Sustainable Change Article

Sustainable change isn't a slogan. It's a stubborn, tricky undertaking, one that requires something bigger than merely posting a new poster on the wall or then checking off the box every year. If you want change that is long lasting, you have to build it into the bones of the Organisation. We work with leaders and teams across Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane that are over band aids. They seek frameworks that hold up when budgets constrict, when leadership turns over, when the news cycle demands nimbleness. What follows is a pragmatic, sometimes brusque, approach to bridging the gap between good intentions and lasting results, without drowning in jargon. I've been in this space long enough to know which ideas last until the weekend, and which ones have had a shelf life of decades.

Why systems thinking is so important, and what most people miss about it

Sustainable change begins when we realise that organisations are living ecosystems, not machines. A machine has parts you can turn out; an ecosystem has relationships that co evolve. Far too many programs are about the parts: new policy, new product, new metric. That's useful, but insufficient. The power is in the relationships. Who influences whom? Where does information flow? What incentives drive behaviour, one way or the other? Map those things and you will find leverage points where small changes have large effect. For instance, changing procurement regulations to favour suppliers that show circular practices can influence whole supply chains. It's low drama, high impact. One thing I would say that makes certain people uncomfortable: strategy without ritual will fail. You can have a beautiful sustainability strategy but without it being embedded in the weekly meeting rhythms, performance reviews and procurement decisions, it won't survive. Habit, the regular, dreary stuff, is the vehicle of culture.

"What you need to do is identify causes, not symptoms."

The Business temptation "You'll often find that fix me projects are about identifying what's visible in the hope of banging out something that 'works' in short order. You see waste on the factory floor, so you make that better. You see the low engagement scores, you put on another wellbeing workshop. But the two realms are different, and both are good for a purpose, as only systemic analysis can reveal whether the waste is a symptom of misguided KPIs or whether loss in engagement has more to do with an incentive that pushes short term output over sustainability. Such methodologies such as stakeholder analysis, causal loop diagrams and simple behavioural audits surface the deeper patterns. Avoid hero syndrome, the quick fix champion who swoops in with a single solution. It is likely that meaningful change occurs quietly, slowly, boringly and steadily.

Set measurable goals, but not too firmly

If you want results, make them measurable. Define metrics for emissions, waste diversion, supplier diversity or employee development. A metric transforms an aspiration into an accountability machine. But, and this is important, don't straitjacket yourself. Hard targets not subject to any kind of review lead to perverse incentives. Embed review cycles and diagnostics so you can adjust. A real, evidence backed moment: global sustainable investment has increased sharply in recent years; the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance (GSIA) put assets considering environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues at about US$35.3 trillion in 2020. That's not vanity; capital flows to where signals are unambiguous. Measurement communicates intent both inwardly and to markets.

Engagement is not optional

If you don't engage the people who have to live with the change, expect pushback. Stakeholder participation not a box to check. It's a discipline. Invite people from operations, suppliers, front line employees, customers and community leaders to join design discussions. They will identify workarounds, unintended consequences and opportunities that you would otherwise miss. Practical tip: run co design sprints. Through quick, facilitated sessions prototyping and testing solutions with stakeholders we can surface friction (and where ownership lies). When you have had a hand in crafting a solution, you defend it. That is how you turn sceptics into advocates.

Pilot, iterate, scale, the order that saves money

Big rollouts are costly and chancy. Pilot to stress test ideas in context. A successful pilot demonstrates if the assumptions are true in the field and highlights operational changes you need to make at scale. Well, you know I'm a fan of incremental scaling. Do a caged experiment, measure the results, tweak and then scale it up. Repeat. On paper, it's slower, but you actually save time and money and reputational risk. It can feel less heroic than a dramatic, one time change to the business model, which many executives prefer. And now I dissent, small change can beat spectacular failure.

Put resources where they multiply

Taking sustainability seriously is about funding it properly. Too often sustainability is an afterthought, squeezed out when budgets get put under strain. That's false economy. Invest in things that grow, staff training, system upgrades, supplier long term arrangements, data platforms. Those are the roots that allow year after year of improvement to bear fruit. Be intentional about resourcing the soft side: capability, change management, governance. Without those, technical changes stall. You'll find that you can spend the money upfront on capability and governance, and your implementation costs will fall.

Communication, the glue you can't outsource

Clarity leads to confidence. Open, regular communication lessens anxiety, debunks rumour and creates trust. Let people know what's changing, why it's happening, how it will be measured and what success looks like. Don't overpromise. Be honest about trade offs. One pragmatic step is to tell a simple story for each initiative: what the problem is, what you want to happen, who owns it and how it maps into your broader strategy. Keep it one page. Share it widely. Repeat it until there is nothing interesting about it anymore."

Resistance is not opposition, but information

People resist for different reasons: fear of redundancy, loss of status, legitimate questions about feasibility. Treat resistance as diagnostic data. Listen. Ask questions. Build feedback loops into your design at every layer so that these types of concerns can be raised and addressed. Resistance often uncovers limitations you hadn't seen, and fixing those limitations wins more allies than rallies ever do. Training and support are the bane of fear. Train teams to be able to work in the new way. That could be the technical training, raw behavioural coaching or decision making frameworks that reduce ambiguity. Education turns fear into capability.

Design for adaptability, the world is going to surprise you

There will be unpredictable shocks. There's a pandemic, a supply chain disruption, regulatory change, you name it. Integrate adaptive capacity into your change architecture. That refers to scenario planning, decentralised decision rights and rapid learning cycles. Develop small teams that are free to make local decisions within guardrails. Central control feels secure, but it limits your speed. Local people empowered with defined principles are often the quickest means to resilient results.

Culture eats strategy for breakfast

You can put a great strategy in place, but it's culture that determines whether it succeeds. Culture moves slowly and it is not linear. It's about being good examples at the top, and rewarding the right signals and building new norms into what you do every day. Two takes that will split the room:

• Formal incentives to perform are required. If you want to change behaviour, make controlling KPIs and rewards the outputs. Don't be afraid of structural incentives.
• Culture change with no structural change is often just theatre. Rituals and narratives will not stick on their own when systems continue to reward old behaviours.

Both are true. Combine them.

Measure impact, and measure again, quality over vanity metrics

Impact measurement requires both quantitative and qualitative lenses. Track hard metrics, emissions levels, resource intensity, as well as softer signals like the feelings of your employees and your suppliers' performance. Employ user friendly dashboards which are comprehensible to non experts. Steer clear of those flashy dashboards filled with vanity KPIs. Likewise, establish realistic baselines and frequency of evaluation. For many projects, quarterly reporting suffices; monthly can flood teams with noise. Make reporting helpful: The goal of evaluation is to inform decisions, not just collect data.

Data collection is an applied science

Good Data requires unambiguous definitions, consistent ways of being collected and governance. Don't start with flashy analytics. Begin with shared metrics and sound collection methods. Then automate where feasible. Best are mixed methods: survey data, system logs, supplier audits and targeted interviews. Qualitative data can often provide a context and an answer to the question 'why' are these results so. Code patterns, Conserve context, And be disciplined in your understanding of the results.

Embed continuous improvement, and make it visible

Continuous improvement is not an option. Institutionalise iterated refinement in governance. You can open up feedback loops and learning forums in which teams share what's working or not. Rotate the participants and fresh perspectives will keep the system honest. Showcase small wins publicly. People underestimate the value of clear progress. It maintains momentum. It also leaves room for constructive criticism, not just fatalistic cynicism.

Governance and accountability, the scaffolding

Clearly define ownership for initiatives. Who is accountable for delivery? Who is responsible for measurement? Good governance sets out decision rights, an escalation path and periodic review. It needn't be overly bloated, a succinct governance charter generally does the trick. One piece of advice: divide governance into strategic steering (setting long term direction) and operational delivery (day to day execution). Boards too often get mired in the operational weeds. Let them govern, not micromanage.

Real world thinking: partnerships and supply chain influence

You can't do absolutely everything. Seek strategic partners, suppliers, industry associations and community groups. These partnerships leverage impact and spread risk. For instance, some Australian large Organisations have been transforming their suppliers through developing higher levels of procurement frameworks that incent circularity and environmental performance. They didn't wait for regulation; they used government procurement as leverage. A direction some resist because our aim should be to lead, not just follow. There's a sensible balance. Leading can generate first mover advantages, and in some instances, regulatory influence. But leading also is risky, so temper ambition with practicality.

Sustainability is an investment, not a cost centre

That so many of the finance teams treat sustainability spend as discretionary. I disagree: a substantial portion of sustainability investments are capital projects that lower operating cost, open new markets and enhance the enterprise value. Package them as investments with ROI models that consider risk adjusted benefits. That does not mean every effort will have an immediate payoff. Some investments purchase optionality and resilience. The latter deserve different valuation methods which value strategic benefit above short term cash flows.

Don't forget the human story

At its core, sustainable transformation is about human beings. Empathy, leadership and humility matter. And successful leadership is instead often about who can tell a good, honest story about why change is necessary and what it means for different sectors. We believe the most enduring shifts are spurred by people who listen at scale, make small public pledges and stick to them. That combination builds credibility.

Final thought, Be patient, but keep your foot on the gas

Sustainable change is work that's done over generations. It takes time, it takes rigour and it takes sustained pressure. Celebrate the wins. Learn from the failures. Keep iterating. One final and perhaps provocative opinion: The most sustainable change may be when you require teams to stop delivering new things. Focus. Less is often more. Trim the portfolio. Consolidate. Make the work you do matter. We partner with organisations to build these capabilities, tangible skills, governance frameworks and behaviour based training that translate sustainability into something operational, not aspirational. Change will always be messy. Do it anyway.

Sources & Notes

• Global Sustainable Investment Alliance (2020). Global Sustainable Investment Review 2020, sustainable investment assets estimated at US$35.3 trillion.
• Insight on local practice: observations related to procurement influence and Australian corporate practice come from our work with clients in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane, and open data on public corporate sustainability initiatives within the Australian market.