Can Sustainability be a way of doing business?
The case of Cooperative group (UK)
Written by Anonymous
Master Thesis: The change in sustainability and sustainable management thinking is the result of a reassessment of the company and its customers. This is because the perceived value of customers is currently based on needs and expectations, and has no similarities in quantity with the past. The shift in the paradigm of customer demand presents threats and opportunities for companies that are thinking about new practices through which they can gain sustainable competitive advantages (Enquist et al., 2006). These developments led to the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), which was delegated by the United Kingdom to other countries in 2002. The treaty states that member states must pay attention to changes in consumer behavior in order to innovate production technologies to achieve sustainable development. Therefore, sustainable development (SD) needs to be defined. The Brundtland report states the widely accepted SD definition as: "Sustainable development is development that meets contemporary needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." (WCED1987:43) may lead to survival problems (Kemp 2005) . Therefore, the attention matching of WCED and WSSD highlights the attention. Criticisms and the status quo As far as the definition of sustainability is concerned, some people criticize the accuracy of its operations and unclear boundaries, as well as the definition of whose needs and how to interpret the problems of Mohanty (2003). The main advocacy or controversy on this issue is crucial, but is outside the scope of this paper, so we will define how to ensure the quality of life in the future. Lélé (1991) once said that because the concept of sustainability is not clearly defined, the concept may be rejected by opposition forces that do not like radical change. For SD (sustainable development) is very sustainable, heproposedthatatwodimensionaldevelopmentworkhastocarryout: a, tohavemoreconcretenessinitsconceptualfoundationsandsecondtoallowmoreflexibility anddiversityinimplementationplansandoperationstohaveabuildupofasocietythatis moreenvironmentallycautious.WealsoagreetotheabovestatementofdevelopmentasSD iscrucialandtherearewaysandtechniquesthatitcanbepromotedthroughoutallsectorsof life.Theinitialdebateonthesustainabilityconceptiscategorisedbythecriticismsmadeby Jacobs (1999) definition putforward bytheWCED. According to our point of view, most of the criticism and rejection of the SD concept stems from the different opinions of different authors on concepts with different paradigms. The case of limited resources and rational consumption and economies based on mass production explains most of the basis of the sustainability debate. The conclusion is that the concept of sustainability requires flexibility, while at the same time some basic and basic principles implemented at the strategic level are consistent. The factor of flexibility is because development itself is a positive and gradual change. This is the soul of the whole message proposed by WCED (1987). For service organizations, just as in the case of cooperative organizations, the web believes that sustainability can be maintained when the externalities of the organization are minimal, and these externalities may reduce the stability of the system, rather than because of the new 30 reasons. Downgrade the system. Therefore, it is necessary for companies and global communities to formulate the definition of sustainable development. Serving global companies is a globally recognized term for sustainable companies, and through the establishment of the World Business Sustainability Council (WBCSD) to define this concept and outline its operations The boundaries of reality. The definition proposed by WBCSD clarifies and defines the level of importance of this concept as “sustainable development involves the simultaneous pursuit of economic prosperity, environmental quality and social equity. Companies committed to sustainable development need to be based on a triple bottom line rather than a single financial bottom Line "(WBCSD 2004, p. 1) .Nowtakingthepresentunderstandingtoafurtherlevel, itdepictsthattheabovecriteriaof WBCSDcanbe regardedastheguidelineforthecorporationstodefinethemselves, group boundaries, direction and objective of its activities, development and environmentandpoliticalgoals.Allthiscouldbedoneinawaythatwasnotthepartofthe thinkingprocessinthecompanies.Thisdictatesthat, changeinthewayofthinkingofthe peopleregardingresponsiblebusinessesisvitalforsuccess (Demiragetal.2005 associated cited p.356as inSebhatu, S, P.2010). Pruzan (1998) and Elkington (2001) described SDtobeattool for the businessest obecome morely responsible as well as improving the quality of their products. They further elaborated that SD is a concept that integrates the value of stakeholders, a responsible company, and product quality. Vogel, D. (2005) defines this way of thinking and doing good, based on business management and their responsibilities, and Waddock (2006) explains it as comprehensive responsibility management—a transition from shareholder-centered to overall well-being of society. Anee feels that when doing business, there is a fit between the well-known pillars of SD (social, environmental, economic). Companies that enable themselves to do this are seen as the three dimensions of success (Edvardsson & Enquist 2006). Read Less