III
Point #1: Know What Youâre Talking About
ou can barely feel your nose anymore after nearly an hour outside in the crisp, early spring evening. The sea breeze whips across your face as you take breath after breath of fresh sea air. Although itâs late, the unusually bright moon lights up the distance. The ocean in front of you is still, broken only by the wake created from the hulking ship under your feet. A couple takes a romantic stroll behind you while a few kids, up well past their bedtime, scurry by in a game of tag.
Suddenly, a horrific scream from up above wakes you from your trance. âIceberg, straight ahead!â Within the minute you feel the great power of the ship try and turn course to avoid a head-on collision. Screeching and lurching, itâs no small task to pull hundreds of tons in one direction or another. Yet, the captain seems able and, after all, this is the greatest ship ever created. You feel several bumps, almost like a snare drum rat-a-tat-tatting. Then the massive, gleaming iceberg comes into view. It passes on your side, dropping small chunks of ice on the deck as it does. Passengers, unaware of the calamity about to befall them, even kick the ice around like footballs. Itâs all just another piece for them to add to their story of Titanic. Something to tell family and friends when they dock in New York.
Today we know only too well the fated story of that ship and the horrific events to follow. On that April night, nearly 2,000 people lost their lives through a series of unfortunate, but largely preventable, circumstances. Weâve read about the lack of lifeboats, reduced in both number and capacity for a focus on aesthetics rather than safety. The monumental hubris of passengers and crew riding aboard the âunsinkableâ ship meant too little was done too late. Socio-economic protocols even played a disastrous role as those in lower-class cabins were made to wait below deck while the upper class, in their tuxedos and pearls, evacuated first.
What we donât often hear about are the myriad other events going on around Titanic that night. James Cameronâs 1997 blockbuster missed a lot of these details. Certainly, Titanic was not the only ocean liner in the area. No less than 28 other ships were in communication with Titanic that night, meaning they were within range and likely could have lent help. Yet only one ship, Carpathia, was able to finally get to Titanic and bring on board what would become some of her only survivors. If there were at least 27 other ships in the area, how on Earth did they not come to the rescue?
Morse code.
Thatâs right. The series of dots and dashes which we now attribute to international shipping played a critical, but detrimental role, in solidifying the fate of thousands that evening. In 1912, when Titanic sailed, most considered the British Marconi System the gold standard in the industry. That didnât mean it was without rivals. Chief among these was German group Telefunken. The rivalry between Marconi and Telefunken was so bitter, radio operators held a gentlemanâs agreement preventing them from passing messages between the two systems.(1)
As a British ship, Marconi of course held primary position on Titanic. Creators spared no expense in equipping the ship with the most advanced instruments of the day. Radio operators were top of their game. It was a technological marvel. Yet, the use of wireless transmission aboard ships was still quite novel. Rather than a robust safety and communication system, most passengers used transmissions to send short messages to friends shoreside. It sounds like a lot of work for a couple of quick wish you were here notes.
Confusion immediately set in when Titanicâs radio operators finally employed wireless transmission to try and call for help. Ships within range questioned how a liner like Titanic would actually be sinking. Their confusion only heightened when Titanic, using the Marconi system, sent through conflicting distress signals. Four years before the night of the infamous sinking, international shipping convention adopted the Morse Code signal of dot-dot-dot-dash-dash-dot-dot-dotâSOSâas the call for distress on the high seas. Titanic, though, was using the outdated Marconi code CQD (âall stations, distressâ) to signal trouble. Most listeners assumed it was all a big mistake.
With an SOS, all other radio ship transmissions were required to cease until the emergency was over to free up communication lines. In using CQD, however, ships continued jamming the airwaves. This translated into crossed signals and even more confusion. In those precious minutes between Titanicâs first signal for help, and itâs eventual sinking to the bottom of the Atlantic, this spelled all the difference. Just think of how many more people could have been saved if those 28 ships were all using the same system instead of letting pride and rivalry get in the way. It feels a senseless waste of life to me.
So why a tandem onto a century-old event? Because in the modern-day struggle to save our shipâMother Earthâweâre repeating the same mistakes as those Titanic wireless operators. While we may have a shared goal, we arenât sharing the approach to that goal. Itâs important, critical actually, to be on the same page if weâre trying to achieve anything meaningful. When weâre not, we step on toes, confuse ourselves, and confound those on the outside. That also means weâre wasting precious resources and capacity, likely duplicating efforts in the process. Itâs pretty evident that up until today weâve not done a good job at being on the same page. The result? A lack of traction, action, and getting others to join the cause.
To show just how much of an issue this is, take a minute and close your eyes.
Imagine what a perfectly sustainable world looks like.
Got it?
Great!
Now, Iâm sure you had images tinted in greens and blues as far as the eye could see. Lush jungles, idyllic fields, and azure skies hum with the sounds of wild animals, birds, and insects. The oceans crash onto shore while the wind whips through your hair. People are likely riding their bicycles, obviously because cars were now obsolete in cities purpose-built to blend into the natural environment. Clothes are sustainably sourced, free of dyes and chemicals. Everyone looks extremely healthy because, well, they are.
Pretty easy, right? Most of us have a fairly shared understanding of what a sustainable world looks like. After all, thatâs our ultimate goal.
Now, take another minute and try to define the word sustainability.
Go onâŠ
Do you have it yet?
How about corporate responsibility? Global warming? Ethical?
While it may have been easy for you to come up with some sort of definition, if you were to ask your neighbor I bet theyâd have a different take. Thatâs because these terms, the mechanisms meant to get us to our goal, are nebulous and iterativeâconstantly evolving. They mean different things to different people in different places. If you were to ask 10 people to define sustainability, youâre likely to get just as many unique answers. Thatâs not a good thing if we are to focus on a collective approach to saving the planet.
Having a shared understanding of the mechanisms behind our work is just as important as having a shared understanding of what weâre trying to achieve. The problem is that we have been defining and using terminology in different ways for a very long time. Thatâs because itâs not just about the etymological meaning, but the varying linguistic, social, and culturally specific interpretations of these concepts. On the surface, we think weâre speaking the same language when weâre really coming from totally different planets. And just so you know, on some of these planets the definitions are really out of this world.
So, if weâre going to reach our goal then we all need to get on the same page. Itâs time to forget about your allegiance to the Marconi system or Morse Code, SOS or CQD. I want to start with a fresh slate, free of any loaded terms and preconceived notions about what something is supposed to mean. Can you do that for me? Please?
Pretty please?
Well, at least try your best then. But Iâve got to say that if you want to be part of that proverbial change in the world, youâre going to have to link hands with all the people in it. A common understanding is only going to fast track that. So, before we even start to attack saving the planet, we better get straight on what it is weâre all supposed to be talking about.
A Crash Course
Class pay attention!
What follows are some of the most widely used terms in the field. Theyâre thrown about quite frequently, usually to varying degrees of correctness. While the definitions I propose might be different from those you believe in, trust that they are the most popular versions. Basically, stop being an outlier and join the fold. This covers everything from sustainability to CSR, environmentalism to ESG.
Sustainability
Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
-UN World Commission on Environment and Development2
Out of everything weâll talk about, sustainability seems to be the most confusing term. Thatâs probably because it serves as an umbrella term for many of the topic areas in the cause-centric world. Itâs multifaceted and prone to different definitions. Even in my day-to-day, I use the word sustainability interchangeably with several other terms. Itâs a great catch-all, but that can lead to confusion.
To get over that confusion, letâs break the term down into its individual parts. Traditionally, sustainability consists of three distinct pillars: environment; society; and, economy. Some people toss in culture as another pillar, which is fine. Because each pillar is so broad, it can consist of any number of issues. Environment can include ecology, water stewardship, air pollution, environmentalism, and on and on. The societal pillar is chiefly concerned with human rights, but also corporate responsibility and community affairs. Economy deals with matters like the private sector, supply chains, and sustainable finance. I could continue for pages, but I wonât. Just understand that everything related to saving the world sits under the term sustainability.
Depending on where you live, your understanding of the field, and your line of work, sustainability may have a very specific context. In China, which in many respects is just starting on its national sustainability journey, the word is most often referenced to mean corporate responsibility. For countries of the European Union, sustainability has to do with regulation and governance. Left-leaning places like Melbourne or San Francisco would use sustainability interchangeably with environmentalism. Confusing? I know. Yet all of these would be correct.
Now the aim of this exercise isnât to make things more confusing for you. Itâs to show the need to qualify what youâre saying when you talk to people. As a general life rule, this is probably a good thing to remember. In the sustainability world, being clear with your words ensures youâre collaborating with the right people in the right way.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a self-regulating business model that helps a company be socially accountable â to itself, its stakeholders, and the public. By practicing corporate social responsibility, also called corporate citizenship, companies can be conscious of the kind of impact they are having on all aspects of society including economic, social, and environmental. To engage in CSR means that, in the normal course of business, a company is operating in ways that enhance society and the environment, instead of contributing negatively to them.
-Investopedia3
When you hear CSR, what do you think of? If youâre like most people, itâs either charity work or a long, boring corporate report. CSR is probably the most widely used term within the field of sustainability but is also the one most coopted and misused. As weâll see, corporations have taken this term and had their way with it. Theyâve twisted and beaten it into submission. Instead of being a term for good, itâs now all too often a term used to position an irresponsible corporation as a responsible one. But, more on that later.
When a corporation is socially responsible, they will contribute positively to the building of a sustainable world. That might take the form of a socially conscious business model, like the cafĂ© that donates all its proceeds to the homeless. For larger corporations, it might mean having a strong environmental mandate, refined labor practices, or a culture of volunteerism. All of this is typically measured in those lengthy, dull corporate responsibility reports. Thatâs because a modern corporation cannot exist without at least claiming to be responsible. CSR programs have become a critical ingredient to modern business success.
At this stage in the game, any company without some sort of CSR program is dead in the water. Most companies h...