In the past I have repeatedly written about economic models – and the paradox contained in how our economic well-being depends on indefinite growth, based again on indefinitely available resources (post from 2012, post from 2020) – all that within a finite physical system.
And while I do not have a silver bullet to offer as to how the more long-term viable alternative might look like, the scientific insights we have acquired across the recent decades (or even centuries), combined with the economic model embedded into our society, does raise the question:
What would the world lose if your company disappeared?
The question is interesting from a couple of perspectives:
- It can’t be answered with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ but requires specificity in the answer. In other words: a company, any company, would actually be required to make the case as to why their reason of existence is relevant for the world: society, the planet, and also – but by far not only – economy.
- By choosing the word ‘lose’ it offers up the opportunity look at all impacts that would disappear: ‘additions’ that disappear, for example products of a certain type, e.g. T-Shirts, as well as negative impacts that would seize to exist also, let’s say CO2 emissions to take a not so arbitrary example.
- The answer has to be specific on one particular business: not on an industry overall
(of course: we could venture to ask the same question about an industry and explore what the answers might be …)
The complementary question obviously is ‘What would the world gain through the continued existence of your company?’ – is one that is at the base of the traditional business case as well as, and sadly but typically, hardly ever goes to look beyond economic impact factors.
This is why I like the negatively worded question a lot better than its positive equivalent: it makes the elephant in the room visible, the focus of our attention and – as a consequence – the subject of arguments and rationales.
So what is your purpose of genuine relevance to the ‘bigger picture’?
The beauty of the question relates also to how easily it offers itself up to scrutinize a company’s purpose. The real and lived purpose that is, and not the one written on posteres, placards, and website slogans.
It does of course not mean that a purpose-less business or indeed a business with a nefarious purpose might not be commercially successful. It may very well be, for all sorts of reasons, good and bad.
In my view though it separates the wheat from the chaff when it comes to the license to operate. If the world is not loosing much good, but gets rid of an awful lot of negative impacts when a particular company disappears – the total ‘return on loss’ is still a positive one. In other words: It’s an overall win.
Business vs industry: the tree for the woods
To express the point of the question rather quite drastically: a business has not, and should not have, a right to exist if its overall total contribution is a negative one. With ‘overall total contribution’ I mean its impact far above and beyond economic numbers: on society, our community, our democracy, human well-being, the planetary boundaries … and also the economic system.
For lack of imagination though, we associate this with the connotation of a generally unhealthier state of the world. ‘Degrowth’ is another of those terms that has regularly been misappropriated to label such a negative state The terminological pin pointing is correct in as far as it focuses our attention on our current system’s reliance on ongoing growth and abuse of limited physical resources our planet and society offers. The term is though often abusively applied to imply that we must continue on this path because ‘everything else is disaster’.
In a future post we’ll spend some time on going into more depth about what ‘degrowth’ really means. But for today let’s leave it at: if the world, our society, democracy and the planet, are overall and in total better off without you as a business, it is time to wind down. Make space to those businesses who are adding real value all across. That’s the kind of economy, society, democracy, and planet we want.
And yes: please explain in full detail and in audited (or at least auditable) quantified numbers the rationale as to why the total overall impact your company has is positively contributive to the ideals expressed in concepts such as Doughnut Economics or the Economy for the Common Good.
