In recognition of Reconciliation Week this week, we extend special acknowledgement to First Nations folks across Australia and Torres Strait Islands, as the original innovators, storytellers and sustainability practitioners. We recognise their resilience and pay our deep respects to all who carry the values and traditions of the oldest continuous culture on the planet.
β
Hello Reader,
What a corker of a week for really leaning into the spirit of reconciliation... seeing the re-elected government and its new Environmental Minister green light a cultural and climate catastrophe of a project, in the extension of Woodside's North West Shelf gas drilling out to 2070. Projected to spew 4 billion tonnes of emissions, it's a devastating slap in the face for all Australians, but also, ancient rock art in Murujuga (for which there is already evidence of it being damaged by the gas giant's current activities in the region - damage which risks a current bid for UNESCO World Heritage status).
Unfathomable as it is that mere weeks into the new parliament that touted itself as 'progressive', that's not even the most absurd part.
And nor is the most absurd part that this is all going through while floods rage on throughout New South Wales.
Nor that Woodside are responsible for a massive toxic spill near Ningaloo Reef (mere kilometres away) earlier this month.
What is absurd, is that a project like this doesn't even make commercial sense. How could it possibly make sense to make contracts of more than 20 years at this point in time, let alone 45 years in this case, with such volatility and uncertainty about how our Earth systems will hold up?
I possibly should have taken more of a breather on this before hitting the keyboard, but frankly, I'm furious. And I reckon it might be ok to show a bit more emotion about what we believe... bringing more of that into our work... if nothing else it might signal to others that now's the time.
Because, we have no time to lose.
All hands on deck,
Melissa
β
Business Reimagined
While going down a research rabbit hole about strategic imagination, I came across this paper which explores the role of imagination paired with knowledge in developing effective strategy, and it featured IKEA to demonstrate how it used its 'projective theory' (or, 'leap of imagination') to chart its current course.
Known for its accessible, affordable furniture, IKEA are on a mission to become a fully circular, climate-positive business by 2030. Identifying key areas of their impact, their vision of the future (and their role in it), they set clear design principles across the organisation and defined their strategy and are implementing accordingly.
β
π ROI & Impact:
By looking at sustainability across their entire operation, centring it as core to their strategy, and empowering their team to solve problems specific to their area, IKEA state they've achieved the following, and are on track for their 2030 goals. A few of these are:
- Reduced absolute emissions across supply chain operations by 29% in 2024 (versus 2017 baseline)
- Restoration of over 14,000 hectares of rainforest through partnerships with the Sow a Seed project (recognising their business continuity relies on materials provided by nature)
- Achieved 100% renewable electricity in warehouses in China as well as reducing overall electricity usage by 17% through improved forklift charging systems
- Reduced food waste in-store globally by 50% in 5 years (from 2017-2022), by recognising their potential impact and influence beyond the furniture they sell, IKEA have also made additional changes in alignment with their vision of the future
β
π Transferrable Ideas:
The eight design principles IKEA are fantastic prompts for business leaders (and not just product-based or manufacturing businesses, when you look a little deeper):
- Design for renewable or recycled materials
- Design for disassembly and reassembly
- Design for standardisation
- Design for care
- Design for adaptability
- Design for remanufacturing
- Design for recyclability
- Co-creation of an imagined future in collaboration with stakeholders
β
π Minimum Viable Adaptation:
At the beginning of your next strategic planning process, hold a 'vision of the future' session with a small group representing your key stakeholders, with the objective to come to a defined imagined future. Then ask "what would need to be true in our organisation for this future to become reality?" - and build your strategy around that.
β
π€ The Cynical Questions:
- To what degree are IKEA (and others like them) willing to sacrifice profitability and growth in pursuit of these objectives?
- What would it take for an(y) organisation to move away from a growth imperative? (the eleventy trillion dollar question)
- What does success look like for an organisation in a reduced consumption state? (brought about either by design or disaster)
|
|
How future-proof is your business (or startup)?
Download our *new* free checklist and get a sense of how future-proof your business is (there's a special version for startups too).
β
|
Signals & Noise
The days of dodgy carbon credit schemes are numbered with a landmark greenwashing case brought against EnergyAustralia by climate advocacy charity, Parents For Climate. It's causing quite the stir because the case has brought to light not only misleading and deceptive claims made by Energy Australia (resulting in their admission of fault and subsequent apology to their customers), but also the legitimacy of the Australian Government's own climate certification scheme, Climate Active (sidebar - for those who are keen to peruse, take a glance the brands that appear on the certified list and take stock of how you feel about it π€’)
Signal Strength: π²π²π²π²π² (5/5)
Why it's a Signal:
- Cases like this now set a global precedent for corporations and send a clear message: they cannot offset their way out of the crisis.
- With greater consumer and regulator focus on greenwashing, businesses of all sizes will want to make sure they have their ducks in a row when it comes to making claims.
The Insight: The real call out here is that offsetting doesn't solve the bigger problem at hand. So talking about measures like offsetting while still carrying on with business as usual, doesn't help the cause. Meaningful action to solve the problem (which, to be clear, the problem we're talking about is the collapse of the very Earth systems that make life - and therefore business - possible) means harder choices are going to have to be made - and consumers shouldn't be the ones to drive this, given all the supporting evidence available to us. We can't express strongly enough that this isn't an exaggeration of the problem with an ideological agenda... it's just science.
Questions for Leaders:
- What is my current exposure to greenwashing risk?
- What mechanisms do we rely on to support claims we make across the ESG spectrum?
- Are our business activities helping us move closer to solving the bigger problem, or just managing our own reputation risk / marketing advantage?
- Where are the skills gaps among our team when it comes to making accurate, ethical and supportable claims?
π Further reading if you find this as interesting as we did: As Australiaβs carbon offset industry grapples with integrity concerns, how can companies genuinely tackle climate change?β
*Full disclosure - we are regular donors (personally) to Parents For Climate because we support their bipartisan, pragmatic and focused approach to climate action advocacy (and they're super nice humans we had the pleasure of meeting a couple of years back at a conference).
β
MIT engineers developed nanofiltration membranes that could make carbon capture systems 6x more efficient and 30% cheaper. This is great news for Big Tech companies sinking bulk energy into AI. They bought nearly two-thirds of carbon removal credits last year to meet net-zero targets. Where's the good news for the planet? Great question. We're still looking for it.
Signal Strength: π²π²π² (3/5)
Why it's Noise:
- It keeps the 'offset illusion' rolling (ahem, refer Signal above!): The outcome here is to make carbon credits cheaper. This is about maintaining business-as-usual expansion rather than genuine emission reductions.
- Scale mismatch: It's a drop in the ocean rather than a planet saver. The article's predicted 430 million metric tonne capacity by 2030 is dwarfed by global annual emissions of over 35 billion metric tons.
Watch Out For:
- Timeline gaps: Research announcements versus actual commercial deployment. A university trial is a long way from scaled impact
- Investment misdirection: Capital flowing toward CCS optimisation diverts from renewable energy development or emissions reduction
- The big picture: other articles on this innovation suggest the captured carbon could be used to produce fuels that would ultimately lead to more emissions.
The Real Signal to Watch:
- True emissions reduction: Are companies using these credits actually reducing their total carbon footprint or just growing while offsetting?
- Alternative innovation: Look for comparable breakthroughs in solutions like energy efficiency, behavioural change or business model innovations that eliminate rather than offset emissions.
What We're Reading
Humble Enquiry by Edgar H. Schein is a great follow-up to Nonviolent Communication by Marshall B. Rosenberg. If you're picking up a bit of a theme here, you wouldn't be wrong. I'm curious about new ways to connect and communicate effectively (oof - as a parent too!) and it's interesting to reflect on the words and phrases we use, their impact on others and the influence they have (or don't have).
Humble Enquiry looks specifically at organisations and interactions among leaders and their team members, and offers that rather than telling, we ought to be drawing people out through (genuinely) humble questions. It's got me pondering what life would be like if we asked more questions from a place of curiosity, and really listened and processed the responses more deeply (tbh I ponder this quite a lot actually).
Got any other book reccos that would fit this theme? Let me know and I'll add them to my list π - M