The concept of success is tricky to define because it differs greatly from person to person. For some, it’s about accomplishment in the form of earning a university degree or promotion in their career. For others, it’s about driving progress by having a positive impact on society. However, for the vast majority, success is defined by the accumulation of wealth and possessions.
My question is, when it comes to the world of business, why can’t it be a combination of all these things? Accomplishment, progress and attainment are all valid and important in and of themselves, but just imagine how much good could be achieved if start-ups, SMEs and powerful corporations were to strive to achieve all three?
The current orthodoxy, otherwise known as neoclassical economics, is based on the concept of infinite growth — the idea that a combination of market power, technological advancements and human innovation will enable us to make better quality products more efficiently than ever before, which will in turn translate to ever-increasing profit margins.
As the name neoclassical would suggest, this is a relatively modern idea, as for hundreds of years before the turn of the 20th century the theory of limited growth prevailed. The brightest economists of the time conceded that due to the interconnectedness and codependence of natural and economic systems, infinite growth on a finite planet was a logical fallacy. And you’d have to be a deluded muppet to believe otherwise, because historically, we’ve seen this play out time and time again.
The economy goes through constant fluctuations, but one thing is always certain — what goes up can only go in one other direction once it’s reached its pinnacle, which is why the 20th century was punctuated by periods of boom and bust. And we’ve seen this trend continue into the 21st century, with the power of profit and profit alone determining which businesses will rise and which will fall.
So, in such a competitive and cutthroat market where profit reigns supreme, who’s got time to care about giving to charity, protecting the environment or making a positive contribution to society when there’s all that lovely moolah to be made?
Of course, you’d have to be terminally stupid to believe that the monetary value of a company isn’t important. Because without profit, a business fails. It’s as simple as that.
But as long as we continue to focus on a narrow, one dimensional model of success that’s solely defined by monetary wealth, whilst conveniently ignoring every other metric, opportunities for genuine progress are all too frequently lost or ignored.
All around us, we see greed, corruption, lawlessness, poverty and war. So, what exactly is the point in being the richest and most ‘successful’ company in a world where misery and inequality is becoming so increasingly ubiquitous? Essentially, you become one of the very few ‘winners’ in a world that people no longer want to live in.
Clearly, the old way isn’t working, so perhaps it’s time for a different approach? And this starts by being courageous enough to redefine what genuinely sustainable success in the 21st century should look like — then having the vision and confidence to create it.
It’s time for the great business minds and leaders of this world to start looking beyond their own bank balances and move towards a more holistic construct that measures a company’s success in terms of its charity endeavours, its impact on the environment, and how it benefits the local and/or global community. Because how can there be genuine progress without morality, accomplishment without sacrifice, or wealth without charity?
If history has taught us one thing, it’s that economic growth alone does NOT equate to a thriving society. So when will we finally learn that the true meaning of success comes with responsibility?