We need to eliminate incentives that reward the opposite behaviour. I
was reading a 2003 paper about ethics yesterday that reinforces my
suggestion about the need to align incentives with sustainability
objectives.
http://www.leadershipreview.org/2003summer/article1_summer_2003.asp
My capitalisation: "Harvey (2000) contends that ethics programs are
neither necessary nor sufficient to ensure ethical behavior in
organizations. He argues that individual ethics are most readily
influenced by formal organizational structure. According to Harvey,
three elements of the organizational structure affect ethical
considerations. These are REWARD STRUCTURE, performance MONITORING and
EVALUATION procedures, and job design, which includes empowerment levels
and the awarding of decision-making rights. Each of these may either
enhance or impede ethical behavior by employees, far outweighing the
impact of ethics training."
Sorry to keep plugging my book, but that is what I have written about:
helping senior managers to realise that they do NOT have the right to
not "get it"; that they have a duty to "get it"; they must develop a
moral order that rewards "get it"; and they need to engage in actions
that show that they "get it".
My book is all about: "management's mistaken perceptions (and) our role
... to enlighten them in the true links between profits and
environmental protection."
See:
http://intergon.net/tsw -- this book is based on the interviews I
conducted with CEOs (those CEOs recognised for effectively dealing with
sustainability issues) for my PhD research:
http://intergon.net/phd
Sorry again for plugging my book, but the answers you seek are there.
The book is being used for executive mentoring in some Australian
corporations and I have sold copies to people based in North America and
Europe (perhaps the publisher has sold them elsewhere).
Lionel Boxer CD PhD MBA BTech(IndEng) - 0411267256
Research Fellow -
lionel.boxer@rmit.edu.au
Centre for Management Quality Research
Read The Sustainable Way - see
http://intergon.net/tsw
Improvement Implementation:
http://intergon.net
>>>
Andrew.A.King@Dartmouth.EDU 06/12/2005 4:14 am >>>
Am I right to understand that the thinking of the people on this list
that managerial cognitive/perceptual limits represent a principle cause
of environmental damage resulting from business activity? It sounds
like we believe that most businesses would go green if their leaders
would just "get it". Presumably, what they would "get" is a recognition
that they can make money and save the environmental at the same time.
Alternatively, they might discover a moral requirement to protect the
environment.
This idea seems to influence how we understand our roles in the
academy. Given management's mistaken perceptions, our role is to
enlighten them in the true links between profits and environmental
protection.
Do I have it right?
Andrew King
Associate Professor of Business Administration
Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth
202 Chase Hall
Hanover, NH 03755
http://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/faculty/andrew.king/
Cell: 603-359-0369
Office: 603-646-9185