Sustainability COULD BE Profitable, Too

Small companies may feel a social obligation or desire to implement sustainability programs, however they could be expensive. Very large companies could justify the expense predicated on the PR value. They’re in the general public spotlight and perceive reap the benefits of being regarded as a good corporate citizen.

Leaders of small companies could be more reticent. Lacking the sources of their larger counterparts rather than being as much in the general public spotlight, they may must be more pragmatic. If there isn’t an excellent return on investment, they often times decide never to act. This can leave the leaders of small companies feeling like they are caught between a rock and a hard place.

Donate to the Greater Good by firmly taking These 3 Easy Initiatives

On the main one hand, they would like to be socially responsible. However, they battle to settle the bills and can’t afford to invest money on things that aren’t a complete necessity for the business enterprise. They believe that sustainability programs equate to more expense and that their businesses can’t afford them.

Just as, there used to be always a generally accepted principle that getting quality cost more. Top quality meant more expensive. Then in 1979, Phil Crosby taught us that, “Quality is Free.” That’s, if quality is defined as conformance to requirements, doing things right the very first time was less expensive than doing it wrong and suffering the results. Actually, quality is preferable to free — it’s profitable.

We view sustainability in the same light as quality. Sustainability, if properly implemented, cannot only be free, it might be profitable. This makes sustainability accessible to smaller businesses. Consider the next examples:

1. A financial services company used teleconferencing instead of planing a trip to meet face-to-face whenever you can. This has environmentally friendly good thing about reducing hydrocarbon emissions, but it addittionally significantly lowers travel costs and the associated employee “dead time” spent in an automobile.

This sustainable practice is a win-win. It’s socially responsible and creates shareholder value. To be certain, face-to-face meetings are occasionally necessary, however when they aren’t, there exists a way to benefit the surroundings and cut costs.

Prod something Into Double-Duty (Profit and Social Good) With 3 Questions

2. A paper producer could negotiate a substantial price concession from its suppliers when it started to recycle the plastic barrels used to provide chemicals instead of sending them to the landfill, as had previously been the practice. Again, the practice was green and profitable.

3. A property-management company switched to more energy-efficient lighting in its loading docks and service areas. The effect was that the business consumed less energy and the areas were better lit better value.

4. A new-media marketing firm thought we would allow the majority of its employees to telecommute. The surroundings benefited from fewer cars on the highway. The business reduced its dependence on expensive work place and could attract quality employees who benefit from the convenience of working at home.

Sustainability programs don’t need to be costly. In fact, they could be profitable. Being trendy is nice. Paying the bills can be an imperative. As these examples illustrate, a little bit of creativity and an intelligently designed sustainability program makes it possible for small businesses to perform both.

The Multitrillion-Dollar Opportunity Available to Entrepreneurs

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply

;-) :| :x :twisted: :smile: :shock: :sad: :roll: :razz: :oops: :o :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :grin: :evil: :cry: :cool: :arrow: :???: :?: :!: