father at the age of 6, this President of an
environmental NGO shared how the careers of his two parents and his older brother
46
influenced his thoughts about the environment while growing up in California during the
60s:
I think it started when I was about six years old and my Dad would take me to the park. I grew up around Modesto, California. My mom was in democratic politics and my dad was a teacher. My older brother made a film in the early ‘70s about garbage. I watched all the development in California and I knew that it did not feel right.
This eco-psychological perspective of happiness in nature can be found in this next
quotation:
Ever since I can remember, I’ve been happiest when I'm out in the wilderness. I grew up walking along trails in the foothills near my house…. One day I started walking fairly slowly. And I just started seeing so much more. Going slow, listening.
As a final example of this finding, here is a quotation about childhood that also
leads into the second finding about environmental education. It is from an interview with
the President of a national consumer food company. In it he describes an unforgettable
experience in middle school:
I grew up in West Nyack, New York along the banks of the Hudson River, less than an hour north of Manhattan. The teachers at the middle school I went to had a mission to get more environmental awareness into the classroom. So they taught us about why the Hudson was so dirty, told us about all the industrial dumping from factories up the river. Then one day they took my class out on the Clearwater, Pete Seeger's sailing vessel that was dedicated to cleaning up the river. I remember how they used nets to dredge up and remove garbage from the river. I saw stuff like old tires, pieces of cars, old luggage, and lots of scary stuff. We also sang all the Pete Seeger and Woody Guthrie songs like “This Land Is Your Land” and “Inch by Inch” and somehow through the music and seeing all the junk in the river, it made a big impression on me.
47
Environmental Education, Teachers, and Mentors
The next finding that emerged from the data is drawn from the number of
executives that reflected on experiences in college or graduate school. For instance, this
executive, a Vice President at a global consumer food company, remembered one particular
class he took that was based on the systems thinking work of Thomas Lovejoy, a widely
respected tropical biologist:
I went to Kenyon College. I remember that I had to take at least one natural science class. There was a class on systems thinking based on Thomas Lovejoy’s work and the value on standing forests… Later on I realized I needed the business skills to continue to explore the power of business. I did a combined MBA and Environmental Studies degree at the University of Washington. My favorite professor was the chair of accounting department and taught a class in environmental accounting.
This participant, the President of a national food company, spoke at great length
about his discovery of ecopsychology while an undergraduate:
I was a psychology major at Stanford. My senior year I heard about the field of eco-psychology. There wasn't anyone who taught it at Stanford but I found a professor at UC Berkeley who had edited an anthology. So I got together with him and did an independent study. I lived in a cooperative on campus called Synergy. They had a big garden outside the house and that is when I first became really interested in how to build soil and grow food… My perspective was being shaped by the time I was spending with the farmers and became the impetus for my work in sustainability.
This participant, an executive with a global NGO, described how his senior thesis
opened up what he referred to as his theme of the integrated nature of disciplines:
I went to Brown and studied environmental science. Part of the curriculum was to write a senior thesis. My thesis explored what it would be like if ranchers were ranching native animals instead of cattle on western rangelands. I explored what that would look like. For me it was the beginning of blending ecological science with culture and economy. Since then it has been a real exploration into
48
that blending of disciplines, which for me has been a key theme since I went to college, the integrated nature of disciplines.
This next participant, a Director of Environmental Policy at a multinational
consumer food and beverage company, reflected how his undergraduate degree launched
his career and ultimately led him from the public sector to what he perceived to be a more
proactive role in a large corporation:
I did my undergraduate in environmental science at University of Washington. I started doing environmental compliance working for King County. The big shift in my career came when I started to realize that I was mostly focused on fixing people’s misses. The government was spending millions of dollars cleaning up people’s misses. These mistakes could have been prevented. So I started to seek out a more proactive role.
These two participants, both senior sustainability executives of global electronics
firms, reflected on how their graduate environmental science and chemistry educations
played important roles in their sustainability careers.
I have a PhD in Organic Chemistry. I’ve led environmental research at labs in China and Germany. Running those groups for around seven years gave me a great perspective on environmental science, technology, and culture. It sort of drove a stake in the ground for me.
I came from a background of environmental toxicology and environmental policy. What I had to develop was business acumen.
This participant refers to a philosophical shift that took place during college and
how social activism inspired his future work as a sustainability leader.
Coming out of high school, I was not the person I now am. I trace back to college as a turning point. Soon thereafter I became a different person, I would say. I grew up in a fairly sheltered upper middle-class suburb of New York…. There was something about breaking through the bubble arriving to college…. that everything was fresh and new…. There was a lot more to think about and read about in college and then there were also ways to apply idealism through community service, which was a big piece of it… Then the pivot from service to activism was one I was feeling out as I was
49
later going through college, junior and senior year. I had a couple of professors who had been activists themselves in the ‘60s. Stories of student turmoil and protest movements really got my attention and interest.
Seeing Poverty and Environmental Degradation in Developing Countries
Many of the participants shared stories about their experiences in foreign countries.
Several executives worked in the Peace Corps or other volunteer organizations in South
America and Africa. They reported how seeing poverty and environmental degradation
firsthand had a significant impact on their worldview. For instance, this participant
described how a volunteer experience in South America changed his life:
I went to Paraguay in the summer of 1991 in between my junior and senior year in high school… I lived with a family in a very rural part of the country... Every few kilometers there were tiny shacks where families lived beside their fields. Mostly they were growing single crops like soy and cotton. There were big open fields for cattle created by clear cutting. In the distance you could see a stand of old-growth forest but it felt like it was always in the distance. The deforestation was depressing. I remember feeling a lot of sadness about what I saw.
The next quotation is from a long-time executive with a large coffee company. As
part of their company’s policy, employees are selected to attend immersion trips to the
countries of origin where the coffee is grown. Here is how he described his experience:
When I first went to Costa Rica in 1992 I did not see any poverty. Then I took a week's vacation in 1995 and travelled to northern Guatemala and southern Mexico and saw all the poverty. I used my own vacation time and paid for the trips myself. I lived with families, took a total immersion language course, and became more and more passionate about these issues. I came to understand the struggles and became so committed that I did a lot of this on my own time.
50
Along similar lines, this participant spoke about how his travel and work in Central
and South America allowed him to formulate new thoughts about sustainable development,
social justice, and the environment.
I was able to get to the developing world early in college through an internship. I think this is where my interest about poverty and inequality issues in the United States pivoted to become more global… I became aware of how environmental and social justice issues went in tandem. Then it prompted travels in Bolivia for my senior thesis research and later living and working in Nicaragua for half a year right after college… I learned more about the questions that I needed to be asking more than getting answers…realizing that people and the environment are very much intertwined.
This participant, the Director of Sustainability at a major consulting firm, referred
to his experiences in the Peace Corps and the United Nations when reflecting on the
motivation for career path in sustainability:
I was in the Peace Corps and was sent to Kyrgyzstan. Then I got my Master’s and worked for the United Nations Global Compact, first in Costa Rica and then in Chile. I was working at the United Nations before I took this job.
Perceiving Capitalism as a Vehicle for Environmental Activism
One very surprising finding that emerged from the interviews was the number of
senior sustainability executives at multinational companies who had extensive prior
experience working in either environmental NGOs or the public sector or both.
These executives described similar versions of stories where they had started their
careers motivated to work on a combination of social justice or environmental issues. Then
after a number of years they intentionally decided to move into the private sector as a way
to leverage their experience and have what they perceived to be a bigger impact on the
world.
51
For example, this participant, a widely respected senior sustainability executive
who has worked for two multinational corporations and pioneered many corporate
sustainability practices, described how he went between the public and private sectors
earlier in his career:
I started my career working for Bernie Sanders on national budget and defense issues. Then I went to work for Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield. We were able to figure out how we could take a peace dividend… Later I went on to Green Peace with a clear focus on global warming… I ended up deepening my understanding of corporations and developing a new model of corporations as a more positive force in the world… I came to the conclusion that being part of a corporation was how I could have the biggest impact.
This next participant, a senior sustainability executive at one of the most visible
global brands with one of the largest global supply chains, described how he spent more
than two decades in the public sector before moving into his role in corporate
sustainability:
I went to college in Colorado and was involved in the protest to shut down the Rocky Flats Nuclear Power plant. I went to work for Senator Tim Wirth and wanted to help end the nuclear arms race… I remember Tim saying not on his life was he going to compromise. He said he was going to fall on his sword before he ever let nuclear weapons continue. When the Berlin Wall fell, Tim kind of pivoted from the east to west political military issues to the north to south environmental and social issues and I pivoted with him. It was a turning point for me in terms of commitment to the environment.
The following quotation is from a veteran Chief Sustainability Officer from a global
consumer food company who started his career with an NGO:
In Seattle in the early ‘90s we had a scandal around recycling trucks dumping their contents in the landfill. Through my involvement on a commission around this scandal I met two entrepreneurs who had started a plastic recycling company. I joined their company and worked in sales of trading plastic scrap and developing first-generation plastic lumber.
52
This next quotation is from a participant who began her career working for the EPA
before joining one of the major corporate social responsibility NGOs:
I was an environmental lawyer doing land use and realized that I wanted to work with the EPA. We did sting operations in New Jersey… They were the pros in environmental dumping in the ‘90s. There was a lot of excitement going after and busting these guys. We sued Monsanto for the largest settlement ever at the time for $1 million. Then I did a Master’s in public administration at the Kennedy School before coming here.
This executive at a national consumer food company pointed to her previous
position with the federal government that formed an important part of her background as a
sustainability leader.
I came from a background in the National Forest Service and was literally in the trenches. I got my hands dirty.
A Sense of Spirituality and Service
The final finding under this theme emerged from participants that evoked a sense of
spirituality and service when describing their motivation for sustainability. For example,
this participant, the senior sustainability executive at a global communications company,
told a story about how she grew up with nature in her backyard:
I believe this whole area of environmental corporate activism also involves spiritual development. I grew up on a creek in Sioux City, Iowa and just that experience gave me a love of nature. Ever since I was a child I wanted to serve and give back to the community. At this point in my life, I can’t imagine having a more satisfying career because my spiritual aspect is being addressed through my work in sustainability.
This next participant, an executive at a global wood products manufacturing
company, shared this very personal reflection of his spirituality during her interview:
53
I am very much of the view that we are all parts of a very interconnected, interdependent whole. All species, or natural features as Joanna Macy puts it, are all important; we all have our place; we are all worthy of respect. However, humans have set themselves apart and above nature to everyone’s detriment. Technology has only increased this divide…. My spirituality is nature-based... it is definitely tied with respect, awe and gratitude for nature. In nature is where I am more at home. I was fortunate to have had access to nature in my childhood. I’ve always had a deep connection and humility. My work in sustainability has only enhanced and deepened my perspective.
Along the same lines, this participant, an executive at a national waste management
firm, shared how his experience with transformational shadow work helped deepen his
sense of the connection between spirituality and sustainability:
I was the first executive director of the Mankind Project, which gave me a lot of perspective on deep transformational shadow work. I suppose that I’ve been working at the intersection of spiritual development and sustainable business practice ever since. At this stage of my career, spirituality, sustainability, and work are interwoven.
This participant, a senior sustainability executive at a multinational
telecommunications company, described how her initial education and experience as a high
school teacher eventually led to not only her work in sustainability, but how she facilitates
sustainability initiatives within the culture of her company:
Early on I had a plan and did not end up following it. I went to college and became a high school teacher. I did that for a year… I wound up in business school with a focus on sustainability… Now we define sustainability in our company more broadly than the environment. We focus on education. The single best determinant is how you can invoke the ability to teach. How can you unleash that ability for people to go and explore. It’s an interesting dynamic at our company. My family members are all teachers, professors, and social workers. I’ve somewhat redeemed myself now that I am doing CSR and sustainability work.
54
This executive at a global footwear and apparel company shared her awakening
environmental consciousness in the following way:
I read the Ecology of Commerce and listened to Paul Hawken speak. I also came across the Natural Step. It became apparent to me that we were operating against Nature’s rules.
This last executive at a major software company cited the movie An Inconvenient
Truth as a pivotal moment that catalyzed and deepened her commitment to sustainability:
That would be when I saw Inconvenient Truth. I was getting increasingly alarmed at what was and wasn’t happening in the areas addressing climate change and thought that I needed to personally get more involved. I became involved with an environmental group in my community and this kind of grassroots effort brought more visibility to what you could do personally and what we could do collectively… so I started looking for a job in the company to address that.
Theme 2: Expressions of Ecocentric Worldviews
- An Awareness of Ecological Embeddedness
- An Awareness of the Fragility of Planetary Ecosystems
- A Belief in the Intrinsic Value of Nature
In addition to the first theme and five findings that describe the origins of the
ecological worldviews of my research participants, numerous expressions of eco-centric
worldviews by sustainability leaders were identified during the interviews.
These expressions occurred mostly during the second phase of the interviews with a
smaller group of sustainability executives in response to more deductive questions such as;
How would you describe your ecological worldview? What comes up for you when you
think about your relationship with nature? (see Appendix B for a complete list of these
questions).
55
Phrases such as ecological context within which we live, learn from natural systems,
inherent value in nature, interconnectedness of humanity and the natural world, and truly
seeing other species are just some of the examples that appeared during my interviews that
are indicative of an ecocentric worldview (Abram, 1996; Capra, 1996; Dunlap, Van Liere,
Mertig, & Jones, 2000; Esbjorn-Hargens & Zimmerman, 2009; Naess, 1989). A detailed
discussion of these findings follows below.
An Awareness of Ecological Embeddedness
As part of their reflection on their ecological worldview, many participants
demonstrated an awareness of the ecological embeddedness of human beings, one of the
key aspects of an ecocentric worldview. For example, this long-time sustainability
executive at a major global apparel and footwear manufacturer, described her ecological
worldview this way:
I think probably that where I come from in terms of my ecological worldview is systems thinking and the interconnection of so much of what we do and our impact on the environment… I've always understood at a fundamental level that the economy and society are within the context of the environment. So we really can't do anything without paying attention to the ecological context within which we live. That’s probably the worldview piece.
This next executive, the senior sustainability executive at a fast-growing company
that produces household cleaning products, reflected on the potential for bio-mimicry and
industrial ecology to make the world better:
My awareness of just how much we can learn from natural systems has evolved over time. I continue to look more closely at how bio-mimicry and industrial ecology could reframe our industrial world and make it so much better. However I'm not so nature-centric that I don't think that there's a vital role for humans within all this. We possess the ability to control our processes and make them more efficient. However we have to sit within the natural system and learn from it.
56
In reference to one of the key principles of natural capitalism, this participant, the
president of a manufacturing company, spoke of "being of service” and “restoring
ecosystems”. He articulated a specific point in time where he expanded beyond his
thinking of himself as just an organizational leader to wanting a better understanding of
ecosystems in this manner:
It was there that I realized I made a shift from being primarily interested in my own experience of being a leader and interpreter to actually understanding ecosystems better in order to be of service and in some way conserve or restore ecosystems.
An Awareness of the Fragility of Planetary Ecosystems
These next interview excerpts are also indicative of an eco-centric worldview.
They demonstrate a heightened awareness of the relationship between social and
environmental issues and the fragility of our planetary ecosystems.
This executive, the head of natural resources management at a major global food
manufacturer, focused on how she sees her role as a sustainability change agent expanding
beyond her own company:
We are at risk to losing an enormous amount of topsoil and people do not understand that. I am very concerned about water allocation, very concerned with mono crops. In Oregon GMO sugar beets are being grown right next to organic... This is my passion and I am fortunate that the company allows me to look at agriculture.
Along the same lines, this participant reflected on his hopes and concerns for the
future by highlighting the health of the oceans and carbon emissions during our interview:
I hope that the next stage is a broader understanding of social and environmental equity as the cornerstone…. I have had a bit of a shift in my thinking. There are so many reasons to limit the amount of carbon into the atmosphere. The health of the oceans is a major one. They are taking a big beating due to acidification to the point of dying.
57
This final set of interview excerpts illustrates an ecocentric worldview by showing
evidence in the belief of a new ecological paradigm (see Table 2). This participant, the
Director of Sustainability and Stewardship in a major global technology company, offered
this reflection:
We are at the end of the age of oil. I have convinced myself by doing the math that if everyone lived like we do, we would need seven earths. So the big question is how are we going to go from a consumption society to a balanced system?
He went on to share a story about a particular solar energy project in Southern
California:
The folks hit a wall related to deploying solar power in the desert in California and we can’t get 100,000 acres because of the protected desert tortoise habitat. Maybe we can design the solar panel farm to be desert tortoise habitat. The key is to not come from our separate perspectives.
Another sustainability executive shared how a recent speech by the CEO of one of
the largest consumer products companies in the world aligned with her own worldview:
The CEO of Unilever, Paul Polman, made a really remarkable speech recently. I’m normally not swayed by these speeches because I’ve been around for this movement for so long. However this speech was amazing because it outlined what the mission is for Unilever in depth. Basically he said that they’re in this for the long term and if investors are for a short-term results then maybe they should look elsewhere…. and this coming from one of the largest consumer products companies in the world.
While describing the evolution of the priorities of his company’s corporate social
responsibility policy, this executive spoke about the importance of sustainably sourced
products to meet the needs of 9 billion people:
We started out giving money to save endangered species but we now know that we need to influence land policy and how products are sourced. This is now the most important part of our work. As
58
we near nine billion people we need to meet their needs with less land and sustainably sourced products.
Finally, this participant reflected on the long-term sustainability goal of reducing
overall consumption in a steady-state economy, a key concept of both a new ecological
paradigm (see Table 2) and an eco-centric worldview:
The longer term issue that I see in terms of leadership in commercial enterprises is that eventually we have to deal with consumption with a big C, not just Cradle to Cradle thinking, but we have to transition to business models that do not depend on growth, that in fact thrive on the basis of reducing consumption. Right now the business world is getting on board with being more efficient because they know we are running out of natural resources or they are afraid of climate change, or political instability, they are on board with this first phase, but not the second phase.
A Belief in the Intrinsic Value of Nature
One of the key distinctions between anthropocentric and ecocentric worldviews is
whether one believes nature is to serve man or whether it has intrinsic value. This next
participant reflected on this core philosophical question. Drawing on his background as a
senior executive with a global environmental NGO, he described how the two sides of this
debate are affecting his thinking:
There’s a fascinating debate going on in the scientific circles right now. On one side is the value of the natural world to human beings that reduces it to economic value and human life, and risk reduction value. I think what's happening is that most people know that this is intuitively a narrow view, but it's one that will speak to the people that we see at Davos and elsewhere…. On the other side is that we not only depend on nature, but there is an inherent value in nature... This is the camp of the spiritual values or you can say even the intrinsic values of the natural world regardless of how it serves human beings. But I think where the conflict arises is that in an effort to speak to the mainstream, the language is being reduced to a story of nature that serves humanity through economic and human wellbeing... However, for many of us who have a broader
59
view of the interrelationship and interconnectedness of humanity and the natural world that is problematic.
This next participant referenced one of the iconic environmental books of the 20th
century: The Sand County Almanac by Aldo Leopold. By describing the influence of great
nature writing on the development of his ecological worldview, he captures one of the
essences of Theme 1 described above. He also illuminates a core realization of an
ecocentric worldview:
It comes from Aldo Leopold that we need to quit being the lord and master of the world and become a plain citizen of it. We need to truly get away from a human-centric to a more nature-centric, shall we say, view. I don't think we can completely figure out how complex life is. But I do think it is possible to relate to and connect to it. I think it's truly seeing other species at least on an equal plane with us.
Along the same lines, another executive described how reading the nature writers of
the 20th century had informed her environmental ethic by adding,
So when I think about where my worldview comes from I can relate a lot to Aldo Leopold and historical lovers of nature like John Muir.
This next quotation offers one final example of the intrinsic value of nature and an
ecocentric worldview:
I'm convinced that humans are an integral part of nature, not masters of or separate from nature, and that through our self-reflective capacities as human beings we can harmonize our actions with the natural movements of nature.
60
Conclusion
In this chapter the supporting findings for the two themes that emerged from the
first research question were presented. These two themes are Experiences that Shape
Ecological Worldviews and Expressions of Ecocentric Worldviews. As support for these
two themes, interview excerpts were organized into two groups of supporting findings.
These include early childhood experiences in nature, environmental education,
experiencing poverty and environmental degradation in foreign lands, shifting to capitalism
as a vehicle for environmental change, spirituality and service, awareness of ecological
embeddedness, awareness of the fragility of planetary ecosystems, and a belief in the
intrinsic value of nature.
Collectively, these findings provide many new insights into how the ecological
worldviews of sustainability leaders are developed and shaped over the course of their
lives. The findings also demonstrate that sustainability leaders express ecocentric
worldviews in at least three distinct ways. However, they also lead to new questions such
as; How do their ecological worldviews influence the motivation for their work as global
sustainability leaders? And; How do their worldviews influence their approaches to
sustainability leadership? Many of the quotations presented in this chapter also show
evidence of post-conventional action logics, which is the focus of the second research
question and the subject of the next chapter: Expressions of Post-Conventional Action
Logics by Sustainability Leaders.
61
CHAPTER FIVE: EXPRESSIONS OF POST-CONVENTIONAL ACTION LOGICS
Introduction
In this chapter the six findings that support the third major theme are presented.
These findings emerged from the exploration of the second research question: Do the
descriptions by sustainability leaders of their worldviews and their work in sustainability
reflect specific action logics?
As described in the previous chapter, interviews took place with 65 sustainability
leaders, the large majority of whom are senior executive in multinational companies.
However, in addition to the questions described in Chapter 4 about their backgrounds,
motivation, and worldviews, these interviews included questions related to the specifics of
their actual work in their organizations. This set of questions focused more on how
sustainability was being implemented. These questions probed into the leadership,
strategies, and culture of their organizations. Participants were also asked about how they
were measuring their success as sustainability leaders.
These questions arose from wanting to know not only who these individuals were,
but also what they did. Questions were designed to get a sense of what their work looked
like on a daily basis and what their challenges were related to sustainability within their
organizations. Questions included; To what extent do you integrate sustainability into your
leadership development processes? What do you see as your biggest challenges to
accomplishing your goals at both the individual and organizational levels? How are you
measuring your success both at the individual and organizational levels? Can you share any
particular success stories? (see Appendix A for a complete list of questions).
62
As described in Chapter 4, the interviews were transcribed either during or
immediately afterwards. In order to explore the second research question, a deductive
thematic analysis and hermeneutic methodology was used to analyze the data based on the
developmental frameworks identified during the literature review. By highlighting various
phrases and looking for relationships and patterns in the textual data, ample empirical
evidence for the expression of post-conventional action logics was uncovered. (See Tables
4 and 5 in Chapter 2 for description of these action logics). During repeated rounds of
analysis, ample evidence for both redefining and transforming action logics was found in
the textual data as described by Torbert (2004). Language indicative of conventional
action logics was considerably less frequent and there were a few statements that could be
considered indicative of alchemical action logics. After more than a dozen rounds of
coding, sorting, and hermeneutic analysis, specific groups of key phrases, patterns of
thought, and expressions used by the participants were identified that led to six findings
that support the third major theme.
Theme 3: Expressions of Post-Conventional Action Logics
- Awareness of Diverse Worldviews and Contexts
- Thinking in Decades: Future Generations and Historical Context
- Enhanced Systems Consciousness
- Planet-Centric Circles of Identity and Care
- Inquiring Stance with Greater Vulnerability
- Highly Collaborative Approaches to Leadership
A detailed presentation of the individual findings and respective sets of quotations
from the interviews are presented in the next section.
63
Awareness of Diverse Worldviews and Contexts
The capacity to see and reflect on a diversity of worldviews (and hold object one's
own worldview) is one of the most crucial differences between conventional and post-
conventional action logics (Cook-Greuter, 2004; Kegan, 1994; Torbert, 2004). Closely
related is the capacity to be aware of diverse contexts. These contexts can be social,
cultural, economic, political, and environmental. During the interviews, numerous
examples of the capacity to see diverse worldviews and contexts were found. For example,
this participant, a Director of Sustainability at a major apparel and footwear manufacturer,
characterized her thinking this way:
What we’ve found in regards to our sustainability initiatives is that people go through phases of understanding over a long period of years. We continue to try to classify where we are on the journey.
This next participant, the Chief Sustainability Officer at a global consumer products
company, described his work as follows:
In my role as CSO everybody has an opinion because the idea of sustainability is so personal. When I come into a meeting with groups of our employees I don't know what their individual priorities are. One person cares about homeless people, another about animal rights, another about climate change, and some of them don't care all. In my job everything is framed about caring. So everyone cares about different things.
A third participant, the Chief Sustainability Officer at global travel services firm,
described how she thinks about the diversity of worldviews in the following manner:
When you think about sustainability you have to think about both ends of the spectrum. It’s about bringing everyone to the center from both sides, both the nonbeliever to the eco-enthusiast…. Both viewpoints have to be brought in… Changing behaviors just for the sake of the environment does not resonate with everyone.
64
A fourth senior executive talked about how his awareness of diverse worldviews
affected his approach to communication:
Part of the reason that I don’t stand on a soapbox is to allow a constant drip of improvements that starts to take root, one by one. I don’t ask employees how they regard our efforts. I want my conversations with my team to be about them, and their needs… It’s my experience that I regard these issues different than most people, I don’t want to environmentalize as a religion. I’m motivated on a very practical level. There’s a risk if I were to be seen as too extreme in my views. It’s kind of a circuitous pattern.
A strong awareness of cultural context was apparent in many of the interviews. For
example, this Chief Sustainability Officer referred to her experiences in India and described
how this has affected her thinking:
One thing that was very illuminating for me was my trip to India. There you have a lot of different environmental issues. Although they have the equivalent of Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, I don't sense it is very well enforced. So although they do have those policies, just the sheer magnitude of people and processes and outsourcing of our manufacturing and everything else in India, you really see all of that boiling there. It was very illuminating because before that I thought that things could be so much better, but not really acknowledging how far we've come. And then you go to India and it makes you realize these are real serious issues. The air quality alone is a major issue in terms of particular matter and the amount of biomass that's being burned. You blow your nose at the end of the day and it's just black. So I think this was a good reality check for me.
This same executive shared her perspective about the Dutch culture and their
relationship to technology:
I lived in Holland for 2 years. Culturally the Dutch are so interesting. In regards to sustainability, I would describe them as being very techno-centric. They have this deep understanding about why they're so vulnerable to climate change because of the fact that so much of the land is below sea level already. They have this intricate system of managing their agricultural land and the
65
north seas using these dikes and levees systems. They know that they would just be inundated creating a huge loss of agricultural land. However through their technology they believe that they will overcome the environmental factor.
The next participant, the Director of Sustainability and Stewardship from a major
global electronics firm, shared how his extensive time spent working in other countries
affected his worldview and way of thinking about culture in the following way:
I’ve led environmental research labs in China and Germany. Running those groups for around seven years gave me a great perspective on environmental science, technology, and culture. It sort of drove a stake in the ground for me. The Chinese know that they are running out of concrete, copper, steel, and minerals. The best place to get them is in Africa. Unfortunately, they will do business with corrupt governments. They will go to the Congo no problem.
The four interview excerpts below are from Vice Presidents or Directors of
Sustainability at multinational companies. Each quotation demonstrates an awareness of
worldviews and contexts in general, especially in the global context of their work.
What I do think is the case is that if you are a top-tier person moving towards the C-suite you need to understand the broader environmental and social context to be successful.
I've had an evolving view. Twenty years ago I was involved with environmental activities. Working in management you're really working on a very different side of the conversation. I realized that there are all these different perspectives and challenges involved with addressing the environment. And there needs to be a middle ground.
If you think about the influence of technology, we all need to be aware of how what we are doing will affect the broader society. It is now an expectation that we do work that benefits developing countries and that we can offer more solutions around the world.
We’re finding that more and more engineers are in tune with societal issues on a global level. For instance, we have many new
66
health care and energy products that are designed for rural markets in India and China. It’s really important that engineers have a cultural sensitivity to the emerging markets. We need enlightened engineers instead of those with a western mindset.
Thinking in Decades: Future Generations and Historical Context
Another indicator of post-conventional action logic that stood out in the data was
the mental pattern of putting sustainability in a long-term historical and future context.
Developmental researchers have found that leaders with post-conventional action logics
think with time horizons longer than decades, and often in terms of generations or their
own lifetimes (Brown, 2012; Esbjorn-Hargens, 2005; Torbert, 2004). This can mean
consistently thinking in terms of multiple decades into the past and future instead of weeks,
months, or years.
When talking about their work in sustainability, many of the participants appeared
to have the capacity to think decades out into the future while holding the past experience
of their own lifetime present in their minds. In particular, the time period of the early
1970s when the modern environmental movement was born forward to the present was
often referred to during the interviews.
By emphasizing their sense of history and long-term view of the future, the
following quotations all illustrate this aspect of post-conventional action logic:
We can see how it will play out over the next 10 years. I can see that if we do this right, we can really make change happen. It’s so much about common sense. Why do we throw all this stuff away and create all this waste? Ten years from now there will not be green companies. Every company will have a set of best practices around sustainability. I won’t need to show you the difference between green companies and other companies… This will be the standard in 10 years.
67
I think people need to understand how everything fits in and relates to the future. What you’re doing today affects what is going to happen 10 years from now. What has changed is that now we ask ourselves what do we need to do by 2050 as relates to climate change and carbon parts per million. What is the right thing to do? How should we be gearing the business to make that happen? How should we engage in legislation? What is the science behind this? What is going to be possible? Our plan has become how we can have all of our products put together in a way that allows us to have flexibility taking into account the large changes that will take place in the coming decades.
In the post-industrial world we will see the result of our work in sustainability… All of us need to be doing things that are very long term and very visionary.
During the interviews, climate change and the role of big business was frequently
put into a longer-term historical and future context by numerous participants. Many of the
research participants represented their companies in a variety of public/private/NGO
coalitions related to climate change and sustainability. Given their ecological worldviews,
many of these individuals spoke in very personal terms about the issue of climate change
and frequently put their thoughts into historical context.
For example, this CEO of a corporate environmental NGO based in Washington,
DC, said;
My personal view is that we've got to find a way to move from the goal of just understanding the natural environment to the realization that we ourselves are causing the environment to change drastically around us for the first time in the history of man. I think that changes the game. I think that I struggle with this personally. I don’t believe that it is possible at this point to mitigate the damage we have started. Now we need to mitigate how bad it's going to be, how we're going to help people deal with these environmental realities in the future.
68
Another participant, an executive at a national environmental coalition that focuses
on working with members of Congress for progressive climate and energy policy, shared
her perspective this way:
Environmental movements take a long time. We should not be surprised. What we see is a scaling up with more sectors, more brands. We were prepared for companies to back out, but we are actually getting more calls. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and big oil and big coal are disproportionately influential. If we really look at history, this is their last gasp. We’re seeing a crescendo of activity that will ultimately result in a long-term careful solution.
This next participant shared his ideas of a steady-state economy the ideas of a new
ecological paradigm. His comments also demonstrate this capacity to think in a longer
time horizon:
The longer term issue that I see in terms of leadership is that eventually we have to deal with consumption with a big C, not just Cradle to Cradle thinking, but we have to transition to business models that do not depend on growth, that in fact thrive on the basis of reducing consumption. Right now the business world is getting on board with being more efficient because they know we are running out of natural resources or they are afraid of climate change, or political instability, they are on board with this first phase, but not the second phase.
Enhanced Systems Consciousness
Thus far we have seen how the sustainability executives expressed two of the key
characteristics of leaders with post-conventional action logics. These two characteristics
are a greater awareness of the diversity of worldviews and contexts as well as a capacity to
consistently think in longer time frames. In this section, interview excerpts are presented
that represent expressions of an enhanced systems consciousness, another distinctive
characteristic of post-conventional action logics that developmental researchers have
identified. As a consequence of being able to see a greater diversity of worldviews and
69
contexts, an awareness of the broader system emerges. These leaders recognize on a
consistent basis that they operate within a larger system made up of many different
worldviews and contexts. They become less quick to assert their own worldviews while
maintaining an enhanced understanding that they cannot control all the variables within the
system. They also begin to see themselves as part of systems within systems.
Developmental researchers have called this the capacity to see the self in the system.
For example, this senior sustainability executive at a major apparel and footwear
manufacturer offered this reflection about her ecological worldview that demonstrates her
systems consciousness:
I think probably that where I come from in terms of my ecological worldview is systems thinking and the interconnection of so much of what we do and our impact on the environment. I've spent a lot of time over the years around sustainability and been exposed to a lot of what's going on in the world. I have a science background. I've always understood at the fundamental basis that the economy and society are within the context of the environment. So we really can't do anything without paying attention to the ecological context within which we live.
When asked how he thought about the impact of his work, here is how another
senior sustainability executive put it:
The next circle out there is the whole planet…. Quite often it breaks down to understanding yourself and your dependence on nature. There's an interrelationship obviously. It means taking yourself and your team out into the world and become aware of how you are impacting the bigger ecosystems and making linkages. You could scale that down or up however you want to. But it's basically how the social and economic systems of the human community are in relationship with ecosystems. You need to have an understanding of all that kind of stuff in order to be skillfully engaged.
This participant, the CSO at a global travel services company, described how the
concept of waste had led her to a deeper appreciation of systems thinking:
70
When you step into a role like this what you think will inspire you changes. For example, I never thought I would be so excited about trash. However I realized that I was getting excited about systems thinking. In order to be a real change agent you have to understand the whole system. One day I put on my gloves and went through the trash in one of our buildings. When I thought about waste diversion, I began seeing the entire global waste system.
Another participant, when asked what some of his key takeaways were since he
began his journey as a sustainability leader, replied,
First, that the more you work on sustainability you realize it is not just connected to other issues, but the same as other issues, like ethics, religion, business, family, education, health, poverty, respect, government.
This next quote also serves to illustrate the systems thinking aspect of post-
conventional action logic:
It comes from learning where we had a role in impacting the environment, not just the planet itself but also the people working for the company. Finding an appropriate balance between all three areas: economic, social, and environmental. I carry the bulk of the environmental focus but the foundation is social justice. I struggle with the balance and how to involve everyone. I carry it as a personal mission.
This sustainability executive and major multinational food company described how
she and her team see their company as part of the global food system. She described how
they are using their company as a platform to influence other multinational companies
towards more sustainable agricultural practices:
We have a series of position papers that we worked on about a broad range of topics…. From climate disruption to local food systems and the value in terms of big world /small planet point of view…the finished papers will be external. They are very good papers for conversations. We are using the papers to influence other multinational companies who may not understand what we are doing… The papers are country specific. The French are very progressive. No genetically modified food. In the next several
71
years we can be a catalyst for safe food…If we capitalize on our ability tell our stories and to really engage our consumers, that is where our strength comes.
This participant, the head of environmental strategy at a global technology
company, became animated when talking about the long-term potential of scaling up the
solutions developed within his organization to address a wide variety of global challenges.
I would say that what makes this job most compelling for me is that despite all these really cool things that we are doing, we have not even scratched the surface in terms of what type of unique contributions we can make systems wide…. galvanizing people and shifting from a profit margin and cogs type of company to where we are helping to address societal issues at a scale that we can’t fathom and unlocking our potential.
This participant, the CEO of a major multinational company, also reflected on scale
in the following manner:
I think that we understand now that scale is a tool and you can use scale to do good things or use scale to do bad things. We try to use scale to do good things.
Planet-Centric Circles of Identity and Care
The capacity to identify with a widening circle of human and nonhuman
communities is another important characteristic of transforming action logics. It has also
been referred to as span of care by developmental researchers (Brown, 2012; Cook-
Greuter, 2004; Esbjorn-Hargens, 2005; Rooke & Torbert, 2005). Developmental
researchers have found the worldview of leaders with post-conventional action logics can
become wider until it embraces everyone on the planet as well as the biosphere itself
(Wilber, 2000).
The capacity to identify with a wide range of cultures and countries around the
world by many of the participants stood out in the data. There were numerous instances
where they indicated a heightened awareness of the entire global community during the
72
interviews. Once again, given the global reach of their companies, this comes as no
surprise. However, the frequency that a global and planetary perspective was mentioned
during the interviews was surprisingly high. For instance, when reflecting on the issue of
climate change, this Chief Sustainability Officer highlighted a missing perspective from the
political climate change debate in the following way:
Of course from a global perspective climate change is an enormous issue that we should be addressing. But I think one thing that is a little bit absent from these conversations is the outsourcing of our industrial processes to these other countries and our being ignorant of the effect of this. Also the reality that there is so much of just basic environmental protection that is not happening in developing countries. I think that's underreported. Most people know there's pollution in China and in India, but we haven't included that within our global environmental goals as well as I think it could be.
This Director of Sustainability spoke of climate change being an issue of equity for
people in underdeveloped countries throughout the world:
Ultimately climate is an issue of ethics and equity, and solving it seems like an obligation to our kids but also to poorer people around the world.
This quotation from a longtime senior sustainability executive at a major apparel
manufacturer reflected that our language and culture are still embedded in our patriarchal
society.
I think we are honing our approach. It’s an ever-widening circle of learning. The work we’re doing on diversity and culture, recognizing what are the patterns and the artifacts in the culture, I continue to find it so helpful… How do we lead going forward? We need to move towards a more matriarchal society from the dominant patriarchal societies. We continue to need to see that sustainability is embedded in the patriarchal and explore how we can move into a more feminine non-traditional approach.
73
This executive at one of the major environmental NGOs was able to articulate a
specific point in time where his circle of identity expanded from himself as an
organizational leader to a more ecocentric worldview.
It was there that I realized I made a shift from being primarily interested in my own experience of being a leader and interpreter to actually understanding ecosystems better in order to be of service and in some way conserve or restore ecosystems.
This last quotation is from a sustainability executive from the coffee industry. He
demonstrates his sense of identity as a global citizen:
For many years I've been involved with fair trade and corporate social initiatives in Central America. Traditionally, we work with the cooperatives and the larger growers on pricing and to help improve their operations and the labor conditions for their workers. About five years ago as part of a trip to Guatemala I sat down with a small group of people in one of the villages to get a sense of what things really looked like from their perspective…. We were after some new perspectives… to see what the issues were for their families.
An Inquiring Stance with Greater Vulnerability The capacity to maintain an inquiring stance with a heightened sense of personal
vulnerability is another important characteristic of post-conventional action logic. Although
this capacity becomes most prominent in the alchemist stage, it begins to appear in the
earlier post-conventional stages as well. Torbert (2010) calls this listening in the dark. This
refers to the capacity to continue to listen with an open mind, especially when under stress.
In particular, the capacity to reflect more consistently on a wide variety of events and
perspectives is indicative of this aspect of post-conventional action logic. For example, this
participant reflected,
Earlier in my career, I had one sense of what environmentalism was and what approaches could be taken. In some ways, I was idealistic because I thought that if environmental education was
74
framed in such a way, then anyone can learn and everything was possible… But then you ultimately don't have control over why or what everyone does… So lately over the last 6 or 7 years I’ve come to understand why certain things are on the trajectory they are. It kind of just places the idealism inside the realism.
Reflecting on his frustration with the tendency of employees in his company and in
the general public to reduce things to more simple binaries, this senior sustainability
executive put it this way:
It’s not as black and white as people see it…. It’s kind of a theatre of the absurd and somewhere in between…. it forces me to maintain a sort of confident humility.
Along the same lines, but even more succinctly, this senior sustainability executive
shared, “I'm in a constant phase of rethinking.” Or this executive who spoke about how to
communicate the essence of sustainability and wondered out loud, “How do we put it to the
heartbeat of the company?”
This long-time sustainability executive shared his observation about needing to
focus more on our failures instead of successes:
We as a business community are getting better at being less bad…not yet being good. The pace of change is nowhere where it needs to be. If we look at where we thought we would be now 5 years ago the progress has been very slow. I learn more talking to my colleagues about where they are failing. The most valuable lessons come from when we stumble.
The following quote is from a senior consultant who facilitates a support network
for chief sustainability officers. He spoke about the singular capacity for chief
sustainability officers to listen on behalf of their organizations:
They all have unique positions within their company. Most of them are sort of the consciousness of their company. Someone has to be the listening post for what’s next. They’re sort of the Indian scouts for the company.
75
This Chief Sustainability Officer at a global technology company reflected on how
his background as a chemist allowed him to work on concepts he can't see:
For me I feel sustainability is too important and when you get down to it that’s why I’m doing it. Being a chemist at a company, I know I don’t have all the answers…. Chemists are really good at solving problems using the scientific method. We’re good at working on concepts that we can’t see.
This participant, the CEO of a global consumer products company, described how
sustainability has forced him to learn how to get more out of his comfort zone.
We started to do more ethnographies and talking to different kinds of people. It’s really more about their world and their planet. You have to get out of your comfort zone and talk to people that you normally don’t talk to.
This last quotation is from a VP of Sustainability. It refers to the experience he had
during a retreat and expresses his vulnerability:
I did a dense and deep work with Joanna Macy below that kind of an aberration. Most of my peers don't want to be that vulnerable. The work I did with the sustainability Consortium was great but I think it could've gotten deeper.
Highly Collaborative Approaches to Leadership
In response to questions related to how sustainability was being integrated into the
leadership and culture of their companies, numerous executives observed how the practice
of sustainability was changing how they thought about leadership. The majority of these
executives had two to three decades of senior leadership experience in the corporate world,
with many of them working in sustainability for the last decade. By looking at key words,
phrases, and concepts, various expressions of highly collaborative approaches to leadership
were identified.
76
One of the most prominent expressions was the way that sustainability has caused
leadership to become a more collective process. Key words and phrases such as leading
from the middle, influencing without control, collective wisdom, from fear to trust, both
ends of the spectrum, and away from the typical hierarchical approach supported this
finding.
For example, this participant, the Chief Sustainability Officer at one of the largest
computer companies in the world with over 300,000 employees, shared this observation:
I think sustainability has caused leadership to evolve within our company. When I joined the company the culture was really about seniority. Now it is more about leading from the middle. With 300,000 people there really is no other way. It would take a year to get the word out on our initiatives. You would be a dinosaur. With my old jobs around change management and diversity it makes it really difficult. What we do in the corporate function is very much trying to influence without control.
Along the same lines, this participant, the Chief Sustainability Officer at a global
travel services firm, quoted above related to her awareness of diverse worldviews, offered
this observation about leadership:
When you think about sustainability you have to think about both ends of the spectrum. It’s about bringing everyone to the center from both sides, both the nonbeliever to the eco-enthusiast… Both viewpoints have to be brought in.
This next participant, the Chief Sustainability Officer at a major automobile
manufacturer, offered a similar reflection about leadership:
I think what comes up for me is that there has been a change in leadership over the years to use more of everyone’s collective wisdom. When I came in there was a group doing sustainability but it was more on the side… When that CEO asked me to take over the sustainability function, he asked me to integrate it more fully into the company. He wanted someone to show the leadership team what it was all about.
77
Also as part of this finding is this highly descriptive quotation from a CEO with
over four decades of senior leadership experience in some of the best-known American
multinational companies in the world:
What I began to experiment with was the change from fear to trust. Trust is a much more powerful tool than fear. Servant leadership is a term that has been overused now for many years but that is basically where it came from. Also what I saw was a form of democratization of companies in the mid to late ‘90s, away from the typical hierarchical approach that comes from the military, where an officer’s idea is better than yours because he outranks you. Good people started to realize that they don’t have to put up with that crap.
Yet another perspective related to the concept of leading from the middle was
offered by this participant, a senior sustainability consultant who has worked with dozens
of sustainability executives in recent years in a consortium. He described his perspective
on how sustainability leadership involves the capacity to hold two juxtaposing mindsets at
the same time.
If we look at the challenges that individual leaders are facing and the situations that they are being put into… we have the opportunity side opening up to new more socially responsible business models. It’s tough to find individuals that can hold both styles. Control versus opportunity. I see this interesting tension right now whether they are the CSO, CEO or at the EVP level, they have to be good at both of these types of leadership styles.
Another way that the capacity to collaborate more deeply and widely involved how
participants were working with a wide range of stakeholders including employees,
suppliers, customers, the public sector, and NGOs. This participant, the Chief
Sustainability Officer at a global consumer products company, reflected on how
sustainability had changed his way of thinking about leadership and collaboration in this
way:
78
I was based in Sweden, which has a more collaborative culture. To get the sustainability agenda to work internally you have to have strong influencing skills. When I think about sustainability leadership in contrast to the 20th century great man style of leadership, you’re more the Collaborator-in-Chief. You’re not command-and-control; you’re not omnipotent.
Demonstrating his inquiring stance, he went on to add,
I knew immediately that I did not know everything there was to know about sustainability…. I know that I will never be an expert. It enforces a new level of humility because I know deep down that I need to collaborate with others in a more flexible way. I'm very grateful that I went into sustainability and feel very lucky because it helped me develop some right-brain skills that I did not know had gone dormant. Practicing sustainability has allowed me to collaborate at a higher level.
This participant, the Senior Vice President of global citizenship at a global food
company, put it this way: “Sustainability is the ultimate team sport.” Another sustainability
executive added, “Whenever our team members want to build a collaborative effort, it’s my
job to build that tent.”
As part of this capacity to collaborate more deeply, there were numerous instances
were where sustainability executives shared stories about how their relationship with the
NGO sector had changed. For example, this participant described a large-scale worldwide
collaboration with an NGO in the area of water stewardship.
My focus is on water. We’re 4 years into this partnership…. We’re focusing on seven major river basins and fifteen countries. We’ve melded the people in the field so that now they’re almost indistinguishable. …. There is a local connection everywhere. …. It represents real ignition as to how we effectively partner and reach out and engage.
These final three quotations are from senior sustainability executives who express
versions of deeper collaboration with NGOs in similar ways:
79
Collaboration with NGO’s at our company has changed drastically... We had to start working with and listening to the NGOs at both the local and the federal level. You can’t please everyone all the time but there is a lot of common ground on new technologies… We share lots of common purpose with them.
I would say that one of the biggest shifts and mentalities that I have seen in recent years is that many people inside our company are now seeing sustainability as an opportunity and not just risk mitigation, governance, or compliance. I think what we have been able to do is turn it around and engage with society.
A really good sustainability leader should focus broadly on a sustainability strategy and make it come alive. We’ve really focused on engagement with stakeholders. Sometimes it takes a lot more listening. We created a human rights policy based on feedback with stakeholders in key issues. It has been dramatically important to the point now we have close relationships with numerous NGOs, and advocacy groups. They now know that we will do the right thing with the right feedback. So now we find out about things early in the curve.
Another highly collaborative approach to leadership that appeared in the data was
an enhanced capacity to translate and communicate complex sustainability initiatives.
Participants spoke of their challenges to communicate to diverse stakeholders and create
greater shared understanding. For example, this participant, a relatively young executive
involved in global food issues at a large environmental NGO shared this perspective:
It still is coming down to that although we have many of the technical solutions to problems faced by people around the world, there are political and economic forces in play that make this too little too late. There just aren't win-win scenarios to be had everywhere, especially on political issues. The power dynamics and economic inequalities are uncomfortable. There is not really a vernacular for the overall context. We've got to find some language that would be translatable for companies and governments.
This participant, the Chief Environmental Strategist the global technology firm,
described his view on communication this way:
80
Most companies are in a state of advanced chaos. The problem is communicating to everyone around the world. The reality today is that there are so many channels out there, we have to get the word out that we are doing this at a level that we’ve never heard of before. The key is to have voices go viral and rise above the clutter. My challenges are more about getting people to understand what is happening and change their behavior at scale.
Two more examples of the capacity to communicate to diverse worldviews can be
found in these quotations.
What we’ve found in regards to our sustainability initiatives is that people go through phases of understanding over a long period of years. We continue to try to classify where we are on the journey. This means that we have to continually evolve our communication.
Part of the reason is that I don’t stand on a soapbox is to allow a constant drip of improvements that starts to take root, one by one. I don’t ask employees as to how they regard our efforts. I want my conversations with my team to be about them, and their needs.
The idea of translation also arose from this executive while she was framing the
challenges of communicating the need to reduce carbon emissions:
All of us need to be doing things that are very long term and very visionary. It’s not going to be easy to translate to the common consumer that it is the right thing to do to reduce carbon emissions.
Finally, this senior sustainability consultant provided the title for this theme:
We all know that we have to have a steady drumbeat to make a difference. I wrote something a while ago that said the CSO should be called the Chief Translation Officer.
Conclusion
In this chapter the supporting findings for the third theme that emerged from the
analysis of the qualitative data were presented. This theme is Expressions of Post-
Conventional Action Logics by Sustainability Leaders. As support for this theme, interview
excerpts were organized into six supporting findings: awareness of diverse worldviews and
81
cultural context, thinking in decades, enhanced systems consciousness, planet-centric
circles of identity and care, inquiring stance with increased vulnerability, and highly
collaborative approaches to leadership.
When combined with the first two themes about ecological worldviews, the
findings presented in this chapter further illuminate the distinctive characteristics of the
sample population of sustainability leaders. In the next chapter, we explore how the
findings contribute to the theories from several literatures. These include the fields of eco-
psychology, environmental sociology, developmental psychology, and sustainability
leadership. In this way, we begin to understand how ecological worldviews and action
logics have the power to reframe and advance the field of sustainability leadership.
82
CHAPTER SIX: IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY AND PRACTICE
Introduction
The goal for this dissertation study was to better understand the interior worldviews
of global sustainability leaders. A review of several social science literatures led to an
integrative theoretical framework for this study. These literatures included deep ecology,
eco-psychology, environmental sociology, integral ecology, and developmental
psychology. They also included theories of interior and sustainability leadership. The two
research questions that guided this study were; How do sustainability leaders describe their
worldviews and motivation for their work? Do the descriptions by sustainability leaders of
their ecological worldviews and their work in sustainability reflect specific action logics?
By using these questions to guide the design of the study and the analysis of the
interview data, ample evidence was uncovered that led to three major themes. These are (a)
Experiences that Shape Ecological Worldviews Over the Lifespan; (b) Expressions of
Ecocentric Worldviews; (c) Expressions of Post-Conventional Action Logics. Each of
these themes is supported by a specific set of findings.
Among the three sets of findings, the most surprising is the ample empirical
evidence of post-conventional action logics in the large sample of global sustainability
leaders. The evidence that their action logics appear to be manifesting in several highly
collaborative forms of sustainability leadership further increases the significance of these
findings for theory and practice. These new leadership approaches include an enhanced
capacity to communicate complex sustainability initiatives to a diversity of worldviews,
influencing without control, and using an enhanced systems consciousness to work more
effectively on social and environmental issues with a wide range of external stakeholders.
While it may be expected to find a large percentage of highly developed ecological
83
worldviews among global sustainability leaders, the evidence that a large percentage also
operate with post-conventional action logics presents an important new contribution to the
literature. When combined with the first two sets of findings, this study serves to
empirically ground ecological worldview and developmental theory in sustainability
practice.
Although empirical studies by Brown (2012), Hedlund-de Witt (2012), and Rogers
(2012) have opened up this line of research, studies thus far have been theoretical, based on
small samples, or focused on areas other than sustainability leadership. In the case of
Hedlund-de Witt (2012), research has been focused on sustainable lifestyles and
development, not leadership theory and practice. Kahn (1999) has conducted decades of
research on the human relationship with nature, but his research has focused primarily on
childhood development, education, and the role of technology. Esbjorn-Hargens and
Zimmerman (2009) have written extensively about ecological worldviews, but primarily in
an integral theory-building mode. Many studies have been conducted using the new
ecological paradigm survey instrument (Dunlap, 2008), but they have focused primarily on
environmental values, education, public policy, and culture. The evidence provided in this
study adds new empirical insights to these theoretical and small sample studies. It extends
the existing body of interdisciplinary research in this area and offers new ways for scholars
and practitioners to think about sustainability leadership theory and practice. Next, each of
the three propositions made in this study are explored in greater depth.
84
Implications of Theme 1
The ecological worldviews of sustainability leaders are shaped across the lifespan by at least five distinct life experiences
The five findings that support Theme 1 suggest that sustainability leaders share at
least five common experiences that have shaped their ecological worldview. These
findings are significant in several ways. First, their descriptions of how they think about
nature indicate that they have explicit ecological worldviews. Second, sustainability leaders
appear to make a connection between their beliefs about the natural world and the
motivation for their work in sustainability. Third, their beliefs about nature appear to have
been formed throughout their lifespan.
Although the interviews were not designed to uniformly examine the biography or
lifeline for each participant, a chronological and possible developmental sequence did
suggest itself within the interview narratives. The first finding on how family and early
childhood had a significant impact on their worldview generally referred to the K-12 years.
The second finding that focused on environmental education generally corresponded to
their college and graduate school years. This appears to have been a period of great
discovery in their lives. However, what distinguishes these sustainability leaders from
many other types of leaders is that this period appears to have contributed significantly to
the formation of an ecological worldview. Many of them described a time when they first
cultivated an understanding of ecological systems and social justice. At this early point in
their lives, many of them then began to orient themselves towards eventual careers in
sustainability.
85
The third finding shows how witnessing extreme poverty and environmental
degradation for the first time in developing countries appears to have deepened their
ecological worldview and commitment to their work in sustainability. It is closely related
chronologically to the second finding, although in many instances appears to have occurred
a bit later in their 20s. The fourth finding that relates to career shifts appears to be in
response to an evolution of their ecological worldview and taken place primarily when they
were in their 30s. It reveals how many of the participants became aware of the impact of
global corporations on planetary ecosystems and social issues. In many cases, they appear
to have made conscious decisions to move to the private sector in order to have a bigger
impact on the world. The fifth finding relates to how they describe spirituality and a sense
of service as part of their ecological worldview. These expressions generally appear to be a
reflection of their current lives, which would correspond to their late 30s or 40s for the
large majority of the participants.
This possible developmental sequence should be of interest to ecological worldview
and developmental researchers in several ways. Although application of developmental
theory to ecological worldviews has been made by a few scholars (Rogers, 2012), most
research has been either theoretical (Esbjorn-Hargens & Zimmerman, 2009), or focused on
other domains such as sustainable lifestyles (Hedlund-de Witt, 2012), childhood
development, technological nature, or education (Kahn, 1999). Through their decades of
extensive empirical research, developmental theorists including Cook-Greuter (2000),
Kegan (1994), and Torbert (2004), have accumulated an impressive body of work that has
established the validity of developmental theory and focused on a wide range of
applications. However, their research has taken place under the anthropocentric umbrella
86
of Western psychology. Thus, it has almost exclusively focused on the relationship of
human beings to themselves and to each other, and not on the relationship to nature.
Among the primary psychometric instruments used for their research include the
various versions of the Washington University Sentence Completion Test (Loevinger,
1979, Cook-Greuter, 2004, Torbert, 2004). These instruments appear to not have given
enough attention to how the human relationship with nature develops. For instance, the
Global Leadership Profile, the latest version of the Washington University Sentence
Completion Test used by Action Inquiry Associates to assess action logics, does not appear
to invite enough reflection on the relationship to nature among its 30 sentence stems to
draw conclusions about ecological worldviews. The 5 findings that comprise Proposition 1
invite developmental researchers to explore new ways to integrate the development of
ecological worldviews into their theories and measurement instruments.
Implications of Theme 2 Sustainability leaders express ecocentric worldviews in at least three distinct ways
The three findings that support Theme 2 demonstrate that sustainability leaders
express ecocentric worldviews through an awareness of their ecological embeddedness, an
awareness of the existence of an ecological crisis, and a belief in the intrinsic value of
nature. These findings suggest that many sustainability leaders possess a high degree of
ecological intelligence on a planetary scale and also have a philosophical stance on their
relationship to nature. Many of them appear to be not only highly educated in the
complexity of global environmental science, but also readily aware of bigger philosophical
questions facing humanity in regards to our relationship to nature. Phrases used such as
running out of natural resources, industrial ecology, learning from natural systems, and
87
bio-mimicry, all point toward the scientific aspect of their eco-centric worldview. Whereas,
phrases such as ecological context within which we live, inherent value in nature, truly
seeing other species, and interdependence of humanity and the natural world, all point
towards a philosophical dimension that forms part of their ecological worldview. This
detailed empirical evidence serves to animate the ecological worldview literatures in a new
context and has numerous implications for theories in the eco-psychology, environmental
sociology, and deep ecology literatures. To demonstrate how, this set of findings can be
explored through the lens of two of the most prevalent constructs found within these
literatures, the new ecological paradigm (NEP) and the ecological self.
Based on the extensive use of the NEP survey instrument by social scientists, the
underlying concepts of a new ecological paradigm have generated significant dialogue over
the last three decades (Dunlap, 2008). The NEP instrument is based on several core ideas
and major themes found in the environmental literature. These include beliefs about
ecological limits to growth, maintaining the balance of nature, and various aspects of a
planetary ecological crisis including deforestation, species extinction, and climate change.
Overall, it seeks to measure the degree to which an individual holds an anthropocentric
versus an eco-centric worldview.
However, findings about ecological worldviews based on the NEP survey have
been criticized from a psychological perspective (Boiral et al., 2009; Brown, 2012;
Hedlund de-Witt, 2012). The major criticism of the NEP is that it is primarily a measure of
values and beliefs on a surface level and does not get at deeper individual eco-
psychological constructs. This occurs in large part because this instrument was designed as
a sociological survey. Moreover, the psychological dimensions of ecological worldviews
88
are underrepresented in the social science literature in general, as Hedlund-de Witt (2012)
and Esbjorn-Hargens and Zimmerman (2009) have noted.
The many ecocentric expressions by sustainability leaders offer new ways to
understand the core ideas of a new ecological paradigm, especially when considering the
sample on which the study is based. By presenting more granular expressions of eco-
centric worldviews by sustainability leaders, this study contributes to filling in the
psychological gaps left open by the NEP instrument.
The interview narratives also demonstrate how several participants appear to have
an awareness of their ecological embeddedness, one of the core aspects of the ecological
self. This finding offers a new link with the philosophy of deep ecology and suggests a new
relevance for this literature to sustainability leadership development. As eco-psychologist
Bragg (1996) observes, the ecological self is part of an expanded self-concept that can
significantly affect the functioning of an individual in his or her environment. Devall
(1995), a deep ecologist, concludes that we underestimate our self-potential by not
appreciating our ecological self.
Another interesting way to think about these findings is the way that they bring
together a more holistic view of the sustainability leader. One can see in their words
representations of both their ecological intelligence and their ecological self. The first type
of ecocentric expressions around the new ecological paradigm relate to cognitive
development, the second type seems more relevant to emotional development. Both form
part of their ecological worldview and the motivation for their work in sustainability.
89
Implications of Theme 3 Sustainability leaders express post-conventional action logics through five dimensions and
through highly collaborative approaches to leadership.
The set of findings that support Theme 3 offer ample evidence that sustainability
leaders express post-conventional action logic by demonstrating an expanded awareness of
diverse worldviews and contexts, thinking in time horizons longer than decades, holding an
enhanced systems consciousness, having expanded circles of identity and care, consistently
maintaining an inquiring stance, and by practicing highly collaborative approaches to
leadership.
The first finding reveals that global sustainability leaders appear to have developed
an enhanced capacity to see a growing range of worldviews and contexts as part of their
global sustainability practice. A range of social, environmental, economic, cultural, and
political worldviews were described in various ways by participants during their
interviews. There were many instances where it appeared that the inherently complex and
interdisciplinary nature of their work in global sustainability was forcing them to develop
this capacity. The diversity of worldviews and contexts exist both internally within their
organizations and externally with a wide range of global stakeholders. Their capacity to
recognize and appreciate various worldviews and contexts appeared to be further magnified
by the global scope of their multinational corporations.
The second finding indicates a capacity to consistently think in longer time
horizons, even while operating under the persistent short-term pressure of public
companies. This can often mean thinking in terms of decades, both in a historical and
future context simultaneously. Many of their reflections during the interviews showed
evidence of this capacity. It was apparent that many of the participants were aware of the
90
historical context within which they are working as well as the reality that it will take
decades to accomplish their goals.
A highly developed systems consciousness was also evident in the interviews with
many of the participants. This is indicative of their capacity to see a wide range of
interdependency both internally within their organizations and externally across multiple
stakeholders, countries, and cultures. Based on their roles in highly complex and large-
scale organizations, these global sustainability executives appear to recognize the
interconnectedness of social, economic, environmental, and political forces influencing the
sustainability initiatives they are responsible for promoting.
An expanded circle of identity and care points to whom these sustainability leaders
are capable of identifying with and caring about. Finding ample evidence of world-centric
and planet-centric spans of care within this sample population of sustainability executives
was a surprise. It was apparent during many of the interviews that the experiences of
working on global poverty and ecological issues in many parts of the developing world had
led to this expanded sense of identity and care.
The fifth finding that supports Theme 3 suggests that many of the interview
participants are consistently able to hold a more inquiring stance, which may be a
consequence of the various capacities described above. By operating with an enhanced
awareness of worldviews and contexts, many of the interviewees appear to have developed
a greater capacity to remain open and learn from their environment. In some cases, there
was also evidence of a greater sense of their own vulnerability. These findings hold
numerous implications for the integration of developmental and sustainability leadership
theory.
91
Based on several large-scale studies, developmental researchers have found the
overall distribution of professional adults in the United States with post-conventional action
logics to be approximately 6-7% (Torbert, 2004). The relatively small percentage of leaders
with post-conventional action logics was found to be virtually identical using Torbert’s
Profile instrument (total N = 497) and Kegan's Subject – Object Interview (total N = 342).
Although there are methodological limitations to this study that will be discussed below,
the qualitative evidence suggests that the sustainability leaders included in the study sample
exhibit post-conventional action logics at a significantly higher percentage than the general
population of business leaders. When considering the participants in this study operate
inside some of the world’s most influential companies, the significance of this set of
findings is magnified.
As Boiral et al. (2009) observe; the characteristics associated with post-
conventional action logic are closely aligned with the demands of sustainability leadership.
These authors propose that post-conventional consciousness equips individuals to navigate
the complexity of sustainability issues and mobilize individuals for sustainability causes
within organizations. Ferdig (2007) observes that sustainability leaders are informed by an
expanded view of how the complex universe operates, noting that being a sustainability
leader means letting go of the ego-driven certainty of right answers and genuinely engaging
with different points of view. A sustainability leader “understands that everything is
connected to everything else, that we live in a dynamic, ever-changing universe, and that
no single action occurs in isolation but is inextricably linked, often invisibly, to every other
action” (p. 32). These findings serve to ground and support the theoretical propositions of
Boiral et al. (2009) and Ferdig (2007) described above. The findings also serve to extend
92
the small body of empirical work into the action logics of sustainability leaders that has
been conducted thus far.
In his pioneering study into how sustainability leaders with later stage action logics
design sustainability initiatives, Brown (2012) illuminated ways that leaders think and
behave with respect to complex change initiatives. He reported that they design from a
deep inner foundation, use systems thinking, access non-rational ways of knowing, and
adaptively manage through dialogue with the system. He concludes that the discipline of
sustainability leadership is still in the very early stages and the lack of large-scale,
empirical research currently makes it difficult to draw specific conclusions about the nature
of sustainability leadership. This research begins to fill in this gap.
Recent work by Rogers (2012) used the framework of the ecological selves
(Esbjorn-Hargens & Zimmerman, 2009) to explore the ability of executives in a single
multinational corporation to confront environmental challenges. She found executives that
appear to be on the more advanced end of ecological selves spectrum demonstrated a more
highly developed sense of complexity, systems thinking, and interdependence. By drawing
on a robust sample of multinational executives from more than 50 companies, this study
adds depth and breadth to her findings.
As described in the introduction to this chapter, the evidence that the post-
conventional action logics of the research participants appears to be manifesting through
highly collaborative approaches to sustainability leadership is the subject of the final
finding. In response to questions about how sustainability was being integrated into the
leadership and culture of their companies, it became apparent that the practice of
sustainability was driving an evolution in their thinking about leadership and large-scale
93
change. This represents a new contribution to the substantial body of organizational
leadership theory that integrates various developmental frameworks. Amongst the most
prominent are developmental action inquiry (Tobert, 2004), adaptive leadership (Heifitz,
Grashow, & Linsky, 2009), leadership agility (Joiner & Josephs, 2007), and immunity to
change (Kegan & Lahey, 2009). However, these prominent theories do not focus on
sustainability leadership.
In an article entitled “Seven Transformations of Leadership” that was voted one of
the top 10 best leadership articles in the Harvard Business Review, Rooke and Torbert
(2005) describe what differentiates leaders is not necessarily their philosophy, personality,
or style of management. Rather, they explain, it is their internal action logic, which is how
they interpret the world around them. Based on research with thousands of executives in
diverse industries over 25 years, they explain how leaders can progressively move through
seven stages of development. They have found that leaders with post-conventional action
logics are able to consistently innovate and transform their organizations. They describe the
specific capacities that these leaders use to lead successful organizational transformations
and generate superior results. These capacities include greater communication and
collaboration skills, enhanced systems thinking, and operating with a more strategic time
horizon.
As their research relates to sustainability leadership, Rooke and Torbert (2005) cite
Joan Bavaria as an example of post-conventional action logic. Bavaria is the CEO of
Trillium Asset Management, the first socially responsible investment fund. She was also
one of the co-authors of the CERES Environmental Principles, which in coordination with
the United Nations, led to the Global Reporting Initiative, one of the most important
94
sustainability milestones in history. Through the example of Joan Bavaria, they make the
link between post-conventional action logics and sustainability practice. However, what is
missing from their research is to also make the link with how the ecological worldview of
Joan Bavaria may have influenced her actions as a sustainability leader.
Referring to post-conventional action logics and ecological worldviews, Brown
(2012) notes that these strengthened capacities are likely to support more effective
leadership during times of complexity and rapid change. He observes further, “research on
the values associated with sustainability leadership is limited and incomplete. The more
we understand what values undergird the behaviors required to lead sustainability
initiatives, the easier it will be to cultivate them” (p. 70).
By showing at least six distinct ways that global sustainability leaders express post-
conventional action logics, this study makes important new connections between
developmental theory and sustainability leadership. It allows for a new understanding of
post-conventional action logics and presents evidence of how these more advanced ways of
thinking lead to more collaborative approaches to sustainability leadership. These findings
could attract a larger audience of developmental and ecological worldview researchers to
apply their theories to the domain of sustainability leadership. This has numerous
generative implications for future research, which is the subject of the next section in this
chapter.
95
Future Research
Through its integrative framework and three generative propositions, this study sets
the stage for social science researchers from numerous disciplines to pursue a major new
area of focus: sustainability leadership. By providing empirical evidence of ecological
worldviews and post-conventional action logics among sustainability executives, it invites
scholars from several social science disciplines to explore how insights from their fields
can expand and enhance leadership development for sustainability. These disciplines
include
- Deep Ecology (Abram, 2010; Devall, 1995; Macy 2007; Naess, 1989)
- Developmental Psychology (Cook-Greuter; 2004; Torbert, 2004; Kegan, 1994)
- Eco-psychology (Bragg, 1996; Kahn, 1999; Roszak, 1995)
- Ecological Economics (Beddoe et al. 2009; Daly, 1996)
- Environmental Sociology (Dunlap, 2008; Hedlund-de Witt, 2012)
- Indigenous Studies (Four Arrows, 2006, 2013; Hart, 2010)
- Integral Ecology (Esbjorn-Hargens & Zimmerman, 2009; Obrien, 2006)
- Systems Thinking (Capra, 1996; Meadows, 2008)
Although a few studies have been conducted in this area, an understanding of how
both ecological worldviews and action logics can accelerate and enhance the field of
sustainability leadership is just beginning. In a recent study conducted by MIT and Boston
Consulting Group entitled Sustainability’s Next Frontier, researchers explored the extent to
which corporations are addressing sustainability issues. Based on a worldwide sample of
corporate leaders, they found that although nearly two thirds rate social and environmental
issues as significant, less than ten percent report that their corporations are addressing them
96
thoroughly. The researchers conclude by attributing this gap to a “disconnect between
thought and action” (Kiron, Kruschwitz, Rubel, Reeves, & Fuisz-Kehrbach, 2013, p. 3).
By providing extensive evidence of the interior worldviews of sustainability leaders and
how these may relate to their motivation for sustainability and their approaches to
leadership, this study starts to close this gap between thought and action in global
organizations. Future studies with new sample populations could explore questions such as
the following:
- Is the practice of sustainability driving human development or do individuals
with post-conventional action logic self-select for sustainability leadership?
- How can an understanding of ecological worldviews and post-conventional
action logics be integrated into sustainability leadership development programs?
- How can ecological worldviews and post-conventional action logics be
leveraged by sustainability leaders to enhance their effectiveness as change
agents in their organizations?
- How can existing assessment instruments such as the New Ecological Paradigm
Scale and the Global Leadership Profile be modified to enhance our
understanding of ecological worldviews in sustainability leaders?
- How do the ecological worldviews and action logics of sustainability leaders
vary across age groups, gender, and culture?
- What role can hermeneutic methodology play to study action logics?
Although the qualitative data uncovered during this study allow for some
speculation in regards to the above questions, drawing any specific conclusions is beyond
the scope of this study.
97
Limitations to the Study
The purpose of this study was to explore the ecological worldviews and action
logics of sustainability leaders. Based on qualitative interviews with a sample of 65
sustainability leaders, thematic analysis resulted in three major themes supported by 14
specific findings that addressed the two research questions. However, there are certain
limitations to this study that offer opportunities for future research.
In regard to Theme 1, the inference that the life experiences of sustainability leaders
suggest a developmental sequence is limited by the qualitative methodology and the
specific interview questions used in this study. As a result, the suggestion that these
experiences represent a hierarchical and developmental sequence is only tentative and
would need to be supported by further empirical research. This could be approached
through additional semi-structured interviews focused on a developmental line of inquiry.
Another approach could be to modify existing assessment tools such as the Global
Leadership Profile, perhaps by adding eco-sentence stems to explore a stage conception for
ecological worldviews. In regard to Theme 2, the expressions of ecocentric worldviews are
also limited by the qualitative methodology deployed in the study. One way to further
explore the extent and specificity of these views could be to triangulate them with various
quantitative instruments, such as the new ecological paradigm scale.
In regard to Theme 3, expressions of post-conventional action logics were identified
through the analysis of textual data and a hermeneutic methodology. Participants were not
assessed with a psychometric instrument such as the Global Leadership Profile or the
Subject-Object Profile. As a result, this study does not make claims as to the specific stage
of development of the participants or the precise percentage of participants that would have
98
been assessed at each stage. Furthermore, this study does not make a distinction between
the three specific levels of post-conventional action logic. However, through the analysis of
textual data, it does strongly suggest a higher percentage of post-conventional action logic
exists in the sample population of global sustainability leaders than exists in the general
population of corporate leaders. In order to further validate this finding, additional
empirical data would need to be gathered using a psychometric instrument such as the
Global Leadership Profile.
The types of companies from which the sample was drawn represent one final
limitation. The companies represented in the sample were primarily involved in consumer
goods such as food and beverage, household products, and consumer electronics.
Corporations directly involved in certain industries such as petroleum extraction, natural
gas fracking, defense contractors, and genetically modified food were not included in the
sample. Therefore, the propositions and findings made in this study are based on data
gathered from sustainability executives only within certain industries and therefore limit
their generalizability to these industries.
Conclusion
This study has provided many new insights about the ecological worldviews and
action logics of global sustainability leaders. Through an integrative conceptual framework,
it has demonstrated how the diverse literatures of ecological worldviews and
developmental psychology can advance sustainability leadership theory and practice. These
literatures include deep ecology, eco-psychology, environmental sociology, integral
ecology, indigenous studies, and systems thinking. They span ecological economics, social
psychology, and sustainability leadership. By grounding key theories from the ecological
99
worldview and developmental psychology literatures in sustainability practice, this study
demonstrates their potential to advance sustainability leadership.
This study has also sought to fill in empirical gaps in these literatures. It has sought
to provide answers to questions such as, What are the deeper motivations of individuals
that lead sustainability within multinational corporations? What are their ecological
worldviews, from where did these views originate, and how are they shaped over time?
How do they think about their work in sustainability and what does this reveal in terms of
their action logics? And, How has their work in sustainability influenced their approaches
to leadership? By focusing on the deeper psychological motivations of sustainability
leaders, this study provides a more holistic view of corporate leaders and offers new
answers to these questions.
Human beings now face the most serious and complex set of ecological problems in
our history. Multinational corporations must play an important role in solving the planet’s
great ecological challenges. During the last decade, the sustainability position inside
multinational corporations has grown in influence. Today there are senior sustainability
executives in hundreds of multinational companies. In order to reframe and advance
ecological sustainability, there is much work to do. The findings from this study should be
of interest to a wide range of social science researchers, leadership educators, corporate
executives, and social entrepreneurs. New insights can be integrated into leadership
curriculum and programs in a variety of public and private institutions to support the
development of the next generation of sustainability leaders for the benefit of all life on
earth.
100
REFERENCES
Abram, D. (2010). Becoming animal: An earthly cosmology. New York, NY: Random House.
Abram, D. (1996). The spell of the sensuous. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Babbie, E. (2002). The basics of social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson. Barlow, M. (2007). Blue covenant; The global water crisis and the coming battle for the
right to water. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York, NY: Free Press.
Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chicago, IL: Harper Collins. Beddoe, R., Costanza, R., Farley, J., Garza, E., Kent, J., Kubiszewski, I.,…Woodward, J.
(2009). Overcoming systemic roadblocks to sustainability: The evolutionary redesign of worldviews, institutions, and technologies. National Academy of Science, 106 (8), 2483-2489.
Bentz, V., & Shapiro, J. (1998). Mindful inquiry in social research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage. Boiral, O., Cayer, M., & Baron, C. M. (2009). The action logics of environmental
leadership: A developmental perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 479-499. Bragg, E., (1996). Towards ecological self: Deep ecology meets constructionist self–
theory. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16, 93–108. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. Brown, B. (2012). Conscious leadership for sustainability: How leaders with a late-stage
action logic design and engage in sustainability initiatives. Dissertation Abstracts International, UMI No. 3498378.
Brown, L. (2010). Plan B 4.0; Rescuing a planet under stress and a civilization in trouble.
New York, NY: Norton. Capra, F. (1996) The web of life: A new synthesis of mind and matter. Great Britain: Harper
Collins.
101
Conn, S. (1995). When the Earth hurts, who responds? In T. Roszak, M. Gomes, & A. Kanner (Eds.) Eco-psychology: Restoring the Earth healing the mind. (pp.156-171). Berkeley, CA: Sierra Club Books.
Cook-Greuter, S. R. (2000). Mature ego development: A gateway to ego transcendence?
Journal of Adult Development, 7(4). Cook-Greuter, S. R. (2004). Making the case for a developmental perspective. Industrial
and Commercial Training, 36(6/7), 275. Creswell, J. (2009). Research design; Qualitative, quantitative, and mix methods
approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Daly, H. (1996). Beyond growth. Boston, MA: Beacon.
Devall, B. (1995). The ecological self. In A. Drenson & Y. Inoue (Ed.), The Deep ecology movement: An introductory anthology (pp. 101-123). Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books.
Dietz, R., & Oneill, D. (2013). Enough is enough; Building a sustainable economy in a
world of finite resources. San Francisco, CA: Berrett Koehler. Drengson, A. & Inoue, Y. (Eds.). (1995). The deep ecology movement; An introductory
anthology. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books. Dunlap, R. (2008). The New Environmental Paradigm Scale: From marginality to
worldwide use. The Journal of Environmental Education. 40(1), 3-18. Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The “New Environmental Paradigm”: A
proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results. The Journal of Environmental Education, 9(4), 10-19.
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring
endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. The Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425.
Esbjorn-Hargens, S. B. F. (2005). Integral ecology: A post-metaphysical approach to
environmental phenomena. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66(05A). (UMI No. 3175027).
Esbjorn-Hargens, S. & Zimmerman, M. (2009). Integral ecology; Uniting multiple perspectives on the natural world. Boston, MA: Integral Books.
Ferdig, M. (2007). Sustainability leadership: Co-creating a sustainable future. Journal of Change Management, 1(7), 25-35.
102
Fischer, A. (2013). Radical eco-psychology; Psychology in the service of life. Albany, New York: SUNY Press.
Four Arrows. (2006). Unlearning the language of conquest: Scholars challenge anti-Indianism in America. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.
Four Arrows. (2013). Teaching truly; A curriculum to indigenize mainstream education. New York, NY: Peter Lange.
George, B., McLean, A., Mayer, D., & Sims, P. (2007, February). Discovering your authentic leadership. Harvard Business Review, Feb. 2007.
Goldhaber, D.E. (2000). Theories of human development: Integrative perspectives. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam. Goleman, D. (2002) Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Goleman, D. (2009). Ecological intelligence; The hidden impacts of what we buy. New
York, NY: Broadway Books. Greenleaf, R. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and
greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press. Grey, W. (1993), Anthropocentrism and deep ecology. Australasian Journal of Philosophy,
71:4, 463–475. Hart, M.A. (2010). Indigenous worldviews, knowledge, and research: The development of
an indigenous research paradigm. Journal of Indigenous Voices in Social Work, 1, 1-16.
Hawken, P. (1994). Ecology of commerce: A declaration of sustainability. New York, NY:
Harper Business. Hawken, P. (2008). Blessed unrest: How the largest movement in the world came into
being and why no one saw it coming. New York, NY: Viking. Hawken, P., Lovins, A., & Lovins, H. (1999). Natural capitalism; Creating the next
industrial revolution. New York, NY: Little, Brown. Hedlund-de Witt, A. (2011). The rising culture and worldview of contemporary spirituality:
A Sociological study of potentials and pitfalls for sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 70, 1057-1065.
103
Hedlund-de Witt, A. (2012). Exploring worldviews and their relationships to sustainable lifestyles: Towards a new conceptual and methodological approach. Ecological Economics, 84, 74-83.
Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K.H. (1977). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hulme. M. (2009). Why we disagree about climate change. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Jacobs, D. (1997). Primal awareness: A true story of survival, transformation and awakening with the Raramuri shamans of Mexico. Rochester, Vt.: Inner Traditions International.
Joiner, B., Josephs, S. (2007). Leadership agility; Five levels of mastery for anticipating and initiating change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kahn, P. (1999). The Human relationship with nature: Development and culture. Boston,
MA: MIT Press.
Kahn, P. (2011). Technological nature; Adaptation and the future of human life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kahn, P., Hasbach, P. (2012). Eco-psychology; Science, totems, and the technological species. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kegan, R. (1980). Making meaning: The constructive-developmental approach to persons and practice. The Personnel and Guidance Journal. 58, 373-380.
Kegan, R. (1982). The Evolving self: Problem and process in human development.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. (2009). Immunity to change: How to overcome it and unlock the
potential in yourself and your organizations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kempton, W. (1996). Environmental values in American culture. Boston, MA: MIT.
104
Kiron, D., Kruschwitz, N., Rubel, H., Reeves, M. & Fuisz- Kehrbach, S. (2013). Sustainability’s next frontier: Walking the talk on the sustainability issues that matter most, MIT Sloan Management Review Research Report, Cambridge, MA.
Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive developmental approach to
socialization. In D. Goslin, Handbook of socialization: Theory and research. New York, NY: Rand McNally.
Koltko-Rivera, M. (2004). The psychology of worldviews, Review of General Psychology, 8, (1), 3–58.
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Loevinger, J. (1977). Ego development: Conceptions and theories. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Loevinger, J. (1979). Construct validity of the Sentence Completion Test of ego development. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 281-311.
Loevinger, J. & Wessler, R. (1970). Measuring ego development (Vol. 2). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lazlo, C. & Zhexembayeva, N. (2011). Embedded sustainability: The next big competitive advantage. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Press.
Lynam, A. (2012). Navigating a geography of sustainability worldviews: A developmental map. Journal of Sustainability Education. 3,1-14.
Macy, J. (1989). Awakening to the ecological self. In J. Plant, (Ed)., Healing the wounds: The promise of eco- feminism. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers, pp. 201–211.
Macy, J. (2007). World as lover, world as self; Courage for global justice and ecological Renewal. Berkley, CA: Parallax Press.
Maltz, E., & Schein, S. (2013). Cultivating shared value initiatives; A three c’s approach, Journal of Corporate Citizenship. (47) 55-74.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2011). Designing qualitative research (5 ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage. McCauley, C.D., Drath, W. H., Palus, C. J., O’Connor, P.M., & Baker, B. A. (2006). The
use of constructive – developmental theory to advance the understanding of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 634.
McDonough, W., & Braungart, M. (2002). Cradle to cradle; Remaking the way we make
things. New York, NY: North Point Press.
105
McEwen, C. & Schmidt, J. (2007). Leadership and the corporate sustainability challenge: Mindsets in action, Retrieved from http://www.avastoneconsulting.com/MindsetsInAction.pdf
McKibben, B. (2010). Eaarth; Making a life on a tough new planet. New York, NY: Times
Books. Meadows,D. H. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea
Green. Naess, A. (1989). Ecology, community and lifestyle: Outline of an ecosophy. Cambridge,
MA: Cambridge University Press.
Naess, A., Drengson, A. & Devall, B. (2008). The ecology of wisdom: Writings by Arne Naess. Berkeley, CA: Counterpoint Press.
Naess, A. (1995). Self-realization: An ecological approach to being in the world. In A.
Drenson & Y. Inoue (Ed.), The Deep ecology movement: An introductory anthology (pp. 13-30). Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books.
Nicolaides, A. (2008). Learning their way through ambiguity: Explorations of how nine
developmentally mature adults make sense of ambiguity. [Ed.D. dissertation]. Dissertation Abstracts International, 69(08A), (UMI No. 3327082).
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
O'Brien, K. (2010). Responding to climate change: The need for an integral approach. In: S. Esbjörn-Hargens, (Ed.), Integral theory in action; Applied, theoretical and constructive perspectives on the AQAL model, (pp. 65–78). Albany, SUNY Press.
Obrien, K., (2006). Are we missing the point? Global environmental changes an issue of human security, Global Environmental Change, 16 (2006) 1-3.
Piaget, J. (1948). The moral judgment of the child. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Piaget, J. (1954). The construction of reality in the child. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Porter, M.E. & Kramer, M.R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review. 89 (1), 62-77.
Quinn, L., & Baltes, J. (2007). Leadership and the triple bottom line: Bringing sustainability and corporate responsibility to life. A CCL research white paper. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
Quinn, L. & Dalton, M. (2009). Leading for sustainability: Implementing the tasks of
leadership. Corporate Governance, 9(1), 21-38
106
Ray, P., & Anderson, S., (2000). The cultural creatives; How 50 million people are
changing the world. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press. Rogers, K. (2012). Exploring our ecological selves within learning organizations, The
Learning Organization, Vol. 19 (1), 28-37. Rogers, K. (2013). Hermeneutic methods for a globalized world. Manuscript submitted for
publication. Rogers, K., & Hudson, B. (2011). The triple bottom line: The synergies of transformative
perceptions and practices for sustainability, OD practitioner, 3 (4), 3-9. Rooke, D., & Torbert, W. R. (1998). Organizational transformation as a function of CEO's
developmental stage, Organization Development Journal, 16(1), 11-28. Rooke, D., & Torbert, W. R. (2005). Seven transformations of leadership, Harvard
Business Review, 83, 66. Rost, J.C. (1997). Moving from individual to relationship: A postindustrial paradigm of
leadership. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 4, (4) pp. 3-16. Roszak, T., Gomes, M. & Kanner, A. (1995). Eco-psychology: Restoring the Earth healing
the mind. Berkley, CA: Sierra Club Books. Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization.
New York, NY: Bantam Doubleday Dell. Senge, P. (2008). The necessary revolution: How individuals and organizations are
working together to create a sustainable world. New York, NY: Doubleday. Seed, J., Macy, J., Fleming, P. & Naess, A. (1988). Thinking like a mountain: Towards a
council of all beings. Philadelphia, PA: New Society.
Sewall, L. (1995). This skill of ecological perception. In T. Roszak, M. Gomes, & A. Kanner, (Eds.), Eco-psychology: Restoring the Earth healing the mind. (pp. 201-215). Berkeley, CA: Sierra Club Books.
Shepard, P. (1973). The tender carnivore and the sacred game. New York, NY: Charles
Scribner’s Sons. Shepard, P. (1995). Nature and madness. In T. Roszak, M. Gomes, & A. Kanner, (Eds.)
Eco-psychology: Restoring the Earth healing the mind. (pp. 21-40). Berkeley, CA: Sierra Club Books.
107
Shrivastava, P. (1995). The role of corporations in achieving ecological sustainability. The Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 936.
Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stevens-Long, J. & Michaud, G. (2006).Theory in adult development: The new paradigm
and the problem of direction. In J. Demick & C. Andreoletti (Eds.) Handbook of adult development, NY: Kluwer/Plenum.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Torbert, W. R. (2000). A developmental approach to social science: Integrating first-,
second-, and third-person research/practice through single-, double-, and triple-loop feedback. Journal of Adult Development, 7(4), 255-268.
Torbert, W. (2004). Developmental action inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Berrett Koehler.
Torbert, W.R. (2010). Listening into the dark: An essay testing the validity and efficacy of developmental action inquiry for describing and encouraging the transformation of self, society, and scientific inquiry. Paper presented at the Symposium on Research Across Boundaries, Luxembourg.
Torbert, W. R., & Herdman-Barker, E. (2008). Generating and measuring practical differences in leadership performance at postconventional action-logics: Developing the Harthill Leadership Development Profile. In A. Coombs, A. Pfaffenberger, & P. Marko (Eds.), The postconventional personality: Perspectives on higher development (pp. 39-56). New York, NY: SUNY Academic Press.
Visser, W., & Crane, A. (2010). Corporate sustainability and the individual: Understanding what drives sustainability professionals as change agents. SSRN Working Paper Series.
Weinrub, E. (2011). CSO backstory: How chief sustainability officers reached the c-suite. Retrieved from http://weinrebgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/CSO-Back-Story-by-Weinreb-Group.pdf
White, L. (1967). The historical roots of our ecologic crisis, Science 155, 1203–1207. Wilber, K. (2000). Integral psychology: Consciousness, spirit, psychology, therapy.
Boston, MA. Shambala. World Commission on Environment and Development, United Nations. (1987). Our
common future: The Brundtland Report. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
108
APPENDIX A
Corporate Sustainability Leadership Qualitative Interview Questions
BACKGROUND 1) How, or why, did you become involved with sustainability within your
organization?
2) In regards to your current work in corporate sustainability, what issues motivate you most?
3) Where do you think your deeper motivation comes from in regards to your passion
for these issues? LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
4) To what extent do you integrate sustainability into your leadership development processes?
5) Are sustainability initiatives included into overall performance evaluations? 6) Have you seen a relationship between employee engagement and organizational
sustainability efforts?
CULTURE CHANGE 7) How would you describe the pace of change related to sustainability within your
organization and what would accelerate the pace?
8) What type of learning needs to occur in individuals in order to fully integrate a mindset of sustainability?
MEASURING SUCCESS
9) How are you measuring your success both at the individual and organizational levels? Can you share any particular success stories?
10) What do you see as your biggest challenges to accomplishing your goals at both the
individual and organizational levels?
109
APPENDIX B
Ecological Worldview Qualitative Interview Questions
1) Perhaps we can start with some general background. How, or why, did you become involved with sustainability within your organization?
2) How would you describe your ecological worldview? What comes up for you when
you think about your relationship with nature?
3) Looking back, can you point to any transitions or events where you started to look differently at the world, yourself, and nature, or is this a worldview that you have held for a long time?
4) How do you think that your work in sustainability has had an impact on your
worldview?
5) How do you perceive global environmental issues today and what you see as the source of many of the problems?
6) Can you think of a situation or a dilemma where your ecological worldview was in
conflict with an action or activity you were involved in as part of your work? How did you resolve this?
7) What do you believe are some of the implications of ecological worldviews on
sustainability leadership development in general?
8) Shifting to more long-term view, can you describe any thoughts about the future role of business in society, especially in the context of ecological issues?
9) In regards to ecological worldviews, can you describe any differences between generations of leaders within your company or within cultures around the world?
10) Is there anything that we did not touch on or you would like to share before we wrap up?
110
APPENDIX C
Fielding Graduate University Informed Consent Form
How Sustainability Leaders Develop Their Ecological Worldviews
You have been asked to participate in a research study conducted by Steve Schein, a doctoral student in the School of Human and Organizational Systems at Fielding Graduate University, Santa Barbara, CA. This study is supervised by Katrina Rogers, PhD. This research involves the study of ecological worldviews and leadership development and is part of Steve Schein's current doctoral course work and dissertation.
The study involves a 30-45 minute semi-structured interview to be arranged at your convenience. You may also be asked to complete a 45 min. leadership profile and a 10 min. online survey. Only the researcher will listen to any digital recordings of the interview and the information you provide will be kept strictly confidential. Any quotes included in the final research report will be anonymous or by generic job title. If any direct quotes will be used, permission will be sought from you first. Ultimately, the results of this research will be published in my dissertation and possibly in subsequent journals or books.
No compensation will be provided for participation and the researcher will provide you with a copy of the final study. If you have any questions about any aspect of this study or your involvement, please tell the Researcher before signing this form. You may also contact the supervising faculty if you have questions or concerns your participation in this study. The supervising faculty has provided contact information at the bottom of this form. If you have questions or concerns about your rights as a research participant, contact the Fielding Graduate University IRB by email at irb@fielding.edu or by telephone at 805-898-4033.
Two copies of this informed consent form have been provided. Please sign both, indicating you have read, understood, and agree to participate in this research. Return one to the researcher and keep the other for your files. The Institutional Review Board of Fielding Graduate University retains the right to access the signed informed consent forms and other study documents.
____________________________________ NAME OF PARTICIPANT (please print)
_____________________________________ SIGNATURE OF PARTICIPANT AND DATE
Katrina Rogers, PhD Steve Schein
Fielding Graduate University Fielding Graduate University
2112 Santa Barbara Street 2208 Lupine Dr.
Santa Barbara, CA 93105 Ashland, OR 97520
805-687-1099 (541) 944-0526