An initiative by
Most companies have their sustainability plans in order. But there is often a considerable gap between strategy and execution. 'The problem lies in execution power'.
Net zero goals, circular strategies, impact-driven business models; The vocabulary of sustainability is established in the boardroom. But if you look a layer deeper, you will see something else: projects that do not scale up, departments with different priorities and employees who do not know what is expected of them in concrete terms. 'The problem is not in the vision. It's in the execution power,' says emeritus professor Rob van Tulder.
A system problem
Organizations have traditionally been designed to optimize the existing, not to transform it. This is not a failure of individuals, but a structural system problem. Future-fit organizations are agile and integrate sustainability and innovation into their strategy to remain relevant and successful in the long term in a rapidly changing world. These organizations anticipate uncertainties and create value by working in a people-oriented way, learning and taking responsibility for their impact.
Van Tulder: 'Future-fit requires companies to assess the nature of the sustainability challenges much better. Many companies are struggling with strategic issues: creating a smart balance between divesting from unsustainable activities and investing in future-proof activities.'
Professor Karen Maas of the Impact Centre Erasmus describes it as the paradox of good management: the better an organisation manages its current performance, the more likely it is to get stuck in the face of fundamental change. 'Traditional KPIs focus on efficiency, predictability and short-term results. Exactly the factors that can inhibit sustainable transition.'
The result: activity is confused with progress. Reports are becoming more extensive, dashboards more advanced, communication more refined. But the business model itself doesn't change.
What Future-Fit organizations do differently
Organizations that do manage to close the gap do not distinguish themselves by better plans. They make different choices in the implementation.
Firstly, they embed sustainability in daily decision-making. Not as a separate theme, but as an integral part of investments, innovation and commercial strategy. Secondly, they accept that transition is accompanied by tension and uncertainty. Where many organizations fall back on short-term returns as soon as things get exciting, Future-Fit companies stay the course.
This is because profit and social impact are often seen as opposites, says Ulrike de Jong of sustainability consultant TOSCA. 'While they can actually reinforce each other. Social impact is pre-financial rather than non-financial. Companies that understand this create opportunities for themselves and for society'.
From steering to facilitating
Leadership plays a crucial role. Classic management is focused on control and predictability, but sustainable transformation is by definition uncertain. Future-fit organizations are therefore shifting from steering to facilitating: clear frameworks instead of detailed plans, giving direction instead of prescribing solutions, removing obstacles instead of closing processes.
It is striking that a lot of sustainable innovation does not come from the boardroom, but from the work floor. In traditional organizations, that energy often strands in pilots. In Future-Fit organizations, it is used and scaled up.
'Future-fit leadership means letting go: less focus on control, giving more space to initiatives that arise from within,' says Nicolette Loonen of TOSCA.
Transformation is not something you do alone
There is another dimension that remains underexposed in many sustainability discussions: no organization transforms alone. Climate, circular chains, social inequality; by definition, these are systemic issues that require cooperation that transcends the boundaries of one company.
Future-Fit organizations are actively building ecosystems: with suppliers, customers, knowledge institutions, industry peers and sometimes also competitors. Not as a PR strategy, but as an execution strategy.
Van Tulder: 'Many organisations that are in the middle of a transition phase are waiting for initiatives from the government, while the biggest change must and can take place internally. Waiting for the government is an easy excuse for avoiding truly strategic measures.'
Instead of value extraction within a chain, value creation within a network is central. Standards are shared, data is exchanged, risks and opportunities are carried collectively. Those who succeed in connecting their own initiative to a broader ecosystem not only increase the impact, but also the resilience of their own transition.
Not a coincidence, but architecture
The fact that Future-Fit organizations are better at execution is not a matter of culture or luck. It is the result of conscious choices in how they organize themselves: investments in leadership that deals with uncertainty, explicit priorities (even if they hurt) and governance that makes learning and adaptation possible.
But perhaps the most distinctive thing: they do not see sustainability as a project next to the company, but as the core of how value is created. And therefore, as part of the business model itself.
This article was written by Change Inc. in collaboration with TOSCA and Impact Centre Erasmus. Click here for the original article.
