awakening giants

Awakening giants:

An inquiry into The Natural Step UK's

facilitation of sustainable development

with sector-leading companies

_______________________________________

Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

in the Systems Discipline, Centre for Complexity and Change,

Faculty of Technology, The Open University, United Kingdom

Francis Meynell BA (Cantab) MSc (Surrey)

September 2003

- i -

Abstract

This thesis addresses how to evaluate the influence of an advocacy organisation. A non-

governmental-organisation, The Natural Step UK (TNS UK), sponsored an evaluative inquiry into its

core work. TNS UK promotes corporate sustainable development in the United Kingdom (UK) with

a group of sector-leading companies. It facilitates others' understanding and use of TNS'

internationally recognised science-based approach to sustainable development (TNS' framework).

A second-order, systemic approach was adopted. A novel heuristic model of 'organisational

learning for sustainable development' (OLSD) was developed. The model was based on the notion

of a conversational lineage. Qualitative data was collected via semi-structured conversations and

participant observation. Narrative accounts that reflected OLSD in TNS UK's ‘Pathfinder

Companies’ were constructed. An analytical strategy involving four steps was developed. The first

step entailed tracing distinctions associated with TNS' framework in the narrative accounts. The

second step entailed examining the narrative accounts to discern the organisational levels at which

TNS-related conversational lineages emerged. The third step entailed a meta-analysis of the

narrative accounts to discern possibilities for OLSD with TNS UK. A typology of possibilities was

constructed. The fourth step entailed a second meta-analysis to discern ‘potentially influential

organisational and structural factors’ that enable OLSD in practice.

The inquiry led to three significant findings. The first finding concerns the model of OLSD. The

model bridges a significant gap in the management-science literature. The second finding concerns

the evaluative methodology. The distinction between first and second-order research traditions was

a powerful one for the inquiry. Moreover, the model of OLSD was an effective heuristic. The third

finding concerns insights into TNS UK's praxis. Both the OLSD model and the methodology

revealed significant potentials for improving TNS UK’s praxis. Proposals are made for reviewing

both the process-design of TNS UK's facilitation, and the organisation of its Facilitator and

Pathfinder Networks.

The thesis concludes that OLSD is better understood in invitational terms as a process of

contextual, systemic inquiry.

- ii -

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank:* Ms Chris Blackmore and Professor Ray Ison, who were the Sherpas and mountain-guides I needed but

never sought. Chris and Ray ensured my negotiation of what was, on occasion, a treacherous path.Thanks to their wise supervision, I can now see possibilities of which I had no inkling when I began thestudentship, have emerged a rounder human being, and am excited about the future! I recommendanyone else interested in researching organisational learning and sustainable development, who isseeking supervisors suited to the task, to look no further. I particularly want to thank them forencouraging me to take a good look at what I managed to do;

☺ All at and around TNS UK, its Pathfinder Companies, Forum for the Future and TNSI, who happened tobe in the right place, at the right time. Thank you for your receptivity, for giving so many opportunities,and for your interest and support. In particular, I'd like to thank Stephen Martin and David Cook,especially, for giving me the benefit of the doubt from the outset. This has been a rich learningexperience. I'd also like to thank Mark Everard, Sandy Muirhead, Peter Price-Thomas, Jas Dhami,Emma Dolman, Hilary Dennett, Ann Donnahue, Lorna Berry, Lilah Fraser, Penny Walker, Paul Roberts,Arnie Vetter, Chris Seeley, Carole Bond, Joanne Tippett, Ed Rowland, Jonathon Porritt, Sara Parkin,Duncan Eggar, Quentin Leiper, Murray Bean, Steve Foskett, Paul Monaghan, Liz Thompson, MarkCahill, Andy Wales, Jayn Harding, Charlie Bower, Annie Pierson-Hills, Miro Peters, Jason Leadbitter,Peter Hawkins, Hugh Pidgeon, Judi Marshall, Karl-Henrik Robèrt, Magnus Huss, Anna Emmelin, BrianNattrass, Hilary Bradbury, George Basile, Sissel Waage, and Jill Rosenblum;

Î Rose Armson, for having a hand in the selection of my application for the studentship, for hercompanionship over its course, and for recognising the need for recognition. Rose and Tony Netherclift'shospitality, strong coffee and support sustained me in the decisive hours;

H Those in and around the OU's Centre for Complexity and Change for their conversation and forcontributing to a sociable academic department, particularly Magnus Ramage, Martin Reynolds, KarenShipp, Cathy Humphreys, Nicky Ison, Simon Blackmore, Fenella Porter, Seife Ayele, Rachel Slater,Alexandra di Stefano, Marion Helme, Rebecca Jones, Sarah Seymour-Smith, Maggie Scott, MaurizioFerrari, Jim Frederickson, Alan Thomas, Roger Spear, Dick Morris, Susan Carr, Stephen Potter, DaveWield, Sue Oreszczyn, and Clive Savory. In addition, I'd like to thank Pat for curing administrativeheadaches with grace and understanding, and Angela, Carol, Mary and Cilla for their amenability and forkeeping their cool in the face of revolting students;

I Alison Robinson and her team in the research school who helped out when circumstances changed forthe worse;

ÿ Three pre-studentship teachers who left an impression: Anna Loveday Minshall (painting) who's healingpresence turned my gaze towards light; Reverend Dr Fraser Watts (Theology), who must have saidsomething nice in his reference; and, Dr William Bloom (holistic practice) who's work continues to holda fascination;

k Chris, Kirsten, Ewan and Robin High – I marvel at the timing of your entry into my life with gratitude; Mike Aiken for extending the hand of friendship, for being the exemplary networker who has much to

teach me, and whose combination of sensitivity and humour kept me going in darker PhD-days;h Friends who kept watch: Pins Brown, Joe Moffatt, Chris and (soon to be) Alex Romer-Lee, Rupert Pitt,

Ewan Charlie and Viola Kerr, Chris and Lucy Spink, and those in Forest Row;\ Three doctoral-level historians from Deutschland with whom I shared London living, reflections on life,

and music: Cornelius Torp, Stefan Ludwig-Hoffmann, and Harald Fischer-Tiné;Ð My incredible cousin, Ashley Ramsden, his wife Kristin and their girls, and Ashley's partner in crime,

Sue Hollingsworth, all of whom continue to give me food for thought on the nature of influence;® Geoff Douglas Mead, who encouraged me to consider my personality in the thesis; and,ñ My brother and his family in Uganda who have waited far too long for a visit.

- iii -

Dedicated

to my parents,

Christopher and

Elizabeth Meynell,

whose love is

steadfast,

and with

whom I

continue

to learn

'organisation

does not give

the generosity

of the heart

and hand.'1

1 From 'Come to it empty-handed', Daily Meditation for Novermber 30th in The Book of Life, J. Krishnamurti 1995,Harper Collins

- iv -

Contents

Page number

Abstract i

Acknowledgements ii

Dedication iii

Boxes, figures and tables vii

Part 1 Orientation 1

Chapter 1 Introducing the thesis 2

1.1 This thesis 2

1.2 Introducing The Natural Step UK (TNS UK) and its Pathfinder Companies 3

1.3 Research purpose 16

1.4 Thesis outline 18

1.5 Reflecting on the chapter 22

Chapter 2 A conversational means of assessing organisational learningfor sustainable development (OLSD) with TNS UK 25

2.1 Introduction 25

2.2 Research strategy 26

2.3 Searching for a sensemaking device 29

2.4 Reviewing previous research into organisational learning with TNS 34

2.5 Grounding my views of organisation and organisational learning in relevant theoretical literature 40

2.6 An 'aha moment' – encountering the notion of a conversational lineage 46

2.7 Developing a model of OLSD 51


Chapter 3 Building researching relationships with members of TNS UKand their Pathfinder Companies 59

3.1 Introduction 59

3.2 Two research traditions 60

3.3 Methodological underpinnings 67

3.4 Methods-in-practice 71

3.5 Three emergent phases of inquiry 75

- v -


Part 2 Evaluative inquiry 94

Chapter 4 Analytical approach and representation of OLSD 95

4.1 Introduction 95

4.2 A narrating approach 95

4.3 An analytical method 97

4.4 Representing OLSD 99

4.5 Constructing the narrative accounts 101

4.6 The practice of analysis 103


Chapter 5 Possibilities for OLSD with TNS UK 112

5.1 Introduction 112

5.2 'Making us think' (An aviation fuel company – see Figure 5.1) 119

5.3 A 'landmark building' (Carillion Building – see Figure 5.2) 123

5.4 'A longish term thing' (Schal – see Figure 5.2) 134

5.5 Uncorking the Green Genie (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3) 139

5.6 Questing to become a restorative enterprise (Interface – see Figure 5.4) 152

5.7 'Word getting about' (Sainsbury's – see Figure 5.5) 168

5.8 Meta-analysis 1: discerning types of possibility for OLSD 172


Chapter 6 Constraints to OLSD with TNS UK 181


6.2 'Living in a commercial world' (An aviation fuel company – see Figure 5.1) 182

6.3 'Swings in society' (Carillion – see Figure 5.2) 184

6.4 'Like eating an elephant' (Carillion – see Figure 5.2) 187

6.5 'I've got targets to hit' (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3) 190

6.6 Screening complexities (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3) 194

6.7 'Undercurrents' (Interface – see Figure 5.4) 200

6.8 Reaching the edges (Interface – see Figure 5.4) 204

6.9 Mixed messages (Sainsbury's – see Figure 5.5) 208

6.10 TNS UK-related constraints (Pathfinder Company member perspectives on TNS' framework and TNS UK – see Box 1.1 and Figure 1.1) 210


- vi -

Chapter 7 Reviewing TNS UK's facilitation of OLSD in the light of the research 221


7.2 Meta-analysis 2: discerning 'potentially influential factors' for OLSD 222

7.3 Defining potentials for improvement for TNS UK 227

7.4 Reviewing TNS UK's modus operandi 231

7.5 Reviewing TNS UK's facilitation of collaborative emergent learning 237


Part 3 Conclusions 244

Chapter 8 Evaluating the inquiry 245


8.2 An audit trail of the inquiry 246

8.3 Reviewing the thesis' contribution to knowledge 249

8.4 Limitations of the research 255

8.5 Recommendations for further research 257


Post-script 260

Appendices 261

Appendix 1 Co-operative ecological inquiry 262

Appendix 2 Autonomy-respecting conversations 263

Appendix 3 Examples of contributions to and management practices for sustainable development 265

Appendix 4 Relevant events connected with sustainable development and organisational management,which I attended during the research period (1999 - 2002) 267

Appendix 5 Memorandum of researching agreed between TNS UK's chief executive and myself 271

Bibliography 274

- vii -

Boxes, figures and tables

Page number

Box 1.1 TNS' action learning framework 5

Figure 1.1 Systems map of the organisation, TNS UK 13

Figure 1.2 Systems map of TNS UK's Pathfinder Company Network 15

Figure 1.3 Outline of the thesis 19

Table 1.1 Pathfinder Companies represented in Chapters 5 and 6 20

Box 2.1 From Taiwan to Halifax: the story of a conversational lineage 49

Table 2.1 An inter-action grid exploring relationships in a process of OLSD 54

Figure 2.1 An interactivity diagram depicting a model of OLSD 56

Table 3.1 Two research traditions as distinguished by the following authors 61

Table 3.2 Forms of 'first-order communication' 63

Table 3.3 Forms of 'second-order communication' 64

Figure 3.1 Example of an interviewee's 'relationship diagram' 72

Figure 3.2 Three emergent phases of the inquiry 76

Table 3.4 'Getting-to-know' members of TNS UK 78

Table 3.5 'Getting-to-know' TNS UK Facilitators (F),and those trained by TNS UK (T) as facilitators 79

Table 3.6 'Getting-to-know' members of TNS Sweden (S) 79

Table 3.7 'Getting-to-know' members of TNS Sweden through a presentation on my research 79

Figure 3.3 Conceptual model of the core work of TNS UK members and facilitators 81

Table 3.8 TNS UK and TNSI 'coal face' events at which I undertookparticipant observation and active learning 85

Table 3.9 'Coal face' conversations with Pathfinder Network members (PNM) representingTNS UK's client organisations 87

Table 3.10 'In-deeper' conversations with members of three of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies 89

Table 4.1 TNS UK Pathfinder Companies represented in this thesis 104

Table 4.2 Eight distinctions related to TNS' action learning framework 106

- viii -

Figure 5.1 Systems map of those parts of an aviation fuel company that I engaged, and which wererelevant for my interviewee or those I encountered 114

Figure 5.2 Systems map of those parts of Carillion plc that I engaged, and which were relevant formy interviewees or those I encountered 115

Figure 5.3 Systems map of those parts of The Co-operative Bank that I engaged, and which wererelevant for my interviewees or those I encountered 116

Figure 5.4 Systems map of those parts of Interface Inc that I engaged, and which were relevant formy interviewee or those I encountered 117

Figure 5.5 Systems map of those parts of Sainsbury's that I engaged, and which were relevant formy interviewee or those I encountered 118

Table 5.1 Assessment of 'Making us think' 122

Table 5.2 Assessment of 'A "landmark building"' 133

Table 5.3 Assessment of "A longish term thing" 138

Table 5.4 Assessment of 'Uncorking the Green Genie' 150

Table 5.5 Assessment of 'Questing to become a restorative enterprise' 167

Table 5.6 Assessment of "Word getting about" 171

Table 5.7 Summary table of number and percentage of TNS-related distinctions 173

Table 5.8 Summary table of organisational levels at which TNS-related conversational lineagesemerged 175

Figure 5.6 Spray diagram of possibilities of OLSD with TNS UK 179

Table 6.1 Summary table of narrative accounts of constraints to OLSD (6.2-10) 218

Figure 6.1 Systems map of constraints to OLSD with TNS UK for a generic Pathfinderorganisation 219

Table 7.1 Summary table of potentially influential organisational and structural factors on possibilitynarrative accounts 228

Figure 7.1 Conceptual model of suggested improvement to facilitate OLSD via the core work ofTNS UK's members and facilitators 234

Figure A1 Bradbury's model of co-operative ecological inquiry 262

Figure A2 An adapted version of Zimmer's 'natural language algorithm' 263

- 1 -

Part I

Orientation

- 2 -

Chapter 1 Introducing the thesis

1.1 This thesis

1.2 Introducing The Natural Step UK (TNS UK) and its Pathfinder Companies

1.2.1 The emergence of The Natural Step (TNS)

1.2.2 TNS' framework

1.2.3 'A totally different kettle of fish' – TNS in the United Kingdom

1.2.4 TNS UK's 'Pathfinder Companies'

1.3 Research purpose

1.4 Thesis outline

1.5 Reflecting on the chapter

1.1 This thesis

Sustainable development amounts to possibly the most formidable notion that faces society. Although a

contested term (Gladwin et al. 1995), questions of how best to address issues related to ecological

degradation, global warming, poverty, government-economy relations, international security, technological

possibilities, globalisation and international institutions are all ones, arguably, encompassed by the notion.

The influence of the business sector in meeting these challenges is seen by many as critical, given its reach

and role in the fabric of society (Hart 1999; Starkey and Welford 2001).

I perceive the transformation of business organisations and the business of organisation, such that they are

better able to contribute to societal sustainability, as a legitimate theoretical and practical concern. Some

businesses and non-governmental organisations regard this challenge just as much an opportunity as a threat

(Anderson 1998; Doering et al. 2002). A non-governmental organisation in the United Kingdom (UK) called

The Natural Step UK (TNS UK) has been working to promote sustainable development as a core business

activity with sector-leading companies, the 'giants' in the thesis title, since its inception in 1997. TNS UK

constitutes a branch of an international network of 'TNS' organisations that facilitate others' understanding

and use of 'TNS' framework', a pedagogical approach consisting of 'principles of sustainability' and a strategic

process-guide to sustainable development (Robèrt 2002). TNS' principles of sustainability provide a

destination for the process of sustainable development (Forum for the Future 1999). Some have described

TNS' principles as a 'compass' (Rowland and Sheldon 1999).

The impact of TNS UK's promotional work is the focus of research reported in this thesis. Members of TNS

UK were interested in questions of their influence with their partnering 'Pathfinder Companies', and initiated

- 3 -

an evaluative research studentship with the UK's Open University (OU). I successfully applied for this CASE

studentship.

What, however, is an appropriate means of evaluating TNS UK's promotional work with other organisations?

Some have experienced evaluating the influence of an organisation such as TNS UK as problematic (Forum

for the Future 2003). I suspect the influence of organisations escapes direct measurement according to

obvious criteria because organisations can be understood as multi-faceted phenomena (Dawson 1996).

My research inquires into what TNS UK's influence might entail methodologically. I develop a means for

assessing TNS UK's facilitation work in terms of a model of 'organisational learning for sustainable

development' (OLSD), which is then applied to collected qualitative data. Reflections on the model's

adequacy are presented and lessons that may be applicable in other contexts are drawn out. Within the thesis

recommendations of possibilities for TNS UK's future development are made.

In this chapter, I introduce the history of The Natural Step (TNS) organisation in section 1.2.1, and the

pedagogical framework (TNS' framework), which TNS advocates have used to teach others about sustainable

development, in section 1.2.2. I introduce TNS UK in section 1.2.3, and TNS UK's 'Pathfinder Companies'

with whom they initiated 'action learning' in section 1.2.4. I go on to discuss my research purpose in section

1.3, and outline the arrangement of the rest of the thesis in section 1.4.

1.2 Introducing The Natural Step UK (TNS UK) and its Pathfinder Companies

This section stems from my fieldwork, the detail of which I describe in Chapter 3.

1.2.1 The emergence of The Natural Step (TNS) in Sweden

TNS UK was formed under license to continue the pedagogical work of Dr Karl-Henrik Robèrt (Robèrt

2002). In the late 1980's, Robèrt was a Stockholm cancer specialist. Privately, however, he was a frustrated

environmentalist. He often experienced debate in Sweden about environmental issues amongst scientists,

policy and decision-makers – usually within the frames of the mass media – as confused and direction-less.

He wished he could steer their debate along more robust lines. His conviction grew stronger, and he decided

to invoke the help of colleagues in various scientific disciplines into an inquiry process. What could they

agree on as constituting normative principles of sustainability that were grounded in established scientific

laws? To his mind, such principles would enable decision making to become more directional, consensual,

and strategically intelligent.

The dialogue that arose underwent twenty-one iterations before arriving at a consensus, which subsequently

received support from scientists in many countries. Robèrt consolidated what emerged and began to raise

- 4 -

others' awareness about what he had done. His advocacy led to him securing support for the first TNS

organisation in Sweden, Det Naturliga Steget ('The Natural Step' – TNS – in English), for which he

ultimately left his reputable medical career behind to become its figurehead.

TNS began to help people from a variety of backgrounds to understand notions of sustainability and

sustainable development (Nattrass and Altomare 1999, 2002; Robèrt 2002). These backgrounds included

industry and local government. Based on their understanding, those 'learning with TNS' – that is to say, those

using TNS' approach to aid strategising and decision making – have been in a position to put into practice

whatever it was that they had learnt. Those learning with TNS have allegedly been able to carry out activities

associated with sustainable development.

Such was the interest in TNS' pedagogical work that TNS organisations sprang up in other countries,

including the UK. These TNS branches formed TNS International (TNSI), which has been the umbrella body

that took over responsibility for licensing branches of TNS since its inception in 1999 (Robèrt 2002). Each

TNS 'branch-member' of TNSI has representation on the TNSI Management Board.

1.2.2 TNS' framework

Robèrt and other advocates consolidated TNS' approach into a standardised format with a discernible set of

items, constituting TNS' framework – see Box 1.1. TNS advocates have suggested that TNS' 'action

learning'1 framework can orient decision making to realise a sustainable society. The description of TNS'

framework as an action-learning framework is mine; however, action learning is a notion introduced in TNS

UK facilitator's training manual to describe the process that they try to enable (TNS UK 2000).

It is worth noting that TNS' framework itself has not been static, but has evolved and continues to develop.

For example, TNSI changed the wording of its principles of sustainability during the course of my research

because, it was felt, the new wording would help with communication and understanding. Moreover, TNS

UK spearheaded an inquiry into TNS' definition of social sustainability ('system condition four' in Box 1.1)

during my studentship that may give rise to a new definition in the future.

1 An action learning cycle consists of: initiating an inquiry, understanding a situation, deciding what to do, acting in thesituation, and reflecting on the outcomes of one's actions. See Bell et al. (2000) for a description.

- 5 -

Box 1.1 TNS' action learning framework. I base this rendition on text and diagrams from TNSUS' website (TNS US 2003d, a, c, b), from TNS UK's Presentation handbook (TNS UK 1999b), andliterature authored by the designers of TNS' framework (Holmberg et al. 1996; Robèrt 1997; Robèrt etal. 1997; Robèrt 2000, 2002; Robèrt et al. 2002). While I have introduced my own version of acommon TNS diagram of the 'sustainable society', the language remains faithful to TNS US' websiteand the literature of TNS advocates. Where the terms 'system' or 'systems' arise, these are used in first-order terms in accordance with TNS' literature. The distinction between first- and second-order is oneto which I return in Chapter 2, and will explicate in detail in Chapter 3.

TNS' framework consists of:

• the story of the emergence of life. This contextualises the framework in terms ofevolutionary trends that began with the 'toxic soup' billions of years ago;

• the funnel metaphor. This describes current trends in terms of increasing demandson limited and decreasing life-sustaining resources;

• basic scientific theories. These underlie TNS' model of the sustainable society;

• the system conditions. These are TNS' three ecological principles and one socialprinciple, that define the sustainable society;

• the strategic corollaries. These are the behavioural implications derived from thesystem conditions; and,

• the ABCD action-learning process. This is a theoretical four-stepped process thatenables strategising, design, and decision-making for sustainable development.

The story of the emergence of Life

The evolution of living systems occurred concurrently with the depositing of varioussubstances, such as heavy metals, into the Earth's crust. These substances have beenpotentially toxic to living systems. The ongoing decrease of concentrations of suchsubstances has made it possible for potentially more complex living systems to evolve.

Industrial society, however, has been releasing these substances from the Earth's crustback into the domain of living systems, namely, the biosphere. Moreover, industrialsociety has been producing substances that eco-systemic processes have found difficult,or impossible, to break down, assimilate and reconfigure. Thus, there is a danger thatindustrial processes have increasingly constrained the emergence of a greater novelty,variety, and complexity of living systems.

The funnel metaphor

Metaphorically, the current global situation can be viewed as a funnel, where there isdiminishing manoeuvrability. Mechanisms that provide essential life-supportingresources for society's continued existence on the planet, such as clean air, clean waterand productive topsoil, are in decline. At the same time, society's demand for resourcesis increasing. This makes the future appear bleak.

With the awareness that everyone– individuals, businesses, governments, families,schools, etc. – lives in this funnel people have the opportunity to change the impactsthey have and be more strategic when making choices and long-term plans. TNSadvocates believe that through innovation, creativity and the potential for changepeople can catalyse the shift toward sustainability, reverse current trends, and begin topush open the walls of the funnel:

- 6 -

(Box 1.1 contd.)

Basic science

The designers of TNS' framework grounded their approach to understandingsustainability in scientific theories. These come under the headings: nothing disappears,everything spreads, there is value in structure, and plants create structure and orderwith energy from the sun.

Nothing disappears

All mass and energy in the universe remain conserved. Energy may be converted intodifferent forms, yet the total amount of energy in an isolated system remains constant.When matter burns, it is not destroyed but converted into waste, predominantly in theform of visible and invisible gases. This principle of matter and energy conservationrelates to the First Law of Thermodynamics.

Everything spreads

Energy and matter tend to spread spontaneously and everything has a tendency todisperse. Materials generated by, or introduced into, human society eventually willdisperse in nature. This relates to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, or the Law ofEntropy. Entropy is a measure of the amount of disorder there is in a system. In everyisolated system – such as the universe – entropy always increases. Examples ofincreases in entropy include organic matter decaying, coloured dye in clear waterdispersing, and ice samples taken in the Arctic Circle containing measurable amountsof synthetic PCB's.

There is value in structure

People determine material quality by the concentration and structure of the matter thatmakes up a material. For example, food is valuable because it has a high concentrationand structure. If you drop a teacup and it breaks on the floor, some of the value from itsstructure is lost, but each of the original atoms is still present. We cannot consumeenergy or matter, only its concentration, purity and structure.

Plants create structure and order with energy from the sun

In the earth system, net increases in material quality are generated almost entirely bythe sun-driven process of photosynthesis. According to the Second Law ofThermodynamics, disorder increases in all isolated systems – the Earth is a closedsystem with respect to matter. However, it is an open system with respect to energybecause it receives light from the sun. The ongoing flow of sunlight creates thestructure and order, in the evolutionary biosphere, from the disorder. Chloroplasts inplant cells capture energy from sunlight and form bonds that provide energy for otherforms of life, such as animals. As such, animals are ultimately dependent onchloroplasts.

RESOURCES

DEMAND

Lifesupporting

resources aredecreasing……demand forresources isincreasing

Throughinnovation,creativity, &the potentialfor change wecan open thewalls of the

funnel

ÙÙÙ

¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨

��

ßßß

ÙÙÙ

¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨

��

ßßß

- 7 -

(Box 1.1 contd.)

Sustainability principles: the system conditions

Sustainability is about maintaining human life on the planet. Contemporary life isfundamentally dependent on natural processes, such as the capturing of energy fromthe sun by photosynthetic organisms and the purification of air and water. Theseprocesses are essential to maintaining human life. However, society is systematicallyaltering the ecosystem structures and functions that provide life-supporting servicesand resources that it needs to survive. In particular, society alters ecosystem functionsand processes when society:

• mines and disperses materials at a faster rate than they are re-deposited back intothe Earth's crust (examples of these materials are oil, coal and metals such asmercury and lead);

• produces substances faster than they can be broken down by natural processes, ifthey can be broken down at all (examples of such substances include dioxins, DDTand PCBs); and,

• depletes or degrades resources at a faster rate than they are replenished (forexample, over-harvesting trees or fish), or by other forms of ecosystemmanipulation (for example, paving over fertile land or causing soil erosion).

These non-sustainability activities lead to the first three of TNS' sustainabilityprinciples.

Addressing human needs is an essential element of creating a sustainable society. Thedesigners of TNS' framework recognised that social and economic dynamicsfundamentally drive the actions that lead to ecosystem changes. Therefore, the fourthprinciple focuses on the importance of meeting human needs worldwide as an integraland essential part of sustainability.

TNS' model of the sustainable society thus looks like this:

TNS' sustainability principles must be met in order to have a sustainable society. Theyprovide a practical set of design criteria used to direct social, environmental andeconomic actions and to transform debate into constructive discussion. These areknown as TNS' system conditions:

Earth’s crust

Society

SunRadiation

The Sustainable Society

TNS' framework posits society as

existing within the evolutionary

biosphere. The arrows to and from the

Earth’s crust, and from the Evolutionary

Biosphere to Society and back, are of

equal size. This conveys that the rates of

release & absorption, transformation,

production & consumption, and waste &

regeneration, are in balance. That is to

say, the material quality of the

Evolutionary Biosphere is secure.

EvolutionaryBiosphere

- 8 -

(Box 1.1 contd.)

Strategic corollaries

As such, these principles have strategic corollaries, by which anyone (e.g. companies,organisations, individuals, groups, governments, and schools) can employ theprinciples. These are:

• ultimately eliminate contributions to systematic increases in concentrations ofsubstances from the Earth's crust. This means substituting certain minerals that arescarce in nature with others that are more abundant, using all mined materialsefficiently, and systematically reducing dependence on fossil fuels.

• ultimately eliminate contributions to systematic increases in concentrations ofsubstances produced by society. This means systematically substituting certainpersistent and unnatural compounds with ones that are normally abundant or breakdown more easily in nature, and using all substances produced by societyefficiently.

• ultimately eliminate contributions to systematic physical degradation of naturethrough over-harvesting, depletion, foreign introductions and other forms ofmodification. This means drawing resources only from well-managed eco-systems,systematically pursuing the most productive and efficient use both of thoseresources and land, and exercising caution in all kinds of modification of nature.

• optimise contributions to the goal of meeting human needs in society andworldwide. This means using all of our resources efficiently, fairly and responsiblyso that the needs of all people on whom we have an impact, and the future needs ofpeople who are not yet born, stand the best chance of being met.

ABCD action-learning process

PHASE ONE (A) – Building Awareness and Understanding

The first phase involves aligning people around a common understanding ofsustainability and their ‘whole-systems’ context. This includes details of the state of theearth’s systems, including ecological, social and economic trends that are influencingpeople's ability to create and manage healthy and prosperous businesses andcommunities. TNS' principles of sustainability, basic science and whole-systemsapproach provides a platform from which strategies for living in balance with natureand the global community can be developed.

- 9 -

(Box 1.1 contd.)

PHASE TWO (B) – Conducting a Baseline Assessment

This phase consists of conducting an analysis of major flows and impacts. This enablesthe identification of critical sustainability issues, their implications and opportunitiesfor moving forward. Bounded by natural systems and communities, this analysis caninclude the impacts of an organisation’s supply chain and an evaluation of productsand services, energy, capital and human resources from ‘cradle to grave’.

PHASE THREE (C) – Creating a Vision and Strategic Plan

In this third phase, people work together to create a compelling long-term vision forsustainable activities. From this vision, they develop a strategy and action plan formoving towards sustainability, starting with the baseline assessment of where they aretoday. Strategies are developed based on looking backwards from a vision of success, amethod called "back-casting" from principles. This prevents people from setting adirection based on an approach that only deals with current problems rather thanpotential future problems.

PHASE FOUR (D) – Supporting Effective, Step-by-Step Implementation

Phase four consists of the realisation of specific initiatives. People are encouraged tomove systematically by making investments that will provide benefits in the short-term, while also retaining a long-term perspective. Decisions should be made with theirimplications for future decision-making and strategising in mind, such that choicesmade will, theoretically, keep desirable future options available and within reach

(It is because of these four 'ABCD' steps that I describe TNS' framework as an 'action-learning' process-guide.)

Much in TNS' framework echoes writings that date back from before 1988 when Robèrt initiated his search

for scientific consensus. Hardin, for example, used language and concepts in the early 1970's – particularly

the metaphors of open and closed systems – that have been central to TNS' framework. Hardin wrote of the

assumptions people have held about the biosphere:

'all the while man has been treating the earth as an open system, he has in fact been operating within

a closed system which he has been constantly short-circuiting. Except for the energy of the sun, all

the materials available to him – air, water, space, and collective resources – are those that already

exist or within limits can be biologically renewed.' (quoted in Harré et al. 1999, p.103-4)

The innovation of TNS' framework (according to the Chairman of TNS UK's management board) was that it

presented these theories in a simple way, and coupled these theories with the notion of 'backcasting'2.

Backcasting is the opposite of forecasting, whereby current trends help generate future scenarios. Backcasting

2 Backcasting is a not a concept created by TNS' founders, and it is not specific to TNS.

- 10 -

entails envisaging a preferred future and calculating how to realise this preferred future. Robèrt described

TNS' approach as 'backcasting from principles of sustainability' (Robèrt 2002).

This thesis accepts that TNS' framework is a sincere attempt to engage with both definitions of sustainability

and of sustainable development, with TNS' principles aiming to define sustainability and the ABCD process

aiming to define sustainable development. My research purpose has primarily been to find out how the work

of TNS UK has influenced the dispositions and practices of its Pathfinder Company partners.

TNS' framework has its detractors, however. Upham (1999a), for example, explored an issue that is critical to

the question of how the implementation of TNS' framework should be evaluated: the strategic corollaries are

open to interpretation. This is especially the case in the light of phase D of the ABCD process that encourages

flexibility in planning. What constitutes the 'elimination of contributions to systematic increases in

concentrations of substances produced by society'? Robert (2002) only gives suggestions. A car manufacturer

might make its engines increasingly more efficient. In doing so, the car manufacturer could be said to be

systematically decreasing car emissions, and therefore its 'contributions of substances produced by society'.

TNS' framework may leave the manufacturer satisfied with this kind of improvement – what Upham

described as 'greening the conventional'. The manufacturer could go further, but because TNS' framework is

open to interpretation there is no urgency in making environmentally optimal choices. For example, the car

manufacturer could try to stem the increasing number of cars it produces and sells. The manufacturer could

take responsibility for its marketing practices when the rise in the total number of cars on the road engenders

a total increase in car emissions, despite their greater fuel efficiency. I review Upham's analysis in Chapter 2.

My perspective on TNS' framework is that it privileges a physics-based model of the 'whole-earth system'

(Adam 1998), given the centrality it gives to the rates of ecosystem processes. Although its designers

accepted that we do not know where precise thresholds may lie, TNS' framework still relies on (ideally)

measurable discrepancies. I think it therefore precludes the realms of culture, aesthetics, emotions and

experience, ones that a variety of educators think are crucial for engendering a more 'earth-friendly' culture

(Bowers 1993; Orr 1994; O'Sullivan 1999; Fisher 2002; Jucker 2002).

An important distinction in this thesis is that between first and second-order traditions of research. First-order

research tends toward realist assumptions about the social world and research purposes, and assumes the

possibility of observer-independent, objective representation. Second-order research tends toward relational

and participative understandings of the social world and research purposes, and assumes the importance of

ethics and taking responsibility for one's conceptualisations based on the view of one's immersion in the

world.

- 11 -

The majority of TNS advocates whom I encountered during the studentship appeared to treat TNS'

framework in first-order terms; in other words, TNS' model of the sustainable society relates to 'how the

world actually is'. For them the description of the 'whole-earth system' in TNS' framework is one that

describes an actual system independent of the observers ascribing the boundaries of that system. Society is

accordingly portrayed as existing within the bounds of the evolutionary biosphere, otherwise referred to as

'nature' in the system conditions. TNS' model of the sustainable society, for example, may tend toward an

equilibrial conception of ecosystem dynamics that some have connected with environmental injustice

(Scoones 1999). Being uncritical about 'nature' and 'society' boundaries – see Box 1.1 – is philosophically

suspect (Soper 1995). Treating boundaries around such things as 'nature' and 'society' uncritically is not an

option within second-order traditions of research.

The distinction between first- and second-order research tradition is one to which I return in Chapter 2, and

discuss in more detail in Chapter 3. For the purpose of this opening chapter, however, I now turn to

introducing TNS UK.

1.2.3 'A totally different kettle of fish' – TNS in the United Kingdom

There were a few previous attempts to anchor TNS initiatives in the UK on the back of visits by Robèrt, and

the resulting enthusiasm of individuals who met him. It was at this time in the early 1990's that the Chief

Executive of The Co-operative Bank – one of the companies involved in this research – became interested in

TNS. However, it was not until Forum for the Future took on its license that TNS became an established

organisation in the UK in 1997.

Forum for the Future, a 'solutions-oriented' charity, was founded in 1996 by three of the UK's leading

advocates of sustainable development: Jonathon Porritt, Sara Parkin and Paul Ekins. Its aim has been 'to

make sustainable development the central strategic framework for all key decision-making bodies in society'

(Forum for the Future 2002), such as the Government, business, education and the professions.

Establishing Forum for the Future involved, amongst other things, scoping sustainable development

initiatives already underway internationally between non-profit-making organisations and the business sector.

Through this exercise, one of its founders encountered The Natural Step (TNS UK 1)3. He then heard Robèrt

speak in the UK. He had been familiar with some of the scientific material Robèrt had utilised in TNS'

framework, such as the laws of thermodynamics, and was aware of their relevance to decision making.

3 This acronym and number form the code for a particular interviewee, which I discuss in Chapter 3. I include the codesin this introductory chapter for reference purposes only.

- 12 -

However, he was impressed with the elegant way in which Robèrt had captured this material in TNS'

framework. He envisaged that the science-based definition of sustainability in TNS' framework would be a

useful counter-balance to the more customised approaches of Forum for the Future's other initiatives with

partnering organisations. TNS' approach corresponded with the Forum's principled stance on sustainable

development. However, TNS' approach of defining 'non-negotiable'4 parameters of sustainability as a starting

point to an educational relationship is distinct from and complements the Forum's own more customer-

oriented 'Business Programme'.

The founders of Forum for the Future thus agreed with members of TNS Sweden to incorporate TNS as one

of the initiatives of Forum for the Future, under license. TNS UK is therefore semi-autonomous, unlike other

TNS branches around the world, which have to take responsibility for their own licensing. This has made it a

'totally different kettle of fish' (TNS UK 1), according to the chairman of its management board. Members of

TNS UK have shared premises and have collaborated on a variety of projects with members of Forum for the

Future since its inception. One of Forum for the Future's founding Directors has been the Chairman of its

management board. Moreover, TNS UK's Chief Executive has played a role in the management of Forum for

the Future, and there has been some cross-fertilisation of TNS' approach to other Forum initiatives, such as

the SIGMA project (British Standards Institute 2003).

I present TNS UK in the form of a systems map in Figure 1.1. I depict TNS UK as a stand-alone organisation,

which conceals its part in the larger organisation, Forum for the Future, which I have portrayed as a sub-

system that crosses the TNS UK boundary. My purpose for depicting TNS UK as a stand-alone organisation,

however, was consistent with my own and others' experiences of TNS UK as distinct from other Forum for

the Future activities. In the first publicity leaflet produced by TNS UK, its author describes TNS UK as 'an

autonomous arm within the Forum' (TNS UK 1997).

During my studentship, between three and five full-time TNS advocates – what I call its 'core team' – have

constituted TNS UK, along with between two to three supporting administrative staff. A chief executive, who

was recruited by Forum for the Future to establish TNS UK, has led the core team. TNS UK's core team have

shared a common modus operandi through their advocacy of TNS' framework.

4 This is a description of TNS' principles of sustainability that many TNS advocates have used.

- 13 -

Figure 1.1 Systems map of the organisation, TNS UK

This systems map introduces the organisation, TNS UK, and aspects of its context that wererelevant to my research. Systems maps are a way of depicting the main structural elements ofa situation, and involve boundaries between systems and their environments, and sub-systems (Lane et al. 2002a).

Since TNS UK's inception, its mission has been to

'deepen the commitment to genuinely sustainable development throughout UK society, through the use

of TNS educational and consultancy materials.' (TNS UK 2000, p.7)

There were clear aims for the work of TNS UK. According to its chief executive, the purpose of TNS entailed

communicating that the earth operates in a systemic manner, 'according to science' (TNS UK 3), that material

flows and regulatory mechanisms are important, and that society is overloading those flows – see Box 1.1.

'For me that’s enough to take action and tell people' (ibid.). He had a vision for TNS' framework as a common

way of approaching sustainable development – 'I’m mad enough to think [the framework] could do that'

(TNS UK 3). He spoke of TNS UK becoming an Institute, with its members 'holding the tablets of stone' of

TNS' model of sustainability (TNS UK 3). TNS' framework, according to TNS UK's then director of science,

was representative of 'how the world works' (TNS UK 5). From his perspective, 'the world works in definite

ManagementBoard

Facilitators

Core team

Administrativeand support staff

Forum forthe Future

Supportingorganisations

TNS UK

TNSI

TNS SwedenTNS UK's PathfinderCompany Network

OU researcher

- 14 -

ways' and that those who took time to study how the world works 'would all come to the same picture as the

designers of TNS' framework' (ibid.). Like other TNS advocates, members of TNS UK espoused TNS'

framework to be a 'strategic planning tool', one that enabled proactive rather than reactive decision-making

approaches to sustainable development. Theoretically, from their perspective, it was possible to make

decisions that were strategically intelligent, ones that would avoid longer-term costs by steering activities

through the narrowing walls of the funnel – see Box 1.1.

Members of TNS UK's core team occasionally contracted part-time facilitators to conduct TNS training

events, strategy workshops or develop relationships with partnering companies, when appropriate. Some

facilitators were self-employed consultants, while others had connections to management development

organisations in the UK.

All branches of TNS are members of, and licensed by, TNS International (TNSI).

TNS UK also included a management board – with representing members from Forum for the Future,

academia and the corporate sector.

By 'Supporting organisations', I mean those corporate and public sector organisations that have supported

TNS UK's development. Some have funded employees as secondments to TNS UK, who became part of TNS

UK's core team. Others have collaborated with members of TNS UK in hosting events and organising

research projects.

I have included myself as the Open University researcher in Figure 1.1 to signify my relationship to TNS UK

as someone outside its organisational boundary. TNS UK provided sponsorship for my research, but I was

not their employee.

While there have been various activities that members of TNS UK have engaged in, one set had particular

relevance for this research. This set consisted of their facilitation of 'action learning' with corporate clients

and partners, consolidated in their Pathfinder Company Network (TNS UK 2000), which I discuss in section

1.3.4. TNS UK's Pathfinder Company Network consisted of companies whose learning with TNS UK is the

focus of this thesis. Other activities members of TNS UK have undertaken included collaborative research

into contemporary issues, called their 2020 Vision series, and educational work with schools (e.g. Everard

and Ray 1999; Everard et al. 2000). I regarded an investigation into these latter activities as beyond the scope

of this thesis. This is despite TNS UK members sharing their 2020 Vision work with Pathfinder Company

Network members.

- 15 -

1.2.4 TNS UK's 'Pathfinder Companies'

When the first staff established TNS UK, their initial strategy was to develop a 'track record' of facilitation

with leading businesses on which to build a reputation for their work (TNS UK 3). They called this their

Pathfinder strategy. I depict TNS UK's Pathfinder Company Network, and its member companies during the

course of my studentship, in a systems map in Figure 1.2. The Pathfinder Company Network consisted of

those companies who have committed themselves to 'learning with TNS UK' and to finding pathways for

sustainable development. These companies paid an annual subscription fee to benefit both from the direct

input of TNS UK and from conversations that took place at Pathfinder Network meetings themselves. The

Pathfinder Company Network met thrice yearly, with meetings usually taking place at the offices of

Pathfinder Company members themselves.

Figure 1.2 Systems map of TNS UK's Pathfinder Company Network

Pathfinder Companies are italicised; those companies that feature prominently in this thesisare both italicised and in bold. Not all the companies listed belonged to the Network at thesame time; there was generally a consistent number of about ten company representatives inthe Network. Critical friends, guest speakers and members of TNSI were sometimes invitedto Pathfinder Company Network meetings.

TNS UK

Carillion plc

InterfaceEurope

bp Scotland

Nike Europe

TheCo-operative

Bank

HP Bulmer

Sainsburys DupontNylon

Tarmac

SunMicrosystems SC Johnson

WessexWater

YorkshireWater

TNSICriticalFriends

GuestsPathfinderCompanyNetworkMembers

CrestNicholson

HydroPolymers

An aviationfuel company

- 16 -

There were a number of reasons for setting up the TNS UK Pathfinder Company Network. These included:

ensuring what TNS UK members perceived as the alignment of Pathfinder Company members with the

philosophy of TNS; building a secure basis to generate an income for TNS UK5, and to enable Pathfinder

Network members to share experiences and perspectives. TNS UK's chief executive also explained that the

Pathfinder Network was set up to 'help TNS UK develop' (TNS UK 3). He had initially approached

companies on the basis that he and others in the UK did not really understand TNS' framework. This

therefore became an invitation to others to trial TNS' framework with members of the newly established TNS

UK. They wanted to give others the opportunity to join them in understanding and testing TNS' framework,

and possibly developing it.

Conversations at Pathfinder Network meetings usually revolved around members' respective organisational

sustainable development strategies, TNS UK's own ongoing work, and the development and 'sounding out' of

strategies and tools with particular reference to TNS' framework. One tool that a member of TNS UK

presented for discussion, for example, was that of 'Sustainability Life Cycle Assessment', which provided a

'qualitative […] precursor, to a full-blown Life Cycle Assessment' (CFE 19).

1.3 Research purpose

The purpose of my collaborative research studentship has remained unchanged throughout its course (1999 –

2003). The research purpose has been to assess the influence of the educational work of TNS UK on its

Pathfinder Companies. What changes in business organisation and practices had they enabled? Were they

helping to bring about changes for the better? How, if at all, were they accelerating the process of sustainable

development with their Pathfinder Companies?

The primary question this thesis addresses is,

1. What is, or has been, TNS UK's influence on its Pathfinder Companies?

It was not clear at the outset how it would be possible to assess TNS UK's influence. Assessing the influence

of any advisory or educational initiative is not straightforward, something that members of Forum for the

Future understood:

5 Pathfinder Companies paid £12,000p.a. to belong to the Pathfinder Network, in return for which they could attendPathfinder Network meetings and were eligible to an annual strategic review with TNS UK. Fees for TNS-training andconsultancy work were separate. Over and above income from the Pathfinder Network, TNS UK have also soughtfunding from charitable foundations and grant-funding bodies.

- 17 -

'We believe we are making a real difference with this work, and there is plenty of anecdotal evidence

that suggests we're right, but trying to put numbers on the change we are achieving is now an important

priority for us.' (Forum for the Future 2003)

Moreover, TNS advocates do not specify implementation outcomes for action learning with their framework,

but leave these open to the interpretation of practitioners, as I make clear in Chapter 2.

My research therefore addresses the following two questions as a way of answering the first. The second

question is one of evaluation methodology:

2. What could it mean to evaluate TNS UK's influence on its Pathfinder Companies?

3. How did members of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies interpret and make use of TNS'

framework in their organisations?

My research answers these questions by focusing on processes of organisational learning in Pathfinder

Companies working with TNS UK, which reflects the extent of organisational tendencies, and organisational

members' dispositions, toward sustainable development. My research is therefore different to conducting an

organisational sustainability audit, which would focus on the relative sustainability of organisational

relationships with the 'whole-system', something that is probably impossible (Zadek 2001).

The thesis also addresses the following question:

4. What organisational and structural factors enabled or constrained Pathfinder Company

members to enact TNS' framework in the ways theorised by TNS advocates?

I understand organisations as patterns of relationship that not only impact on the world in measurable,

material ways, which is the level for which TNS' framework was created. Organisations do not just have

'structures'. I also understand organisations in terms of their 'pattern of organisation', that is to say, their

dynamic, interactive processes of sensemaking, interpretation and meaning-creation that give rise to the sense

of 'an organisation'. Organisational learning from this view entails interactive processes of making sense of a

situation, of deciding what to do in the situation, of acting, and of reflecting on the outcomes of actions. The

better an organisation is at facilitating interaction between its members and across organisational levels, the

better will it be at enabling organisational learning and optimising the realisation of discerned purposes.

When organisational learning occurs, organisational members transcend their familiar patterns of relationship

– either the pattern of organisation in which they participate or its realisation through structural elements.

- 18 -

My research is part of a collaborative research studentship, one that stipulated from the beginning that it

would try to contribute to TNS UK's own organisational learning. Therefore, the thesis also addresses a

question of how to improve TNS UK's own practice:

5. What organisational and structural factors could members of TNS UK consider to

improve their own practices?

1.4 Thesis outline

I now present a diagram of the thesis structure, which I arrange in three parts and over eight chapters, in

Figure 1.3. Part 1 orients the reader to the evaluative inquiry, Part 2 relates the analysis and findings, and Part

3 forms the conclusion. Part 1, in which I discuss orientation to the inquiry, includes this introduction and

consists of Chapters 1-3.

Chapter 2

Chapter 2 is the first original outcome of the research. In it I discuss my evaluation research strategy and the

search for a means of evaluating organisational learning for sustainable development (OLSD) with TNS UK.

Advocates of TNS' framework do not specify how to implement it. My search therefore entailed a review of

previous research into decision-making and organisational learning with TNS, and a discussion of relevant

management and organisational learning literature. I establish an understanding of organisations and their

structures in interactive, conversational terms, and view impediments to organisational learning as

impediments to previously existing or potential interaction. On this basis, I construct an heuristic model of

OLSD. At the heart of the model is the notion of a 'conversational lineage', a legacy of discernible elements

that frame ongoing conversations, which can then evolve or fade. I hypothesise that distinct stories and

discernible 'TNS-related conversational lineages' will frame organisational purposes, identities, strategies,

design, operations, and day-to-day decision making and conversations.

Chapter 3

Chapter 3 discusses my methodological approach and conveys how I carried out the research. Here I

introduce the reader to two traditions of inquiry, namely, first- and second-order research. Each of these

traditions corresponds with theories of learning and communication that I outline. I go on to discuss my

assumptions relative to methodological traditions of realism, social constructionism, pragmatism and critical

theories. I then discuss my research methods and processes of building researching relationships, which

entailed three phases of inquiry that progressively took me deeper into the evaluative inquiry with TNS UK's

Pathfinder Companies.

- 19 -

Figure 1.3 Outline of the thesis.

The arrows convey 'leading towards'. The double-headed arrow between Chapters 5 and 6conveys my recursive sensemaking in writing the two chapters, and the interdependentrelationship between constraint and possibility.

Chapter 8Evaluating the

inquiry

Part IIEvaluative

inquiry

Chapter 7Reviewing TNSUK's facilitation

of OLSD

Chapter 5Possibilities of

OLSD with TNSUK

Chapter 6Constraints to

OLSD with TNSUK

Chapter 4:Analytical

approach toOLSD

Chapter 3Building

researchingrelationships

Part IOrientation

Chapter 2Towards

evaluatingOLSD withTNS UK

Chapter 1Introduction to

the thesis

Part IIIConclusions

- 20 -

Part 2 concerns the evaluative inquiry of OLSD with TNS UK, and consists of Chapters 4-7.

Chapter 4

This chapter discusses my analytical strategy, which is the second original outcome from the research. The

evaluative inquiry entailed defining distinctions related to TNS' framework that would help trace TNS-related

conversational lineages in analysing the data. This chapter discusses how I constructed narrative accounts

from my data that represent Pathfinder Company members' OLSD with TNS UK, which draw together

multiple perspectives. All the narratives correspond with stories that I believed were significant for the

members of the three Pathfinder Companies from which they emerged. I then explain how I analysed the

accounts, which was, in the first instance, a process of discerning possibilities and constraints for the

evolution of TNS-related conversational lineages, and then assessing the organisational levels at and across

which conversational lineages emerged and developed. I chose narrative accounts of five Pathfinder

Companies to represent in the thesis, which I present in Chapters 5 and 6, and which I introduce in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 Pathfinder Companies represented in Chapters 5 and 6

Single asterisks (*) refer to a company that I keep anonymous, and any information I give arose in

interview and is not publicly available. Double asterisks (**) refer to numbers of employees in the

respective company's group (of subsidiaries or worldwide sites) of which I researched only with

particular subsidiaries or sites.

Pathfinder Companyname

Annual turnover (as of2002)

Pre-tax profits (as of2002)

Number of employees(as of 2002)

An aviation fuelcompany*

c.£3,650m* –* –*

Carillion plc £1,974m £50.2m c.18,000**

The Co-operative Bank £483m £122.5m 4138

Interface Inc (US-based)

$924m -$27.7m c.7400**

Sainsbury's £18,495m £667m 145,703**

Chapter 5

I present in Chapter 5 six narrative accounts. A 'meta-analysis' of these accounts towards the end of the

chapter conveys four types of 'possibility for OLSD' with TNS UK based on the extent to which and how

- 21 -

conversational lineages developed. These possibilities were, namely, 'awareness raising', 'systemic thinking',

'role/project-focused training', and 'collaborative emergent learning'. I suggest that the latter, collaborative

emergent learning, most closely reflected what I defined as OLSD in practice, and provides a template for

TNS UK's facilitation work, which I discuss in Chapter 7.

Chapter 6

In Chapter 6, I present eight narrative accounts that convey constraints to OLSD with TNS UK. I discerned

these constraints when organisational members did not implement TNS' framework in ways espoused by

TNS advocates, or when organisational members expressed frustrations in their attempts to further a TNS-

related conversational lineage and sustainable development trajectory in their organisation. These frustrations

included perceived needs being unmet, and impediments to inter-personal, inter-departmental and inter-

organisational interaction. Having presented all the narrative accounts, I am then in a position to undertake a

second 'meta-analysis' into 'potentially influential organisational and structural factors' on the development of

collaborative emergent learning, which I undertake at the beginning of Chapter 7.

Chapter 7

This chapter rounds off Part 2 by exploring possible implications of my findings for TNS UK, based on the

second meta-analysis. This is the third original outcome of the research. Here I discuss the roles, benefits, and

limitations of OLSD with TNS UK. I explore possibilities for TNS UK's future development, in relation to

the model of OLSD, in relation to the narrative accounts in Chapters 5 and 6, and in relation to additional

relevant data that arises from encounters with TNS UK facilitators. These lead me to recommending, first, a

revision of the design of TNS' framework and its facilitation-in-use; and, second, a review of TNS UK's

accreditation of its facilitators and the development of its Facilitator and Pathfinder Networks. I envisage this

chapter fulfilling the original expectations of this collaborative studentship.

Part 3 forms the conclusion to the thesis, and consists of Chapter 8.

Chapter 8

I conclude the thesis by evaluating the research in Chapter 8. I argue that its 'contribution to knowledge' lies

in three significant outcomes: the second-order, heuristic model of OLSD that I present in Chapter 2, the

analytical strategy for evaluating TNS UK's influence in Chapter 4, and the recommendations for TNS UK's

organisational development in Chapter 7. The research is novel in that the notion of a conversational lineage

has not been used in an OLSD context before, and a second-order approach has not been used in the context

of evaluating OLSD with a TNS organisation before. In addition, the OLSD model and the analytical

- 22 -

approach may be applicable beyond the domains of both TNS UK and of sustainable development

facilitators; they may be applicable in other educational and facilitation contexts as well. This chapter

contrasts with Chapter 7 in that it also considers the research according to well-established academic criteria

for assessing qualitative research. I consider the trustworthiness of my contribution to knowledge through

having written the thesis, its adequacy and limitations, and suggest possibilities for further research.


I conclude each chapter with my reflections on the chapter – hence the different font. This is a way of

accounting for the act of writing the chapter, and the reflections I offer are a way of grounding the

content of the chapter in my experience. It is a practice developed by David McClintock, a former

researcher in the Systems Discipline at the OU (McClintock 1996). The practice fulfils my commitment

to taking responsibility for the conceptualisations that I make – a commitment that stems from a

second-order tradition of research, which I discuss in Chapter 3. The practice complements that of

writing from an objectivist standpoint more associated with a first-order tradition, which tries to

clarify meanings in as economic, and accurate, a way as is possible. I aim to emulate this first-order

standpoint in keeping with the expectations of good PhD research, but the thrust of my research

belonged in a second-order tradition that accounts for the researcher. No matter how determined we

might be, we cannot perceive and represent the world objectively and in 'value-free' terms (Maturana

and Varela 1987). Our histories indelibly influence how we perceive, communicate and act in the

world, and meaning arises through an active neuro-physiology. Meaning does not 'come from' the

world. This is so for reflecting on one's own research, and writing a thesis about it, as much as for

daily decision making. I therefore think it appropriate to convey briefly my interest in the research

studentship.

The OU studentship that I saw advertised was an opportunity to investigate how people in some large

UK businesses encountered, perceived and made use of the notion of sustainable development as

portrayed by TNS UK. I had become sensitised to stories of ecological degradation, and of people

actively addressing their social and ecological concerns, when I first went to university. I began to

realise that contemporary human impacts on the world are often 'invisible': we do not necessarily see

the full effects of our actions (Orr 1994; McNeil 2000). This is partly because modern economic logic

increases the 'imaginal' distances between producers – and the conditions of production – and

consumers (Gorelick 1998). I began to feel constrained in an economy that provides incentives for

ecologically degrading consumption and one that tends, decreasingly, to care for products by

repairing, reusing and recycling them. I felt limited in the extent to which I could make optimal

choices. Such market arrangements are not necessarily the most efficient in terms of economics,

either. Some have claimed that should 'prices […] tell the truth about all costs involved from design,

raw-materials extraction, production, transport, marketing and usage to disposal, the world economy

- 23 -

would reorganise itself overnight into regional markets' (Jucker 2002, p.121). For me, sustainable

development was becoming a critical agenda, and inquiring into OLSD was an opportunity I found

difficult to resist. Did some of TNS UK's Pathfinder Company members experience a change in

perceptions as a result of learning with TNS UK? Did they perceive their business strategies and

operations in a new light? Perhaps they became enthused and keen to contribute to a more sustainable

future? Maybe the notion of sustainable development may have been of no interest to them

whatsoever. Alternatively, perhaps they felt they could not contribute to a more sustainable future for

discernible reasons? If this was the case, I wanted to know what these reasons were. Through the

pedagogical relationships that TNS UK had built up, the studentship provided a means to investigate

the experiences of business people learning with TNS UK. Understanding the organisational factors

that enabled and constrained their OLSD could contribute to improving their own practices, the

practices of TNS UK, and possibly other sustainable development practitioners within and outside the

business sector.

In this chapter, I have introduced the subject and purpose of the collaborative research studentship,

and the structure of the thesis. The thesis tells the story of my researching whereby I appreciated the

learning journeys of others grappling with TNS' notion of sustainable development and trying to put

their learning into practice. I offer the thesis as a means of assessing the influence of The Natural Step

on its Pathfinder Companies in the United Kingdom. In essence, the thesis addresses the question of

whether it is possible to know whether something is 'going somewhere'. I suggest that the thinking

embedded in the thesis could be applicable beyond the bounds of the real-world domain of TNS UK

and its Pathfinder Companies to which the thesis refers.

Dividing the thesis into its first two parts emphasises both the aspects of preparation in undertaking

research, and analysis in the light of having carried out the research. I hope that the division makes

the reading easier. Appreciating the purpose behind something of interest engenders a greater desire

to engage with it, in my experience. I do not regard a PhD thesis as a work of fiction, unlike the

stereotypical postmodernist. Its primary purpose is to make meaning and provide insight, but not to

entertain. Having said that, I hope that clarifying the purpose behind structuring the thesis in the way

that I do helps to build up some suspense!

One might expect the end of a thesis is the appropriate place to forge and clarify outcomes. Certainly,

in Chapter 8 I reflect on the effectiveness and limitations of the research. However, the model of OLSD

in Chapter 2 is an important sensemaking device that I developed late in the research, and after I had

collected my data. I did not use it as means to experimentation and deductive research. This is not to

say that I was without 'a rudder' in my researching, which is far from the case as I hope to make clear

in Chapter 3. Indeed, the model is a synthesis and consolidation of theory I had been engaging with

up to that point. The model of OLSD is thus like the icing on the evaluative-inquiry cake. This is why I

regard Chapter 2 as a significant outcome of the research. It may seem unusual to include a major

- 24 -

outcome of the research so early in the thesis, but I feel justified in doing so. I think the model works

very well as a sensemaking device and as a means for evaluating the facilitation of OLSD.

I also believe the model is highly relevant to the practice of facilitating OLSD. Rather than use it in an

inquiry 'production line', my theorising in Chapter 2 therefore becomes pertinent for when I consider

the implications of the research for TNS UK in Chapter 7. Chapter 7 is the other significant outcome of

the research in that if fulfils one of the objectives to the collaborative research studentship, namely, to

give feedback to TNS UK. I found members of TNS UK to be supportive and interested during the

course of the research. They seemed willing to learn. I hope Chapters 2 and 7 will therefore reward

both the faith they had put in me in carrying out the research, and their expectations in having the

research carried out.

I also emphasise the dual evaluation purpose of the thesis in distinguishing between the implications

of the research for TNS UK in Chapter 7, and my reflections on the research in Chapter 8. Chapter 7

forms an assessment of the direction of TNS UK's practices. Chapter 7 therefore fulfils the 'formative

evaluation' aspect of this thesis (Patton 2002). I discuss this type of evaluation in the beginning of

Chapter 2. Chapter 8 is an evaluation of the inquiry, that is to say, of my research and this thesis,

which goes toward fulfilling the academic expectations of a PhD researcher.

I want to offer one last note before I finish the chapter. In writing the thesis, I have become aware of a

prevalent academic habit of citing other authors in the present tense. For example, 'Jane Austen

writes…', 'Bertrand Russell argues…', or 'Winston Churchill documents…'. This is a habit I find very

irritating, even when citing authors who are still alive. The habit conceals the temporal nature of

writing, and may prevent a reader from wondering whether the author cited may have changed his or

her mind since writing whatever it was that he or she wrote. When someone changes their perspective,

should we bind them into taking responsibility for everything that they had thought or written

previously? I offer this as an open question. The practice is one that I discard. In the context of this

thesis, I use the present tense to denote what I am thinking and doing in the act of writing the thesis. I

use the past tense to describe my own thoughts, dispositions and actions when referring to something

that I did or thought in my researching activities.

- 25 -

Chapter 2 A conversational means of assessing organisational

learning for sustainable development (OLSD) with TNS

UK

2.1 Introduction

2.2 Research strategy

2.2.1 Evaluation research

2.2.1.1 A formative rather than summative evaluation

2.2.1.2 Both implementation focused and goal-free

2.2.2 Applied research

2.3 Searching for a sensemaking device

2.3.1 TNS' framework as a decision-making guide

2.3.2 TNS UK's ladder of engagement

2.4 Reviewing previous research into organisational learning with TNS

2.4.1 Bradbury's 'Co-operative Ecological Inquiry'

2.4.2 Nattrass' 'Corporate Learning and Innovation for Sustainability'

2.5 Grounding my views of organisation and organisational learning in relevant theoreticalliterature

2.5.1 Understanding organisations and their structures

2.5.2 Processes of organisational change

2.5.3 Managing conversations

2.5.4 Barriers to organisational learning

2.6 An 'aha moment' – encountering the notion of a conversational lineage

2.6.1 Possibilities and constraints for the development of conversational lineages

2.6.2 Conversational lineages and organisational learning

2.6.3 The relevance of conversational lineages for this research

2.7 Developing a model of OLSD


2.1 Introduction

This chapter develops the first of three original outcomes from my research, namely, a contribution to theory

in terms of a model of 'organisational learning for sustainable development' (OLSD). I begin by discussing

my research strategy in section 2.2. I specify that the research had both an 'evaluation' and an 'applied' focus.

- 26 -

TNS advocates give no specific guidelines on implementing TNS' framework. The designers of TNS'

framework leave those learning with TNS to define their vision of a sustainable future and to decide how they

implement TNS' first-order, normative principles of sustainability, and to what extent. This was a significant

point for Upham in his critique of TNS' framework (1999a). He concluded that TNS' framework has more

rhetorical and political value than it does technical. I review his thesis and a provisional evaluation

framework devised by members of TNS UK, in section 2.3.

In searching for a means to evaluate organisational learning with TNS UK, I review previous research of

others who researched with TNS in section 2.4, and discuss how it was or was not useful to my task.

I go on to refer to organisation, organisational learning and management theories from relevant literature, in

section 2.5. This literature highlights the inevitability of interpretation and conversational processes of mutual

co-adaptation that occur in organisations, and, by implication, when Pathfinder Company members learn

together with TNS UK.

In section 2.6, I discuss an 'aha moment' that brought to my attention a potential indicator of organisational

learning, namely the 'conversational lineage'. The notion of the conversational lineage helps me discriminate

between stories and perspectives that others and I gave rise to through my researching conversations and

fieldwork.

I then develop a model of OLSD in section 2.7. The model is a device to make sense of the roles of

conversational lineages in improving organisational practices in relation to the organisation, its structures,

stakeholders, and their wider contexts. Because it defines OLSD as an ongoing organisational process, and

specifies a core indicator of OLSD, the model is intended to help give my evaluation a relevant focus that is

theoretically robust within a second-order systems tradition.

2.2 Research strategy

Patton (2002) illuminated the distinction between 'pure' and 'applied' research by distinguishing between

basic, applied, evaluative, and action-oriented forms of research. My research was qualitative and it had

elements of both applied and evaluation research, hence a need to develop an appropriate strategy. Applied

research, according to Patton, consists of interdisciplinary inquiry into real-world concerns and also

- 27 -

contributes to and generates theory. Evaluation research entails assessments of interventions to address real-

world concerns1.

2.2.1 Evaluation research

Patton discussed evaluation research, highlighting a difference between summative evaluation and formative

evaluation (Patton 1990; Shaw 1999).

2.2.1.1 A formative rather than summative evaluation

My research was more a formative than a summative evaluation. My research was a formative evaluation in

that my purpose was to contribute to improving the specific pedagogical programme of TNS UK. My focus

was on TNS UK's facilitation of OLSD (organisational learning for sustainable development), rather than an

audit of TNS UK Pathfinder Companies' sustainable development. This is implicit in the narrative accounts

of OLSD in Chapters 5 and 6, which, as I make clear in Chapter 4, are partial. The purpose of generating the

accounts is to discern potential rather than deterministic influences of TNS UK.

A summative evaluation entails assessing whether or not a programme is effective. Assessing the

effectiveness of TNS UK's pedagogical strategies and activities in enabling sustainable development would

require familiarity and knowledge of appropriate contexts that I did not have. For example, I did not know

enough about the field of sustainable development advocacy organisations in general to make an informed

comparison. I also could not know the extent to which the activities of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies

today would or would not contribute to the sustainability of human societies in the long-term. Assessing

organisations' contributions to sustainable development in terms of their relative sustainability, that is to say,

their ability to contribute to the long-term survival of society (Forum for the Future 1999), requires

knowledge that we do not, and probably cannot, have (Hart 1999; Robèrt et al. 2000; Zadek 2001). I therefore

regarded neither my expertise, nor my pre-understanding (Gummesson 2000), as sufficient for a summative

evaluation.

To some extent, discussing the implications of my research for TNS UK in Chapter 7 constitutes a summative

evaluation. There, I discuss the effectiveness of TNS UK's pedagogical strategies at enabling organisational

learning for sustainable development. In addition, as I discuss below and in Chapter 4, I do set out to evaluate

the extent that conversations and activities in Pathfinder Companies corresponded with the strategic

1 Whilst Chapter 7 is geared toward the improvement of TNS UK's activities, mine has not been action-oriented researchas Patton defined it, which, he suggested, entails within-intervention inquiry. That is to say, an intervention's participantsand beneficiaries themselves carry it out.

- 28 -

corollaries of TNS' framework. However, because TNS' framework avoids defining specific, requisite

behavioural changes, and the rates at which changes should occur, the best I could hope to witness would be

systematic improvements in operations and organisational practices. These improvements would be along

lines defined by organisational members themselves, in accordance with TNS' strategic corollaries.

Therefore, I frame my discussion in Chapter 7 more in terms of a formative rather than summative

evaluation.

2.2.1.2 Both implementation-focused and goal-free

The formative evaluation was twofold, combining elements of implementation and goal-free evaluation

(Shaw 1999; Patton 2002).

The implementation of TNS' framework could be regarded as a 'programme' for design and decision making

(Upham 1999a). An exploration into how practitioners implement a given program, and how varieties of local

circumstance might effect implementation, could be helpful to the designers of TNS' framework directly, and

possibly practitioners. My research therefore was an implementation evaluation, which, from Patton's

perspective, could

'tell decision makers what is going on in the program, how the program has developed, and how and

why programs deviate from initial plans and expectations.' (Patton 2002, p.161)

For such an evaluation, 'open-ended, discovery-oriented […] qualitative methods are ideally suited' (Patton

2002, p.162). In contrast to outcome evaluation, implementation evaluation assesses the extent to which

practitioners actually implement a given program. Without this assessment, there is little use in evaluating

outcomes.

Advocates of TNS' framework do not specify how to evaluate the implementation of it, however. Therefore,

the search for a means of assessment, a sensemaking device or sensitising concept2, becomes critical. This

search forms the rest of this chapter.

I found that a blueprint approach to research design was inappropriate at the outset. I began the research by

constructing a provisional timetable, beginning in October 1999 and going through to September 2002. This

did not prepare me for the interweaving of researching conversations that took place and the ambiguities of

researching in-situ. My research thus evolved from my prioritising fieldwork and real-world relationships

2 A sensitising concept is a way of organising 'the complexity of experience', and something that is 'virtually aprerequisite of perception itself' (Patton 2002, p.279). As such, I aimed my research less at testing this model andrefining pure theory than would basic research, as defined by Patton.

- 29 -

rather than any 'first principles' of theory. Moreover, I assumed it inappropriate to expect members of one

TNS UK Pathfinder Company or department to view the same aspects of TNS UK's input to be of the same

value as perceived by another. I was interested in finding out what were their perspectives and experiences,

and appreciating them as valuable in their own right. This was a methodological assumption that I discuss in

Chapter 3. I believed it necessary to appreciate the experiences of TNS UK Pathfinder Company members,

primarily, in order to appreciate how, and the extent to which, TNS' framework was applicable in Pathfinder

Companies. The implementation evaluation therefore had elements of a goal-free, 'consumer-' rather than

'management-driven' evaluation (from the summary of Michael Scriven's methodology, Shaw 1999, p.23).

2.2.2 Applied research

Similar to that of Nattrass (1999), my interest was on how change in commercial organisations occurs, such

that they are in a better position to contribute to sustainable development. My research was interdisciplinary

in that I drew on a range of theories, specifically those in the fields of sustainable development,

organisational learning, systems theories, and management science. I aim to contribute both to theories of

organisational change (Dierkes et al. 2001a), and to TNS' systems theory and practice (Ison et al. 2001), via a

theory of organisational learning for sustainable development (OLSD) which I develop in this chapter. I use

the model as the basis to my evaluative inquiry in Part 2 of the thesis, which I review in Chapter 8. I argue

that the model enables sensemaking as to what constitutes OLSD, and, by implication, the process of OLSD

itself.

2.3 Searching for a sensemaking device

TNS' framework defines sustainability parameters for society. From these normative principles, its designers

derived strategic corollaries and the ABCD action learning process that offers an approach to strategising,

design and decision-making – see Box 1.1. Its advocates say it can be used at any systemic level – individual,

group or organisation (Nattrass and Altomare 2002). When implementing it at an organisational level, one

can understand TNS' framework as an approach to organisational learning for sustainable development

(OLSD).

There has been little guidance on defining the characteristics of the sustainable future and in making design

choices for those implementing TNS' framework provided by its designers. There was a good reason for this.

The precise thresholds between non-sustainability and sustainability, they claimed, are unknown. Therefore,

the rates of improvement regarding the transformation from non-sustainable to sustainable behaviours are

equally unknown. In addition, the designers of TNS' framework have regarded those implementing it as the

experts in their field. Rather than impose on them solutions, the designers of TNS' framework were keen to

initiate a dialogic, learning process with them that would discern opportunities for sustainable development

- 30 -

on an ongoing basis. Their dialogic approach has been explained as a good reason for the attraction for

business people to learning with TNS (Bradbury 1998; Robèrt 2002).

This unspecific stance makes evaluating the implementation of TNS' framework difficult. What are the

relevant evaluation standards for implementing TNS' framework? On the one hand, the first three strategic

corollaries3 of TNS' sustainability principles specify ultimately eliminating contributions to systematic

increases in degrading activities, while the fourth implies optimising contributions to meeting human needs.

On the other hand, the ABCD strategising process advocates making improvements that are flexible enough

to support ongoing improvements.

There is therefore no expectation over the periods in which to make improvements, or over the scope of the

improvements. This lack of specificity became a central concern in Upham's (1999a) critique of TNS'

framework, to which I now turn.

2.3.1 TNS' framework as a decision-making guide

Upham argued that TNS' framework was too general to be of specific guidance, too precautionary to be

particularly appealing, and too normative to help discriminate between choices (Upham 1999a). Moreover, he

was unclear as to what the application of TNS' framework would precisely entail in practice. He discerned

four aspects of TNS' model of sustainability that practitioners could use as decision-making guides. These

were the system conditions4; their strategic (what Upham called 'rate') corollaries5; general interpretations6;

and, self-reflexive questioning7. While 'true in the abstract', he concluded that TNS' principles added

3 See Box 1.1.

4 See Box 1.1.

5 See Box 1.1. According to Upham, using these for decision-making would entail matching the rates of extraction,production of un-biodegradable (or potentially biodegradable, but actually excessive quantities of) compounds, andharvest-cum-biodiversity-loss with natural background rates of absorption, biodegradation, and regeneration. As such,these strategic corollaries would lead decision-makers to reduce these non-sustainability behaviours. While their precisequantifications might be unknown, as Upham pointed out, a basic comparison between these rate corollaries and currentpractices should make substantial discrepancies immediately obvious. Thus, it would be a logical next step for decision-makers to reduce systematically these non-sustainability behaviours.

6 That is to say, according to Upham, decreases in extraction, production and harvest-cum-biodiversity-loss.

7 For example, does my organisation decrease its dependence on processes of extraction, production and harvest-cum-biodiversity-loss?

- 31 -

'little technically to environmental management, even with extensive inference, but that they do add a

highly [precautionary] set of normative prohibitions.' (ibid. p.239)

Upham cautioned TNS advocates against overstating the value of TNS' framework as a decision guide. For

him, 'abstract identification of potentially adverse environmental and population trends does not itself

constitute evidence of a need to end the trends now' (ibid. p.241). From Upham's perspective, practitioners

needed information 'on the relative performance of product/process options' (ibid. p.219). They might be

content, for example, with 'greening the conventional' (ibid. p.215), rather than searching for the perhaps

unconventional, but optimal, environmental choice8. Some of his interviewees expressed a need for help in

selecting between different choices and a guide to weight different choices when they 'breached' TNS' four

sustainability principles. When he asked his interviewees to recall the constituents of TNS' model of

sustainability, he occasionally experienced them to be unclear, perhaps confused, as to the constituents of the

model. For him, this suggested

'that, when personnel state that they are using TNS, it should not be assumed that they are applying

TNS as codified in papers and TNS UK’s training manual.' (ibid. p.208)

Upham saw the application of TNS' framework to involve value judgements. This led him to define the role

of TNS' framework more in sociological terms as a 'boundary object' (cf. Wenger 1998), which potentially

brought varying groups together, moderating their differences and establishing a shared if not consensual

understanding. Regarding those companies that had made 'a special commitment to operationalising TNS',

Upham predicted that TNS' principles could

'function within the organisation, and between divisions, as a means of orienting planning and

decision-making […]. It [would] not matter […] that the TNS principles are difficult to express

operationally. They would nevertheless function as a means of engaging people in sustainable

development, while allowing them considerable latitude in the way in which they go about this.'

(Upham 1999a, p.232)

He acknowledged that TNS advocates and their facilitation of the use of TNS' framework had

8 By 'greening the conventional', Upham gave the example of 'greening' the electricity supply and climate control in abuilding by linking the building to the conventional electric grid, 'high insulation levels and a relatively efficient form ofgas central heating' (p.215). This might engender an environmental impact reduction on what the designers may haveoriginally chosen. However, he argued that a more environmentally benign form of supply would be to convert andmanage 'usable types of solar radiation' (ibid.). He therefore argued that 'greening the conventional' – something thatTNS' framework allows, given its non-prescriptive nature – would be environmentally sub-optimal. In addition, becausethe espoused application procedures of TNS' framework do not specify any requisite information, the designers of such a'greener' building would not necessarily know about environmentally more benign design choices.

- 32 -

'played a creative and indirectly productive role in firms that have used it. […] It is likely that the

changes made by firms exposed to TNS are primarily due to a high-level decision to begin a process

of change. Only thereafter, is change likely to be facilitated by TNS's capacity to engage, motivate

and (to a mixed extent) educate, the consequences of which will be practically expressed by a search

for means of achieving enhanced environmental and commercial performance.' (ibid. p.234-5)

In concluding on a positive note, Upham wrote that

'TNS is a good device with which to begin a process of environmental performance raising, not least,

because it is evidently found informative and attractive. Through careful formulation, TNS combines

this capacity with norms that echo the views of those who want to shift the environment/development

balance of industrial societies further towards environmental protection.' (Upham 1999a, p.253)

In response to his perspective on the applicability of TNS' framework for technology choice, the designers of

TNS' framework agreed that connections between TNS' principles and sustainability parameters for

individual firms were unknown (Robèrt et al. 2000)9. They agreed that most data relevant to assessing the

relative sustainability of human activities was unavailable, and that TNS' principles were 'challenging, even

provocative' (ibid.). However, they regarded the normative dimensions of TNS' principles to enable the

detection of 'qualitatively critical' material flows that could then inform quantitative measurement (ibid.).

Strategically, they argued, TNS' principles enabled the detection of 'early warning signals for when long-term

investments based on today's structures can lead to dead ends and when marginal changes are not enough'

(ibid.).

Upham's thesis helps me make sense of some of the possibilities and limitations of implementing TNS'

framework. I do not entirely agree with his analysis. For example, I believe there are sufficient grounds for

initiating processes to end the potentially adverse trends as identified. However, Upham's thesis prepares me

for some of the difficulties others reported in implementing it. In addition, his highlighting TNS' framework

as a 'boundary object' is potentially useful for understanding how those implementing TNS' framework might

use it as a means of bringing diverse groups together and negotiating shared experiences.

However, I did not want to limit myself to the notion of the boundary object. To do so would not help me to

understand other ways in which organisational members used TNS' framework, or the extent to which they

found it meaningful, or how they interpreted it. Fixing on the notion precluded potentially multiple ways in

which organisational members used TNS' framework and integrated it into the networks of relationship that

9 Their response was specifically in relation to Upham's perspective on the integration of TNS' sustainability principlesinto the materials analysis procedure of Life Cycle Analysis (Upham 1999b).

- 33 -

constituted their organisation. Perhaps some of them did use it, on an ongoing basis, as a decision-making

guide.

The question remained, therefore, how would TNS UK or an evaluation researcher evaluate the extent of

TNS UK's influence with a 'client' organisation?

2.3.2 TNS UK's ladder of engagement

Members of TNS UK had developed their own evaluation framework for assessing the depth of an

organisation's engagement with them – the 'ladder of engagement' (TNS UK 3 & 5, and CFE 9)10. Their

ladder of engagement consisted of different levels of possible relationship, ranging from 'paid consultancy' to

'tool-making'11 to 'enlightenment', in which core organisational purposes and strategies corresponded with a

TNS-related sustainable development trajectory. This typology of relationships was vague. One Pathfinder

Company representative described a self-evaluation exercise at a Pathfinder Network meeting (CFE 9), based

on the ladder of engagement, as 'party games' (PNM 1).

Although perhaps lacking definition, I interpreted TNS UK's ladder of engagement as an affirmation of the

view that an ongoing, self-sustaining process of OLSD was the ideal. When an organisation no longer needed

the facilitation work of TNS UK – when it was 'enlightened' – then that organisation would be able both to

understand the notion of sustainability and to facilitate its own process of sustainable development12.

Unanswered questions remained, however. TNS UK's ladder of engagement did not adequately answer the

question as to relevant evaluation standards of implementing TNS' framework. For example, on what bases

could those implementing TNS' framework claim to be on a sustainable development trajectory? Would it be

sufficient that organisational members iterated their implementation of the ABCD process, as conveyed in

Box 1.1? What would be an appropriate means, if any, for evaluating the extent of iteration of the ABCD

process? More interesting, from my point of view, were two more questions. Would it be possible to evaluate

the 'ongoing-ness' of a process of OLSD? To what extent might it be possible to evaluate the extent to which

a process of OLSD was self-sustaining? Neither TNS UK members nor TNS advocates in general had

addressed these questions. In part, this has been because the designers of TNS' framework regarded others as

10 I include these codes consisting of an acronym and number in this chapter for reference purposes only. They denoteinterviewees and fieldwork events attended that I discuss in Chapter 3.

11 'Tool-making' consisted of organisations collaborating with TNS UK to develop a set of decision-making and 'culturechange' tools for implementing TNS' framework.

12 This supports my supposition that TNS advocates expect an ongoing action learning cycle. See Chapter 1.2.2.

- 34 -

the experts in their own field. The emphasis in the TNS' ABCD process has been on enabling others to

conduct their own 'baseline assessment' and to create their own 'vision of a sustainable future'.

2.4 Reviewing previous research into organisational learning with TNS

In searching for answers to the questions posed in the last section, I reviewed two PhD theses based on

previous research into organisational learning with TNS. Both helped orient the direction of my search for a

sensemaking device. The first documented and explained the emergence of TNS' framework and the initial

TNS organisation in Sweden in terms of the interactions and learning of those involved (Bradbury 1998).

This primed me to a multi-vocal mode of evaluating organisational learning that intuitively appealed and

struck a chord. Moreover, this research developed a dialogic model of interpersonal learning that inspired the

model of OLSD that I go on to develop at the end of this chapter. The second explored 'corporate learning'

with TNS (Nattrass 1999). This research documented what kind of organisational change four companies in

North America and Sweden had undertaken by engaging with TNS.

2.4.1 Bradbury's 'co-operative ecological inquiry'

Bradbury presented the origins of TNS in Sweden in the form of a 'learning history'. She engaged a variety of

research participants from science, business and organisational development (Bradbury 1998). Most if not all

had contributed either to the original consensus-seeking process initiated and managed to varying degrees of

satisfaction by Robèrt, or to the establishment of the first TNS organisation.

In her learning history, Bradbury interwove a substantial diversity of perspectives. For example, she

portrayed Robèrt's motivations in searching for sustainability principles in terms of him wanting to ascertain

the facts that would then motivate people into realising a sustainable future. From his perspective, appropriate

knowledge enabled action. Some spoke of their differences in perspective with Robèrt regarding the design of

consensus processes, and regarding what was, and was not, relevant in the creation of sustainability

principles. There were also diverse views on the dialogic and pedagogical skills exhibited by participants in

the consensus process. In addition, business people spoke of what attracted them to TNS, and how they

contributed to the establishment of the first TNS organisation.

- 35 -

One of the goals of her study was 'to link dialogue with large scale change with reference to structuration

theory'13 (Bradbury 1998, p.203). 'In essence', Bradbury held a

'dynamic understanding of culture, one which is produced and reproduced by the interactions of

people. Not all people have equal power to shape culture, those that do, "thought leaders", have been

invested with symbolic capital, that is, people are willing to follow them, whereby culture shifts. The

willingness of followership is linked to their being perceived as legitimate, and sincere.' (ibid. p.223)

A question that arose for her was the extent to which the attraction of TNS in its early days depended on

Robèrt's charisma, or on TNS' sustainability message coupled with its inclusive, consensus-seeking

communication processes. She decided on the latter, primarily.

From her empirical research, Bradbury developed a model of what she called 'co-operative ecological inquiry'

to explain what factors influenced the audiences of TNS advocates in adopting TNS' framework (see

Appendix 1). Accordingly, audiences accepted TNS' vision of sustainability based on a number of factors.

These included their perception of the credibility of TNS' advocates as 'thought-leaders', their own self-

interest, the relative attractiveness of the conversations they had with TNS advocates, and the extent to which

their personal and professional networks consequently became active. The activation of personal and

professional networks helped transform cultural and economic structures and thus catalyse sustainable

development. Bradbury suggested that TNS-related interpersonal encounters in which participants

experienced little genuine dialogue reduced the attractiveness of conversations around TNS. These in turn

reduced the receptivity of social contexts to TNS advocates, and, presumably, the extent to which networks

became active for sustainable development. In describing the process of co-operative ecological inquiry,

Bradbury wrote that one could think of it as

'a form of immaterial interaction […], which […] asks us to listen and speak in such a way that ideas

are not constrained, but can flow to be amplified (or not) in organizational contexts to bring change.'

(Bradbury 1998, p.270-1)

If I took issue with anything in her thesis, it related to two things: Bradbury's approach to systems thinking,

and her lack of critique of TNS' framework.

13 Bradbury cited Giddens and Bourdieu as the two main proponents of structuration theory. The theory suggests thatactors not only inherit social structures that incline them to act, be and feel in particular ways, but that they alsocontribute to the realisation and transformation of those very same social structures.

- 36 -

I had no problem with her description of co-operative ecological inquiry, but with what followed. She

continued to describe it as

'an inquiry which concerns questions of global concern. It is an inquiry which is facilitated by

bringing representatives of the whole system together, through boundary spanners, and allowing bi-

lateral, that is both intuitive and logical, inquiry concerning an issue such as sustainable

development.' (ibid. p.271, emphases unchanged)

As such, Bradbury's conception of systems thinking is inherited from what I regard as a 'first-order systems

dynamics' approach of Senge and Forrester, which is one amongst a variety of systems approaches (Armson

et al. 2000). By 'first-order systems' approach, I understand one that tends toward regarding definitions of a

'system boundary', 'sub-system' and 'environment' as real-world definitions. In contrast, a second-order

approach would view such definitions as negotiable human constructs. Second-order systems approaches,

such as those of Checkland (1999), tend to approach systems theories and practices as means of personal or

collaborative inquiry for situation improvement. These contrast with first-order approaches that view systems

as descriptions of the world, and that use these descriptions for problem solving and control14. I was

unconvinced that first-order approaches sat easily with the social constructionist epistemology Bradbury

adopted. Who would bring the 'representatives of the whole system together'? Who would have the

legitimacy to appoint the representatives, and from where would they get it? I did not regard such matters as

obvious. I question the extent to which such system boundaries are givens (Blackmore et al. 1998; Blackmore

et al. 2000; Midgley 2000). Having said that, Bradbury was aware of the potential her model of co-operative

ecological inquiry could have for further research regarding dialogue in organisations – something that, as I

understand it, inherently involves inquiry into boundaries.

In addition, Bradbury did not review the underlying theories behind TNS' framework. Her analytical focus

instead was on dialogic dynamics that gave rise to TNS' framework and influenced people's interest in it. As

such, she perhaps treated TNS' framework uncritically, as if the important factor in determining TNS'

influence was merely the engaging brand of a 'thought-leader'. This treatment limits the extent to which she

might have otherwise questioned TNS' framework, and thus the extent to which it might improve. Moreover,

differing modes of application of TNS' decision-making framework may influence how, and the extent to

which, people learn with TNS through dialogue. As such, there may be value in linking the interests of

Upham and Bradbury in further research.

14 The distinction between first- and second-order research traditions is one to which I return in more depth in Chapter 3.

- 37 -

On reflection there was much in Bradbury's thesis, theoretically, that I appreciated and with which I agreed. I

appreciated her multi-vocal learning history of TNS, and found her dialogic model of co-operative ecological

inquiry to make sense. Certainly, the focus of her research concentrated on the emergence of TNS as an

organisation, rather than on processes of OLSD in partnering companies. Bradbury's empirical work did not

focus on means by which patterns of organisation and organisational structures militated against or enabled

networks for managing sustainable development, which is the subject of this thesis. This was something

about which she was aware, for example, when she wrote of how social structures did not give equal access

to all perspectives within dialogic processes. In concluding her thesis, she wrote that it was

'a limitation [of my thesis] that I do not have objective data to augment interviewees' reports of

conversations and the evolution of dialogue in personal networks. To have access to this type of data,

however, I believe it is necessary to have a stricter boundary around the system I am studying. It will

therefore be interesting to explore whether and how the model of co-operative ecological inquiry is

applicable to a specific organizational change.' (Bradbury 1998, p.279)

Having said that, her model of co-operative ecological inquiry opened my eyes to the possibility of

developing a similarly dialogic model of OLSD, which I do so in section 2.7.

2.4.2 Nattrass' 'corporate learning and innovation for sustainability'

In his research, Nattrass focused on the 'learning, change, and innovation' that took place in four companies

'based on [TNS'] insights and theories of action', which he presented in the form of case studies (Nattrass

1999, p.3). He discerned eight influential factors on corporate learning that included 'leadership:

breakthrough understanding'; 'vision and strategy'; 'training, education and coaching'; 'involvement'; 'practical

application and action'; 'measurement and feed back'; 'influence'; and, 'integration into all business functions'

(ibid. pp.70-8). I accepted these aspects of organisational learning as legitimate. However, I was wary of

using them to create a tick-box 'management-led'15 evaluation approach that would be closed to others'

perspectives. While influential, I did not structure my evaluation according to these aspects.

Nattrass was overtly positive about TNS' framework. For him, TNS' model of sustainability

'provides a comprehensive definition of an environmentally sustainable society that is based on

scientific principles and is easily understood. This makes it an effective tool for decision-making,

planning and training. The framework is valid at any scale. It can be used as an integrating

15 See section 2.2.1.2.

- 38 -

framework to seamlessly tie together many different components of a system into one coherent

whole, such as different and disparate environmental programs within an organization.' (ibid. p.79)

Nattrass described a limitation of TNS that appeared to support Upham's thesis and contradict his positive

perspective above. This was that neither TNS organisations nor their framework gave guidance on, or 'many

tools' for, 'implementation strategy' and tactics, which was

'a cause of some frustration […]. The challenge of every company studied was in the application of

[TNS'] principles.' (ibid. pp.81-3)

Although aware of such limitations, Nattrass concluded that TNS' approach

'stimulates transformative learning16 and invites the construction of new meaning at both the

individual and organizational levels. The strength of [TNS'] approach is two-fold. One aspect is more

obvious: the reframing of perceptions of the interrelationships between social and ecological

sustainability based on the solid foundation of consensually accepted scientific observations and

laws. The second aspect is more subtle, yet is equally important to [TNS'] success in organizational

transformation: the "theories of action" through which [TNS] conveys the information about socio-

ecological sustainability. These include a focus on communicative learning17, dialogue, systems

thinking18, and future-oriented systems design19 guided by new assumptions about the

interrelationships between social and ecological sustainability and the corporation's responsibility,

role, and influence in those dynamics.' (ibid. p.40)

16 By transformative learning, he meant the process by which 'meaning is construed' (ibid. p. 24). Core assumptions – or'meaning schemes' – develop or change because of reflection, and are then subject to validation with reference to the'wider social context' (ibid. p.26). We thus develop new meanings based on a reinterpretation of 'an old experience froma new set of expectations' (ibid.).

17 By communicative learning, he meant the process of gaining insight and 'common ground through symbolicinteraction' that involves a process of 'identification and validation of explanatory constructs' (ibid. p.36). It is closelyassociated with 'an attitude of dialogue' that does not make 'people or companies wrong' and is 'open to differentopinions' (ibid.)

18 By systems thinking, similar to Bradbury, Nattrass adopted Senge's definition of systems thinking in terms of 'seeingwholes […and] interrelationships rather than things, for seeing patterns of change rather than static snapshots' (ibid.p.32). The same issues I raised regarding Bradbury's conception of systems thinking apply. Nattrass made a point withwhich I agreed, however, about the kind of systems thinking espoused in organisational learning theory. From hisperspective, it has neglected the 'whole [earth] system' that has been the focus of TNS' model of sustainability (ibid.p.35).

19 What Nattrass meant by future-oriented systems design remained unclear, however, although presumably he meantthe integration of learning with TNS' framework into corporate strategy and operations.

- 39 -

As such, Nattrass' conclusion about the role of TNS' framework parallels Bradbury's model of co-operative

ecological inquiry.

Based on his case studies, I accepted Nattrass' analysis of organisational learning, and his conclusions about

TNS' framework. However, I experienced little opportunity to appreciate what his conceptions of

transformative or communicative learning, or systems thinking, meant in the narration of his case studies. I

explain this by his particular conception of organisational learning. In the main, his case studies tended

toward a mono-vocal conception of organisational learning, and reflected a unitarist conception of

organisation that some have critiqued as antithetical to sustainable development (Jones and Welford 1997;

Gergen 1999). I thus question the extent to which Nattrass had grounded his social constructionist

perspective. I return to Nattrass' conceptualisation of organisational learning in more depth in Chapter 4.4,

when I discuss the representation of my data and of OLSD. This is because the issue is more a

methodological than a theoretical one in the context of this thesis.

In the main, Nattrass did not compare and contrast his case studies, probably because he did not set out to

discriminate between the extent of OLSD in different companies. He did not ask whether and how it would

be possible to discriminate between different 'sustainable development learning journeys' with TNS and its

'client' organisations. He did not offer assessments about which is the more likely to evolve and persist, and

thus contribute to sustainability over the long term, and why.

Some would argue that assessing the relative stability of organisational learning processes is a project

doomed before it has begun. I agree with Badaracco, for example, who acknowledged the role of small acts

that can be influential months even years after their manifestation by their taking root in experience,

gestating, and shaping development (Badaracco Jr. 2002). Trying to evaluate the relative efficacy of OLSD

with TNS UK and its Pathfinder Companies might therefore be a waste of time, given the unpredictable

effects of small, apparently unnoticeable events.

Having said that, I think searching for a means of assessment is a worthy investigation. I thus now review

relevant literature that influenced my understanding of organisations and organisational learning. Coupled

with an 'aha moment' that I relate in section 2.6, this forms the basis to my model of OLSD in section 2.7.

- 40 -

2.5 Grounding my views of organisation, and organisational learning, in relevant

theoretical literature

2.5.1 Understanding organisations and their structures

My understanding of organisational learning is rooted in a view of organisations as phenomena that not only

constitute and influence 'the' world in observable biophysical, structural, and operational ways, which is the

level at which TNS' founder argued for the need for organisational and societal change (Robèrt 1997).

Organisations can also be understood as social and intersubjective sites for making sense of, and finding and

generating meaning in, people's experiential worlds (Shotter 1993; Weick 1995; Capra 2002). They can be

understood as networked patterns of conversational and interactive sensemaking (Bouchikhi 1998). Along

similar lines, others refer to 'storytelling organisations' to describe the interactivity of these patterns (Boje

2001). These patterns can be spread across particular locations (Espejo et al. 1996). Some could be non-

location-specific, but oriented around shared meanings, identities and practices (Wenger 1998, 2000).

The difference between these two understandings of organisations – that is to say, structural and interactive –

is mirrored in the distinction between the organisation of a system and the structures of a system. I take this

distinction between a system's organisation, and its structures, from living systems theory (Maturana and

Varela 1987). Accordingly, 'organisation' is the pattern of relationships between components of a system that

an observer discerns. The observer can then attribute the system as a particular class of system, for example,

an animal, vehicle or hospital. As soon as organisation changes, then the system changes or is no longer

functional. 'Structure', on the other hand, refers to the actual components that realise organisation. Structural

elements can change without changing the system's organisation.

In the context of this thesis, I am interested in the patterns of relationship between components of

organisational systems, which I take to be interactive, moreso than in their structural elements, hence my

interest in conversational patterns as I go on to discuss.

I also need to clarify that I distinguish between an organisation, an organisation's organisation, and an

organisation's structure. I thus retain the common usage of organisation as concrete noun – for example, 'the

organisation in the next door building is a conservation charity'. This contrasts to its use as a descriptive noun

according to the above distinction between organisation and structure – for example, 'the organisation of the

conservation charity is managed in a non-profit way'.

From my perspective, organisations consist of individuals each with unique perspectives and 'ways of being'

in the world. Following Anderson, I view an organisation as consisting of individuals who have 'coalesced

around a particular relevance', or relevances, rather than as 'a contained entity that acts, feels, thinks, and

believes' as a singular unity (Anderson 1997, p.234). Anderson explained that organisations can consist of

- 41 -

'complex structures whose traditions and rituals can contribute to [a sense of there being] monological states

and problems in search of solutions' (ibid. p. 255). It is the patterns of interaction that persist over time and

contribute to a sense of 'an organisation', that is to say, a discernible, singular entity.

Anderson echoed a variety of theorists who critiqued the modernist notion of organisations as rational,

unitarist, and goal seeking (Checkland 1994; Reed and Hughes 1994; Boje 2001). If each person in 'an'

organisation is involved in his or her own ongoing processes of sensemaking and interpretation, then this

modernist notion of an organisation is inappropriate (Checkland 1994). Another way of describing this notion

is as the 'managed organisation' (Gabriel 2000).

Instead of the unitarist notion of organisation, such theorists develop understandings of organisations in

pluralistic terms, terms that some have argued are more compatible with sustainable development discourses

(Jones and Welford 1997; Gergen 1999). Their understandings are more process-oriented. Gergen, for

example, understood organisation to be made up of individuals engaged in 'processes of relational

coordination' (Gergen 1999, p.265). He suggested that process-oriented notions of organisation are more

appropriate than unitarist conceptions in an age when globalisation undermines hierarchical authority,

singular rationality, and centralised knowledge. From empirical research, he found that, more often than not,

managers emphasised relational and

'dialogic process, multiple logics, and permeable boundaries within organizational spheres and

between the organization and its external context' as 'optimal management practices for the future',

and as 'the most effective communication practices.' (Gergen 1999, p.267)

The multiple voices and perspectives within an organisation potentially contribute to multiple dilemmas.

They contribute to the circumstances that give rise to a high incidence of perceived complexity (Armson et al.

2000).

In other words, I understand organisations to consist of dynamic patterns of relating, involving a multiplicity

of 'traditions of understanding' (Ison and Russell 2000), conversational networks, and structures.

Organisations are just as much social sites for interpreting 'the' world and people's experiences 'in' the world.

This, crucially, explains why conflicting perspectives can arise and why the 'negotiation' of realities is such a

central feature of collective endeavour (Wenger 1998). The conversational and sense making dynamics that

exist influence the coordination of behaviours in ways hidden to 'objective' measurement and analysis.

However, some conversational patterns perhaps persist longer than others and become manifest in structural

elements (Ison 2000a), for example, the material, technological and human elements that realise the

organisation of an organisation.

- 42 -

2.5.2 Processes of organisational change

With respect to facilitating organisational change, the dynamics of sensemaking and interaction demand a

different order of approach than mere technological restructuring. If one considers OLSD as a process of

innovation, as some do, toward more sustainable organisational forms, relationships, and technologies, then

patterns of interaction become crucial foci as they do for any entrepreneurial endeavour (Bouwen and

Steyaert 1999). Following a sustainable development trajectory may thus require changes for commercial

organisations that are more profound than merely changing structural dimensions (Ison 2000a) – for example,

procedures, policies, processes, technologies and skill-sets. Requisite changes might concern organisational

dimensions, consisting of patterns of relationship, processes of relating that constitute the pattern, and

purposes – that is to say, the relationships of the organisation with its wider contexts. These are the more

profound because the overall organisation of the organisation changes. Ison maintained that the distinction

between organisation and its structures is important because managers can all too readily focus on changing

structures whilst remaining blind to the real need of allowing the instituted pattern of relationships and

conversations to change.

Perhaps for those trying to bring about organisational change it is difficult to accept that we cannot determine

learning, conversations, and ensuing actions (Maturana and Varela 1987; Maturana and Bunnell 1998; Ison

and Russell 2000; High 2002; Shaw 2002). We can influence, guide, and suggest. However, the evolutionary

paths of these relationships and conversations are indeterminable because they involve sensemakers engaging

in relationships, either with humans or with what Abram (1996) called the 'more-than-human world'.

A better approach to determine organisational learning, therefore, is to try creating the appropriate conditions

for enabling the emergence of organisational learning (Ison et al. 2001). I suspect that such enabling

conditions would include processes of invitation in the first instance. Following on from my understanding of

organisation and organisations, I view organisational learning in conversational terms (Glanville 1997; Boyd

1998). I define it as the conscious learning, interaction and decision-making of organisational members that

change organisation – that is to say, the patterns of interaction – and an organisation's structures. I understand

organisational learning to entail people together deciding on ongoing bases, in the light of their experience,

appropriate definitions of a situation, purposes, and standards to judge efficacy, efficiency, effectiveness,

elegance or 'fit', and ethics (Checkland 1994). I understand organisational learning to entail perceiving an

opportunity, inviting others to contribute and participate if appropriate, defining and understanding a

situation, specifying how the situation is to be engaged, acting in relationship to the situation, and reflecting

on the outcomes of actions according to negotiated standards of accomplishment. In this, I especially take my

cue from Reyes and Zarama's (1998) definition of learning as a 'process of embodying distinctions', the

- 43 -

notion of a 'systemic action-learning cycle' (Bell et al. 2000), and Zimmer's (2000) pattern of autonomy-

respecting conversations20. I discuss the latter in more depth in the next section.

Organisational learning theorists have often neglected to explore definitions of learning (di Stefano 2000),

despite there having been, for example, multiple definitions ranging from the cognitive to the social, situated,

and systemic definitions (Ison et al. 2000). I refer to all of these, including action-oriented and cultural

definitions (Pawlowsky 2001) 21. Organisational learning processes involve processes of becoming and

identity formation (Wenger 1998; di Stefano 2000), as much as skills and information acquisition. They

involve situated practices, by which socially constructed standards, tacitly assumed or explicitly specified by

observers, determine the attribution of accomplishment (Reyes and Zarama 1998). In addition, they expand

the capacities and possibilities available to learners (Krippendorff 1995; Bunnell 2002).

2.5.3 Managing conversations

In sections 2.5.1 and 2.5.2 above, I referred to organisations and organisational learning in conversational

terms. I refer to Ison and Russell's (2000) definition of a conversation as an interactive 'turning together'

between two or more individuals, in which both the presence of the other and 'the willingness to act together

in some mutually acceptable way' are acknowledged (p.22), and in which the outcomes are uncertain. I also

suggest that a conversation's participants experience a sense of a journey to their interaction that is more than

a mere encounter – they have the sense that they are 'going somewhere' even if they do not know precisely

where. Conversations are thus dynamic, exploratory, creative and indeterminate.

As I convey in section 2.8, I had experiences that led me to regard Zimmer's pattern of 'autonomy-respecting

conversations' to be incredibly pertinent to the practice of managing conversations (Zimmer and Chapman

2000). I find it pertinent in the context of TNS UK's facilitation activity, because, from my perspective, the

pattern raises questions about the kind of conversational dynamic potentially engendered by first-order

conceptions of reality22. Others and I often experienced TNS UK's facilitation of the understanding and use of

TNS' model of sustainability in first-order terms.

20 I also found a number of other authors helpful for understanding the notion of organisational learning (Argyris andSchon 1978; Vickers 1987; Checkland 1994; Espejo et al. 1996; Easterby-Smith 1997; Checkland and Holwell 1998;Denton 1998; Burton-Jones 1999; Checkland 1999; di Stefano 2000; Ison and Russell 2000; and Pawlowsky 2001).

21 A more in-depth discussion of theories of learning is beyond the scope of this thesis.

22 I discuss the distinction between first- and second-order research traditions in detail in Chapter 3.

- 44 -

Autonomy respecting conversations are invitational rather than coercive. Zimmer's pattern mirrors Bradbury's

model of co-operative ecological inquiry (Bradbury 1998), whereby the certainty of a TNS advocate could

render the experience of a conversation repressive, which undermines the advocacy of TNS. Zimmer's pattern

goes further, however, as is evident in Appendix 2 where I present and discuss the pattern in greater detail.

Conversational participants can also understand conversation in second-order terms whereby they reflect on

the trajectory of the conversation. They can perceive choices that are available for developing supportive

conversational practices. Participants can not only perceive the basic constituents of an autonomy-supporting

conversation – namely, invitations, comprehension, and expressions. They can also choose to respond in

ways that enhance the possibilities of sustaining a conversation, even when sensing dogma, demand or

judgement.

2.5.4 Barriers to organisational learning

Organisational members could experience a multiplicity of perspectives giving rise to confusion, poor

communication and conflict in their interactions, which could inhibit processes of organisational learning.

Berthoin Antal et al (2001) discerned three sets of barriers to organisational learning in their research, which

were interruption, psycho-cultural, and structural. As they argued, these barriers are closely interrelated and

need to be analysed as such if one is to address them effectively.

I frame my discussion by concentrating on the themes of interruption and structural barriers, given my

interest is primarily in matters of the reproduction and transformation of organisation and its structures, and

interpersonal relationship. For a discussion of psycho-cultural barriers I refer the reader to their work, and to

that of others (Argyris and Schon 1978; Senge 1990; Espejo et al. 1996).

Interruption in the fluidity of organisational learning processes can occur through an insufficient legitimacy,

capacity or receptivity given to someone to act on, or continue their, learning. Some might suggest that self-

organised learning would enhance the fluidity of organisational learning, even when this stretches

organisational members to accept discrepancies in perspectives and approaches. As such, this would build on

personal enthusiasms and dispositions (Ison and Russell 2000). Interruptions can occur when only parts of an

organisation learn but not the whole, and when particular moments heighten learning that the organisation

then forgets (ibid.). In addition, past learning can intertwine with organisational structures and power

relations to prevent the flow of new learning that might legitimately challenge the past learning.

In particular, organisational structures can inhibit organisational learning particularly by disrupting learning

and communication, and reinforcing psycho-cultural barriers. Whether an organisation's structure is more or

less hierarchical has seemed less important to whether structures enable effective communication between

individuals and groups over time (Espejo et al. 1996; Berthoin Antal et al. 2001). Poor communication will

- 45 -

inevitably inhibit creativity that arises from members interacting with reference to tacit and explicit

knowledge. From Berthoin Antal et al's (2001) four case studies, organisational learning 'requires networking

in every type of structure' (ibid. p.880). Cross functional opportunities for face to face exchanges, whereby

members construct meaning, over and above the implementation of strategic plans and the strict following of

rules and policies, are essential (Westley 1995).

Organisational structures that are not flexible enough will marginalise changing personal dispositions, needs

and situations (Hernes 1999). Moreover, they will not be responsive to changing environments (Westley

1995). As Hernes argued, 'the great challenge in creating more responsive organisations lies in improving

mechanisms by which members make sense of the information' or create their knowledge (Hernes 1999,

p.91). His research surfaced how those at ground level in one organisation made little use of information

provided by their headquarters.

I understand such discrepant structures to be classic barriers to organisational learning. Classic structural

inhibitors of organisational learning have included separation between functions, particularly between

designers and users, and policy-makers and practitioners (Ison 1995; Westley 1995; Hernes 1999). Such

inhibitors can arise when those tasked with realising a design, or implementing a policy, are not involved in

the creative processes of meaning-making that would have underlain their creation (Ison 1995; Checkland

and Holwell 1998). Gergen expressed this point too. What is critical for organisations, argued Gergen, is for

space to remain for 'a continuation of the dialogue and a revisioning of policies and practices' (Gergen 1999,

p.265). He suggested that

'maximal resilience must be placed on relational processes linking those responsible for the decision

or policy to those who will be affected. […] The decision-making process, then, should be

permeable, interactively embedded within the context of consequence.' (Gergen 1999, p.265-6)

Organisational members engaging in a process of OLSD could consciously devise flexible learning systems

for sustainable development (Hernes 1999; High 2002). This is a process of concern to various systems

thinkers and practitioners more associated with second-order systems traditions23 (Vickers 1987; Checkland

1994; Blackmore et al. 1998; Blackmore et al. 2000; Midgley 2000).

Clearly, there are significant complexities involved in contributing to, and managing, organisational learning,

related to the extent to which organisation and its structures facilitate communication and the discrepancies

that arise from multiple perspectives. Implicit are issues of power (Krippendorff 1995), and the importance of

23 See section 2.4.1.

- 46 -

trust amongst organisational members (Pawlowsky 2001). These issues are ones that few management

science approaches to organisational learning have addressed, according to Easterby-Smith (1997).

In summary, I adopt a conversational understanding of organisational learning. As I discuss in Chapter 3

relative to building research relationships, a conversational understanding of communication and learning

consists of people interpreting each other's meanings and dispositions, in relation to their contexts and

purposes, on ongoing bases. This understanding helps to narrow my evaluation focus, particularly onto

interactive communication in relation to organisation and its structures. Organisational learning from this

view entails interactive processes of making sense of a situation, of deciding what to do in the situation, of

acting, and of reflecting on the outcomes of actions at and across a variety of organisational levels. The better

an organisation is at facilitating interaction between its members and across organisational levels, the better

will it be at enabling organisational learning and optimising the realisation of purposes.

2.6 An 'aha moment' – encountering the notion of a conversational lineage

Fortunately, an appropriate metaphor that helped to make sense retrospectively of my research interest

emerged from late within the research process. It helped to clarify what I consider an effective sensemaking

device or 'sensitising concept' that builds on a conversational understanding of organisational learning.

Encountering the notion was an 'aha' moment, as it captured the thrust of my researching. The notion was that

of a conversational lineage, a metaphor that evokes the characteristics of recurring and inherited themes that

are discernible over time.

According to Bunnell, the idea of a conversational lineage rests on Maturana's theory of languaging, whereby

objects, distinctions, language and self-consciousness arise through 'recursive coordinations of consensual

coordinations' (Bunnell 2002). Particular objects and distinctions arise repeatedly over time, possibly in

different contexts; they persist, and thus become more familiar. Our sense of their 'objectivity' strengthens

(Maturana and Varela 1987).

I define a conversational lineage as a set of distinctions that persist through dynamic conversations over time.

A conversation thus might inherit discernible distinctions of a lineage from past conversations, which become

its resources in the present, and might provide resource for future conversations. Making distinctions

constitutes an inevitable part of living. The process is simple, involving the reification of something from its

background. The act helps to direct, situate, and ground processes of learning (Reyes and Zarama 1998; Ison

and Russell 2000). Sets of distinctions might arise and persist, for example, in relation to an academic

discourse relating to action research (Reason and Bradbury 2000a), or a project to build a well in an arid rural

area. I suggest that an observer discerns the characteristics of a conversational lineage, that is to say, its

constitutive elements and the extent to which it persists. I found the notion helpful in characterising the basic

- 47 -

unit of analysis in the context of this thesis. It became possible to create an analytical approach that surmised

the existence of conversational lineages around TNS' framework and the influence of TNS UK, as I discuss in

Chapter 4.

I suggest that a conversational lineage unfolds through recursive sensemaking in relation to emotions.

Consensual coordination, coexistence, conversation, and learning are relational activities (Maturana and

Bunnell 1998). We learn by making connections with 'the other' in the context of, and relative to, our own

history, understanding and practices (Reyes and Zarama 1998). Following Maturana's concept of the biology

of love, learning depends on love, whereby love is the domain 'in which the other arises as a legitimate other

in coexistence with oneself' (Maturana and Bunnell 1998; Bunnell 2002). Emotions are the ground to these

coordinations, being domains of relational behaviour that we feel internally (Maturana and Bunnell 1998;

Bunnell 2002). For example, we cannot kiss loved ones when angry.

2.6.1 Possibilities and constraints for the development of conversational lineages

In reflecting on the development of conversational lineages, I suggest the distinction between possibility and

constraint is helpful. In this, I follow Ceruti's book, Constraints and Possibilities, which explored the

influence of the evolutionary sciences on the philosophy of knowledge and reality (Ceruti 1994).

Ceruti suggested that a significant epistemological shift has occurred in the sciences, from a focus on the

classical notions of objectivity and necessity, to the observer-dependent idea of possibility. 'Once relegated to

a twilight zone of indeterminacy', the notion of possibility 'characterises the multiple developments of

contemporary science' (ibid. p.21). The notion of constraint, on the other hand, 'indicates the pre-existence of

conditions of a physical order which impose specific limitations on the forms and dimensions of organisms. It

also refers to a whole series of irreversible decisions which have been sedimented little by little throughout

the course of evolution' (ibid.). Moreover, a constraint 'participates in the construction of an integrated

structure that determines for the occasion a whole spectrum of intelligible new consequences' (quoted from

Prigogine and Stengers by Ceruti 1994, p.21)24.

With reference to the notion of conversational lineage, one can perceive constraints and possibilities at every

conversational turn. A conversational lineage – whether about a TNS-related understanding of sustainability

24 Systems' ideas – such as 'system', 'relationship', 'boundary', 'context', 'pattern of organisation', 'structure', 'structuralcoupling', 'co-evolution' and 'emergence'– that influenced my theorising also enabled a better understanding of constraintand possibility. New patterns of relationship and organisation within a company, and with the wider natural, social andeconomic worlds might emerge via people conducting 'sustainability conversations' and engendering the kinds ofpractices outlined in Appendix 3. These ideas come from the following authors: Capra (1996 and 2002); Ison andRussell (2000); Maturana and Varela (1987); Midgley (2000); and Lane et al. (2002a and b).

- 48 -

or not – develops in relation to conversational 'sediments' in its history, and according to the possibilities for

continuity invariably perceived, or not, by its participants. I doubt whether anything determines particular

conversational dynamics or a conversation's trajectory. Zimmer's second-order pattern of an autonomy-

respecting conversation discussed in Appendix 2 posits that a conversational process is one of constant

interaction and adaptation. Humans have the capacities for interpretation and negotiation, which can

influence the extent to which we make choices about pursuing and maintaining conversations. I suggest that

conversational participants experience ethics and imagination to be important ingredients to conversations as

well (Badaracco Jr. 2002, p.125).

The sediments of past conversations will not strictly constrain the evolution of conversational lineages in the

same way that biophysical constraints affect biophysical evolution. In the ongoing flow and evolution of any

given conversation, there is an undisturbed stream of perpetual invitations for its participants to continue the

conversation or not (R. Armson 2003, pers. comm.). If 'the conversation is the relationship', as it was for

Scott, then conversational participants will continually evaluate and make decisions about the extent to

which, and how, they wish to engage in further conversation (Scott 2002; Shaw 2002). Such constituents

influence the experience of, and contribute to the eventual outcomes from, a conversation. I suggest that

conversational lineages develop in relation to the emotions and resonance that the lineages have for their

participants.

Positive emotions such as enthusiasm would reflect past and present experiences, and future expectations, of

enabling organisational and structural factors for learning. Enthusiasm can be understood as a 'predisposition

to act' (Ison and Russell 2000). Hence, enthusiasm could be a good indicator of possibilities that might arise

as a result of OLSD with TNS UK. Frustration, on the other hand, could point to organisational and structural

constraints to learning. Having said that, there may also be the 'seeds of possibilities' for future action in those

situations that organisational members experienced frustrations. Anderson, for example, reflects on the idea

that crises can also be opportunities (Anderson 1998).

2.6.2 Conversational lineages and organisational learning

Our horizons, options, perspectives and capabilities thus expand through our relationships, interactions and

conversations with, and in relation to, the other. This expansion of possibilities can only arise if we go

beyond our familiar boundaries. We can thus understand learning as the 'transcendence of the familiar'. Thus,

adapting to a new situation, exploring a strange situation (Bouwen and Steyaert 1999), acquiring new skills,

innovating, improving current practices, developing new relationships, becoming more familiar with a

situation – these can all be classed as forms of transcending the familiar. Organisational learning could thus

be characterised as the emergence, evolution, improvement, and displacement of intra- and inter-

organisational conversational lineages that transcend the familiar.

- 49 -

We could regard conversational lineages in terms of them being either self-reinforcing or balancing cycles

(Lane et al. 2002b), which could be relevant to those trying to bring about positive change in organisations. A

story perfectly demonstrates the idea of a conversational lineage appearing to be self-reinforcing – see Box

2.1. I recount this story as a means to grounding the notion in someone's experience.

Box 2.1 From Taiwan to Halifax: the story of a conversational lineage. Mark told this story

from his experience in his after-dinner speech at TNS UK's Sustainability Masterclass in Cheltenham,

on 27th January 2003. I tell it here in the third person.

Mark worked for the largest manufacturer of carpet tiles in the world. There is a forty- percentchance that an office, library or hotel will have installed in it the carpet tiles produced by Mark'scompany.

He had been in Taiwan on business, and was facing a sixteen-hour flight back to the UK. He realisedhe would be sitting next to the same passenger for the whole flight and so he struck up someconversation. They found out what each other did, who they did it with, and where they did it.

Mark eventually introduced a subject close to his heart, namely that of the greenhouse effect. Heinquired whether his neighbour knew that flying by aeroplane was the most polluting form of masstransit known, in terms of the emissions it contributed to global warming. His neighbour said yes, hehad read about it somewhere. Did he know that planting trees helped to absorb the carbon gas emittedby flying? Yes, his neighbour had heard about that too. Mark continued. 'Did you know that thecompany I work for calculates my share of carbon gas emissions by my flying on this plane today,and the number of trees required to absorb my share?' His neighbour did not. 'Well, the company Iwork for will not only calculate those things. It will also actually plant the requisite number of treesto absorb my share. And, as a token gesture, it will plant as many trees as are required to absorbevery other passenger's share of carbon gas emissions by them flying on this plane today.'

What happened next was surprising. Mark's neighbour told his work colleague about what Mark'scompany was doing. The work colleague of Mark's neighbour told the person on the other side of theaisle from him, and she told the airhostess about what Mark's company was doing.

A few moments later, there was an announcement from the flight captain. 'Good morning, ladies andgentleman, we are currently cruising at 30,000 feet. As you can see, there is a clear sky, and we areexpecting a smooth journey back to London Heathrow. You might be interested to know that there isa passenger on board today who works for a company that will plant as many trees as are required toabsorb all the carbon gas emissions from this flight. This flight is therefore carbon neutral, and is notcontributing to the greenhouse effect. I personally would like to acknowledge what this person andhis company are doing to make the world a better place. Thank you for your attention, and I hope youhave a pleasant flight.'

A week later, Mark was back in his office near Halifax in Yorkshire, England, when he received aletter from the Chief Executive of the airline with which he flew – KLM. The chief executive askedhim whether the story about what Mark's company was doing was true. Mark, no doubt, followed upon this coup by giving the Chief Executive a call.

- 50 -

The question that arises for me through engaging with the story in Box 2.1 is, 'what was it that enabled

Mark's conversation to develop into a conversational lineage?' My answers are speculative, but I think

reasonable because they arise from second-order theories of communication and sensemaking. I suspect Mark

was open to his neighbour in such a way that the other (his neighbour) felt legitimised in coexistence with

him (Bunnell 2002). His neighbour probably experienced Mark's conversation as invitational, understanding,

and authentic, rather than dogmatic, judgemental and demanding (Zimmer and Chapman 2000).

In addition, Mark provided his neighbour with a sense of possibility through his conversation. This is what

Bradbury called an engaging vision that a conversational participant is then able to relate to his or her own

experience, and perhaps evoke a related vision that is particularly relevant to him or her (Bradbury 1998).

Others experienced an enticement for change in Mark's story. He thus had awakened his neighbour's

imagination, just as Robèrt had done for business people after telling them about TNS' framework.

It is worth mentioning that I distinguish between a conversational lineage and what Boje called 'antenarrative'

(Boje 2001), and Gabriel's definition of a story (Gabriel 2000). According to Boje, antenarrative is the pre-

linguistic, messy, and interactive realm from which narratives, stories (and I would add conversational

lineages) emerge. Gabriel defined stories as containers for values, meanings and symbols with a beginning,

middle and end. In contrast, I regard a conversational lineage as a legacy of distinctions. This is much like

Ison and Russell's idea of a 'tradition of understanding' (Russell and Ison 2000b), and Gummesson's notion of

'pre-understanding' (Gummesson 2000), but perhaps operating at a more micro-level. Having said that, I

believe stories can have the same effects as conversational lineages, as I convey in section 2.7.

2.6.3 The relevance of conversational lineages for this research

The notion of the conversational lineage is relevant in my research for a number of reasons:

n Conversations both constitute and contribute to specific activities, and orient trajectories of

sustainable development through time. This follows Bradbury's (1998) thesis and my observations.

n Intra-organisational conversations in which there are genuine opportunities for free flowing, open-

ended, exploratory and mutually reflective encounters are at a premium. This was others and my

observation both before and during the research. Being an important resource makes them a relevant

locus for evaluating TNS UK's influence.

n 'Learning with TNS' framework' can bring benefits of some kind. This observation comes from

previous research such as Nattrass' (1999). A TNS-related conversational lineage might therefore

signify, for example, financial benefits from eco-efficiency measures, token benefits of associating with

TNS UK, or possible motivational benefits from the belief of contributing to sustainability.

- 51 -

n Conversations that evolved into intra- and inter-organisational, TNS-related conversational

lineages and stories reflect a trajectory of organisational learning with TNS' framework. The

interactions where TNS-related distinctions persisted over time could reflect the extent of a self-

sustaining virtuous cycle of OLSD that occurs with or without the partnership of TNS UK.

n Frustration, indications of difficulties in communication, or the lack of discernible TNS-related

organisational activities might signify organisational and structural constraints to organisational

learning with TNS. An important question that I was alive to from the beginning of the research

concerned the emotions others conveyed in telling their stories, relating their experiences, and sharing

their perspectives relative to their organisation's trajectory of sustainable development. Asking the

question retrospectively using the notion of a conversational lineage, it becomes: what emotional

qualities wove through the conversational lineages in which there were explicit references, or echoes of,

TNS' framework? An appreciation of emotional qualities enables understanding of constraints and

possibilities of learning with TNS UK in Pathfinder Company contexts (see 2.6.2).

n The richer, more poignant, more reified, or more resonant25 a TNS-related conversational lineage,

the more likely it would influence strategy, decisions and activities. By rich conversational lineage, I

mean one involving clear emotions, TNS-related distinctions, multiple organisational members and their

perspectives, and ongoing activities. Rich TNS-related conversational lineages or stories could help

assess the extent of TNS UK's influence. This is perhaps the most important rationale for using the

notion of conversational lineage to evaluate OLSD with TNS UK.

This latter expectation arose particularly from theories of situated learning, organisational sensemaking, and

storytelling in organisations (Weick 1995; Wenger 1998; Weick 1999; Gabriel 2000; Wenger 2000; Boje

2001; Denning 2002). This expectation helped me to define a model of OLSD.

2.7 Developing a model of OLSD

My rationale for developing a model of OLSD was to help locate conversational lineages in organisational

processes of contributing, ultimately, to societal sustainability. The model is one of the significant outcomes

from this thesis. The qualitative, graphical model I develop is a tentative heuristic. That is to say, I designed

the model to help inquire into how sustainable development in organisations takes place. I follow this

definition of a model:

25 Each of these indicators is qualitative, and subjectively and inter-subjectively assessed.

- 52 -

'A simplified representation of some person's or group's view of a situation, constructed to assist in

the working with that situation in a systemic manner'. (Morris and Chapman 2002, p.9)

A 'systemic' approach entails engaging with a situation in which there are perceived to be multiple actors with

varying interests, multiple influences, a range of decision-making processes and networks, and sets of

dynamic relationships that are 'irreducible' to sets of separate component parts (Armson et al. 2000). They are

situations from which 'complex systems' can be constructed26, in which interactions between component parts

'create the possibility that new, self-organizing behaviours will emerge' (ibid. p.80). When conceptualising a

complex system, 'severing any of the connections linking its parts usually destroys essential aspects of the

system behaviour or structure' (ibid.).

Apart from sensemaking and the organisation and organisational learning theories discussed above in section

2.5, other aspects from the literature helped in consolidating a model of OLSD. I understood systems

theories, stakeholder engagement, conversation theories, and negotiation to be relevant.

I agreed with those who argue that stakeholder engagement is important because stakeholders are the prime

constituents that legitimise, or de-legitimise, the reputation of a company and its brand (Hart 1999).

Companies that enact practices of corporate social responsibility could view themselves as 'conversational

corporations' (Zadek 2001). Organisational members of a conversational corporation negotiate between

themselves and through interaction with stakeholders their boundaries of responsibility, the standards for

improvement in practices27, and the ongoing evaluation of those practices. Extra-organisational stakeholders

can also become spurs of innovation (Sabapathy et al. 2002). One can regard TNS UK as an external

stakeholder of its Pathfinder Companies.

I posit that organisational members and stakeholders interact, preferably directly and actively so as to avoid

threats to the organisation (Kädtler 2001), concurrently with processes of sensemaking. Their sensemaking

contributes to, occurs in relation with, and in response to, their systemic contexts, a notion from systems

literature that concerns system-environment relationships (Lane et al. 2002b). A system's environment, or

context, can include technological, natural, socio-economic, political and regulatory systems, depending on

26 I follow Lane et al's (2002b) definition of a system as a set of interacting parts within a system boundary, set apartfrom an environment, and distinguished by observers with an interest in the system.

27 I give a list of examples of management and operational practices that might enable and constitute a process ofcorporate sustainable development in Appendix 3. These include 'responsible investment' (Ekins 2000), 'leasing ratherthan selling manufactured goods' (Anderson 1998), and 'managing by means rather than targets' (Johnson and Bröms2000). In keeping with the philosophy of TNS' framework, I do not prescribe these practices as definitive examples ofcorporate sustainable development – hence, I relegate them to an appendix.

- 53 -

their delineation by observers (Blackmore et al. 1998; Checkland 1999; Bawden 2000)28. These contexts not

only provide the resource for, but are also influenced by and constituted through, actors' sensemaking (Weick

1995). In addition, I suggest that conversational lineages give rise to the standards by which practices are

judged. For example, they give rise to standards of quality, relevance, improvement, and ethics.

To make sense of an OLSD process, I first tried to diagram the influences on and causes between constituent

entities in terms of influence and multiple cause diagrams (Lane et al. 2002a). However, I found these

influences and causes to appear highly inter-related, and therefore found little definition.

I therefore devised an 'interaction grid'29. This helped to specify the relationships between actors (in this case

stakeholders and organisational members), constituent processes of sensemaking, negotiation, evaluation, and

improvement, and contexts that I understood to influence directly the process of OLSD. The grid was a

device to bring coherence to what appeared to be a nebulous set of relationships, and I include it here to

convey how I structured my inquiry – see Table 2.1. Top row items constituted an 'actor' (the subject), each

cell in the grid constituted an activity (the verb), and the right-hand column items constituted the 'acted upon'

(the object). The dynamics described in each cell specify the influence of the top row items on the right-hand

column items. For example, reading from the first, left-hand column, organisational members interact with

external stakeholders.

The grid helped me to scrutinise the influence of each actor, process and context. The grid revealed what

were uni-directional influences. For example, external stakeholders do not directly influence inter- and intra-

organisational conversational lineages, but the latter provide references for external stakeholders.

The grid also clarified what are all encompassing influences and what are distinctive influences. For example,

organisation and its structures affect constraints and possibilities for everything else except stakeholders.

Improvements in practices, on the other hand, can reinforce the development of conversational lineages but

can give meaning to organisational members.

28 In some senses, one can regard organisations and their structures as contextual to organisational members. However,taking organisations and their structures as my 'system of interest' (Lane 2002b), everything that is outside theorganisational boundaries discerned by observers is contextual. Of course, not everyone will have a clear, or the same,definition of an organisation's boundaries (Ison 2000a).

29 The idea of an interaction grid arose in conversation with a colleague in the Systems Discipline at the OU.

- 54 -

Table 2.1 An inter-action grid exploring relationships in a process of OLSD.

Organisationalmembers

Externalstakeholders

Organisation andits structure

Sensemaking Negotiation

Improvements in,and standards for

evaluatingimprovements in,

practices

Systemic contexts– political,

regulatory, socio-economic,

ecological andliving

Inter- and intra-organisationalconversational

lineages

Interact withSet constraints on,threats to, and offer

possibilities for

Frames perceptionsof Sets agendas of

Give meaning toactivities of, and

motivate

Set constraints on,threats to, and offer

possibilities for

Frame identities,activities, histories,

experiences,perceptions and

agendas of

Organisationalmembers

Interact with Frames perceptionsof

Set expectations ofProvide exemplarsfor, and influence

expectations ofinform Provide references

forExternal

stakeholders

create Gives rise toSet constraints on,threats to, and offer

possibilities forEnsure continuity of Organisation and its

structure

Inevitably engage in Inevitably engage inSet constraints on,threats to, and offer

possibilities forGives rise to Legitimise sense

that comes from


possibilities for

Recursivelyconstitute

Sensemaking

Engage in Engage inSet constraints on,threats to, and offer

possibilities forframes informs


possibilities forNegotiation

enact MonitorSet constraints on,threats to, and offer

possibilities forframes Defines


possibilities forSet expectations for

Improvements in,and standards for

evaluatingimprovements in,

practices

Make sense of Make sense ofSet constraints on,threats to, and offer

possibilities for

Mediatesperceptions of

Changesrelationship with

Systemic contexts –political, regulatory,

socio-economic,ecological and living

Participate inSet constraints on,threats to, and offer

possibilities for

Recursivelyconstitutes

Recursivelydetermines

Can reinforce

Inter- and intra-organisationalsustainability

conversationallineages

- 55 -

The interaction grid became a stepping stone to my developing an interactivity diagram30. An interactivity

diagram specifies the active relationships between nodes. Unlike influence diagrams, an interactivity diagram

does not focus on temporal aspects, and does not concentrate on causal mechanisms in unidirectional terms,

as do the causal links in multiple cause diagrams (Lane et al. 2002a). Moreover, an interactivity diagram

attests to a myriad of relationships – unlike 'sign graph' or 'causal loop' diagrams (ibid.), which confine

themselves to describing only reinforcing or balancing dynamics between nodes.

Developing my heuristic model of OLSD in the form of an interactivity diagram was a process that went

through a number of iterations until I reached simplicity and coherence in a final version, as in Figure 2.1. I

rationalised and transformed some of the elements of the interaction grid in this iterative process, such that:

• 'Negotiation' became implicit in interactions between organisational members and external stakeholders,

and in the development of conversational lineages and standards; I thus discarded it as a unique node or

interaction;

• 'Sensemaking' became a relational activity between what I regarded as the most appropriate nodes (i.e.

organisational members, stakeholders and systemic contexts), rather than a node in itself;

• I separated out 'improvements in, and standards for evaluating improvements in, practices' into two

separate nodes, such that it became 'practices' and 'standards'. The notion of improvements therefore

becomes implicit in the diagram;

• I discarded representing interactions between 'practices' and 'systemic contexts' on the basis that they are

obviously implicit;

• I therefore also discarded representing an interaction between external stakeholders and organisational

practices because I thought that representing an interaction between stakeholders and their systemic

contexts would be sufficient; and,

• I discarded representing interactions between 'organisation and its structures' and 'practices' on the basis

that the interaction between them is mediated by the negotiation of implicit or explicit standards and the

framing activity that these standards have on practices.

30 As with the interactivity grid, I devised the interactivity diagram as a result of a conversation with a colleague in theSystems Discipline.

- 56 -

Figure 2.1 An interactivity diagram depicting a model of OLSD

The arrows in the diagram denote some form of interaction between the nodes. I include'stories' (in brackets after conversational lineages) because, while they are distinct fromconversational lineages as I have argued, they can arise from, and have similarinfluences to, conversational lineages.

Significantly, the diagram conveys the notion that conversational lineages mediate between organisational

members on the one hand, and the creation and maintenance of an organisation's organisation and its

structures on the other. This made sense, to my mind, adding depth to the theory of organisation I discussed

in 2.5. Organisation therefore not only consists of persistent patterns of conversation, but also the persistence

of particular distinctions over time, that is to say particular conversational lineages.

The OLSD model clearly portrays the idea that the conversational networks of individuals, and their

emerging lineages, constitute an organisation's organisation, and sustain, threaten and transform organisation

and organisational structures. I argue this accords with Bradbury's dialogic model of co-operative ecological

Members

Standards

Practices

Systemiccontexts

Organisation andits structures

Stakeholders

Conversationallineages (&

stories)

interactwith

interactwith

make sense of,reproduce and

change

make sense of, reproduce, andchange

set constraintson, threats to,

and offerpossibilities for



set constraints on,threats to, and offers

possibilities for



negotiating

sustain, threatenor transform

giverise to

interact, such thatthey participate in,

generate andtransform

frame

inform sense ofpossibilities forimprovementsin

enacteffectmoraleof

inform

- 57 -

inquiry, which she based on her linking of dialogue with structuration theory (Bradbury 1998). It also takes

up where her model left off by focusing specifically on organisational as opposed to interpersonal and social

contexts. I found the notion of 'quiet leadership' helpful in theorising about the significance of each individual

(Badaracco Jr. 2002). Anyone can be a 'quiet leader' in the dilemmas of everyday managing and the perceived

complexity of decision making, regardless of whether or not they are 'thought-leaders' or 'key decision-

makers' (Bradbury 1998; Nattrass 1999; Nattrass and Altomare 2002). The model therefore shows individuals

rather than organisations as the main actors in a process of OLSD. This conforms to Gergen's insight that the

individual becomes the 'common locus for a multiplicity of relationships' when considering organisational

dimensions of global change (Gergen 1999, p.265). He suggested these relationships determine the

intelligibility of decision making and activities.


In this chapter, I explained that TNS advocates have not specified how practitioners should implement

TNS' framework and reviewed previous research into decision making and organisational learning

with TNS. I went on to discuss relevant literature to forming an evaluation focus, and recounted an

'aha moment' when an indicator for organisational learning, the conversational lineage, came into

sharp focus. I developed a model of organisational learning for sustainable development (OLSD) that

justifies the relevance of a conversational lineage as an indicator of organisational learning. I expect

that any evidence of a rich TNS-related conversational lineage discussed by perhaps more than one

organisational member would reflect a lineage that was salient in the wider organisation. By wider

organisation, I mean the spaces 'in between' organisational members and beyond my interviewing.

The model of OLSD is a second-order model in that it attends to relational, intersubjective and

interpretive dynamics. Such dynamics underlie second-order notions of systems thinking, which I

discussed in my critique of Bradbury's (1998) thesis in 2.4.1. I think the model of OLSD complements

TNS' first-order model of sustainability very well. Bradbury noted that an uninviting certainty makes

TNS-advocacy conversations unattractive. I agree and suggest that this kind of certainty, which can

border on dogmatism, arises from epistemological assumptions about the possibility of certainty that

are closely tied to first-order traditions. The distinction between first- and second-order research

traditions is something I explicate at the beginning of the next chapter.

Being aware of the pattern of autonomy supporting conversations discussed in 2.5.3 enlivens second-

order notions, in my experience. Since encountering the pattern, I have been able to diagnose more

easily the effects on a conversation of what have been, from my perspective, first-order conceptions of

reality. For example, a conversational participant who claims 'this is how the world is' might not be

signalling an invitation for someone else to share his or her perspective. I am thus trying to develop a

practice of signalling, 'this is how the world is from my perspective'. In addition, someone who says

- 58 -

'you should approach the problem like this' might be making demands that another might experience

as judgemental. I am thus trying to develop a practice of inviting the other to share their perspective,

for example, by asking, 'what do you think is the best way to approach the problem? Would you like to

know what I think?' These questions issue an invitation and signal my willingness to understand the

other's perspective. My experiences of using the pattern as a heuristic device have given me a sense of

liberation, and potential liberation, from conversations that I might have otherwise experienced as

repressive. I now have the choice whether or not to perceive someone else who claims 'this is how the

world is' as someone who is being dogmatic or is expressing an authentic personal perspective. This is

not to say that the pattern is a cure-all, and his pattern operates on a non-interruptive, equitable

plateau devoid of the issue of power differentials (Krippendorff 1995). My experience suggests,

however, that attending to the management of opportunities for invitation, expression, and

understanding can help 'open spaces for learning' (High 2002), in such a way as to make

consideration of power differentials possible. These experiences contribute to my exploration into the

implications of this research for TNS UK in Chapter 7.

The most significant insight for me that the idea of a conversational lineage gives is the implication

that our everyday conversations carry within them the seeds of our future. If conversational lineages

n sustain, threaten or transform organisation and its structures;

n give rise to standards of evaluation;

n inform a sense of possibilities for improvements in practice; and,

n effect the morale of organisational members,

as predicted in my model of OLSD, then attending to the feel, dynamics, and directions of our

conversations becomes critical. This is a point picked up by Scott, who claimed that 'the conversation

is the relationship' (Scott 2002).

In Chapter 3, I discuss the methodological underpinnings to, the methods for, and the practices of my

researching.

- 59 -

Chapter 3 Building researching relationships with members of TNS

UK and their Pathfinder Companies

3.1 Introduction

3.2 First and second-order research traditions

3.2.1 First and second-order research traditions

3.2.2 Related conceptions of communication

3.2.3 Locating myself for this research

3.3 Methodological underpinnings

3.3.1 Pragmatism

3.3.2 Embodied and relational realism

3.3.3 Social constructionism

3.3.4 Critical, humanistic and action-oriented

3.4 Methods-in-practice

3.4.1 Interviewing

3.4.2 Participant observation

3.4.3 Desk research and personal reflection

3.4.4 Treatment of the data

3.5 Three emergent phases of inquiry

3.5.1 First, 'getting to know' phase

3.5.1.1 Emergent questions for researching

3.5.2 Second, 'coal face' phase

3.5.3 Third, 'in-deeper' phase


3.1 Introduction

This thesis reflects the emergent inquiry that was my studentship. The studentship evolved via my

researching relationships with members of TNS UK and their Pathfinder Companies, via relevant literature,

and from my attending associated events. These relationships were like a web that sustained and framed my

investigations, and enabled me to develop a means to assess OLSD.

In this chapter, I discuss the methodology that underpinned my research strategy and practice, the research

methods I adopted, and the researching journey that I underwent. I begin with a section on 'meta-

methodology' in 3.2, in which I discuss two broad inquiry traditions – namely, those of first- and second-

- 60 -

order research that are closely tied in with assumptions about communication and learning. I have tended

toward the latter, second-order tradition in my research. In section 3.3, I orient myself in relation to well-

established methodological positions – namely, those of realism, social constructionism, pragmatism and

critical approaches. In section 3.4, I discuss my methods-in-practice, which paves the way for section 3.5, in

which I portray the pathways that I went down in undertaking my research journey.

3.2 Two research traditions

A number of authors have highlighted marked differences between positivist and interactionist traditions of

researching (Silverman 1985). Russell and Ison (2000a,b) went one step further, distinguishing between first-

and second-order traditions. The differences between a first- and second-order tradition revolve around issues

of relationship, responsibility, context, communication, and participation.

3.2.1 First and second-order research traditions

First-order approaches tend toward realist epistemologies, and reify systematic interventionist assumptions

about how to solve real-world problems. According to Russell and Ison, they 'describe the system [of interest

to the researcher] as if it was an objective set of operations functioning independently of its historical and

social creation' (Russell and Ison 2000a, p.209). Second-order approaches, in contrast, emphasise a view of

the social world in which matters of process, history, context and the researcher's purpose become as relevant

as accurate representation. Acknowledging the researcher in the researching is more in tune with a second-

order research tradition, what High (2002) referred to as 'declaring the observer' (p.42). I refer to a list of

authors, whose writings helped me make sense of Russell and Ison's distinction between first- and second-

order traditions, in Table 3.1.

The first-order tradition has been the predominant mode of education that objectifies knowledge, disembodies

particular relational and emotional dynamics, and treats the student as a consumer with a knowledge deficit

(Russell and Ison 2000b). In this mode, there is little opportunity to acknowledge student – or teacher, for that

matter – perspectives, emotions and experience as bases for understanding, building relationship and

collaboration (Fell and Russell 2000).

Second-order approaches tend toward participative action research (Reason and Bradbury 2000b). Moreover,

these approaches regard action research as a means to improving a situation from the perspectives of its

participants (Checkland 1994). They attend to emotional dispositions as much as they do to rationality (Fell

and Russell 2000). They operate through an ethic of invitation and acceptance of the Other as a legitimate co-

researcher (Ison and Russell 2000). Specifying the situation becomes an acknowledged, appreciative act, in a

second-order approach, which stresses facts-as-perceptions rather than as objective representations. They

- 61 -

emphasise that interpretation determines situation definitions, decisions and activities, which influence

research outcomes. They also acknowledge political considerations, but are perhaps more social than political

(Bunnell 2002).

Table 3.1 Two research traditions as distinguished by the following authors. Only some ofthese authors used the terms, 'first-' and 'second-order tradition', but I believe that the perspectives ofthose who did not also correspond with the distinction.

Authors First-order tradition Second-order tradition

Argyris and Schön (1978)Researchers engage indeviation-correcting learning(single-loop learning)

Researchers exploreassumptions, values andpurposes, and learn how to learn

Maturana and Varela (1987)

Science is an observer-independent activity, in which itis irrelevant who makes a claim;language is representational

Science is observer-dependent;what is said is said by somebodyto someone else; language is aprocess of co-ordinatingbehaviour

von Foerster (1992)An observer is apart from theuniverse; language isrepresentational

An observer is a part of theuniverse; language is self-referential

Krippendorff (1993, 1995)Explanations arerepresentational and context-independent

Explanations are relational,contextual, and part of ongoingconversations

Schön (1995) Researchers operate on atechnical high-ground

Researchers operate in aswampy, socially-relevantlowland

Wadsworth (1997) Researching takes place 'on'others

Researching takes place 'with'others

Maturana and Bunnell (1998)

An observer adopts an'engineering look' at the worldwithout awareness of his/herparticipation in the observed

An observer adopts a 'poeticlook' at the world withawareness of his or herparticipation in the observed

Checkland (1999)Systems exist in the world, withinquiry having a descriptive goal

Systems are heuristicmethodological devices fororganising inquiry

Ison and Russell (2000)A researcher is separate fromthe 'system' under consideration

A researcher grounds inexperience and context theconcepts used to define and act,and takes responsibility for theseconceptualisations

- 62 -

3.2.2 Related conceptions of communication

Conceptions of knowing and learning will have profound implications for how one evaluates, and catalyses,

organisational learning. As implied in Table 3.1, different understandings of knowing and learning are close

to understandings of communication.

Table 3.2 conveys two metaphors of linear communication – namely, information transfer and information

exchange. These types are what I called first-order communication, owing to the realist assumptions of clear

translation rules, and the irrelevance of context for expression and interpretation.

Table 3.3 depicts two self-referential approaches to communication. The first approach of these depicts self-

referential communication that can occur within autonomous living systems in the form of self-reflection, or

in manmade devices such as thermostats in which the device compares inputs with pre-set standards and

prescribes outputs accordingly. I refer to both as types of regulation. The second approach depicts a

conversation between two or more autonomous living systems. I refer to these types of conversation as

second-order types of communication because they are sensitive to context and they embody relationality,

perspective and processes of interpretation. Accordingly, communication is an open-ended process of

interpretation relative to our own individual inherited identities and structures and the history of distinctions

we have made and make (Maturana and Varela 1987). It is not a process of information transfer and

knowledge acquisition. This view tends to interactive and conversational notions of perception,

understanding and learning. 'Languaging' is a social activity, and what might appear as representations are

actually an inherited consensus. The familiarity we experience arises less from the world as it is apart from

us, and more from the patterns of regularity that we experience, and to which we choose to orient. We make

these choices based on our emotions and relational connections with the world, and not on objective realities

that are separate from us. Communication thus constitutes a process of coordination of structural similarities

brought about through the mutually negotiated coordination of interactions. Some have appropriately referred

to this process as a conversational dance, as opposed to an information exchange (Ison and Russell 2000).

In traditional linguistics, 'language planners' might attend to the 'referential', 'systematic', 'social' and

'environmental adequacy' of our language. These foci sit well with a view of language in which language

'provides a fixed public code for exchanging verbal messages between the members of some community that

subscribes to (and maintains) its use' (Harré et al. 1999, p.43). Integrationists in contrast to traditionalists

propose 'the primary function of language is to enable human beings to develop communication processes

that are intrinsically open-ended and necessarily involve nonverbal as well as verbal components' (ibid.). For

integrationists, language is an open system. Likewise, Maturana and Varela's (1987) process-oriented view of

language places greater emphasis on emotions and moods implicit in communication.

- 63 -

Table 3.2 Forms of 'first-order communication'. I define communication as interaction,

despite these two first-order forms entailing limited interaction in the true sense of the word. These

forms are epitomised in modernist information theory, but have long historical roots. They have

underlain many assumptions related to objectivity and meaning in science (see Roszak 1999, for

example) and economics.

Communication type Characteristics Examples and their sources

Information Transfer

• Linear

• Clear and accepted

rules for encoding and

decoding

• Hierarchical

• TV broadcasting (Krippendorff 1993;

Ingold 1995; Bouwen and Steyaert

1999)

• Extension of R&D (Ison and Russell

2000)

• 'Classroom learning'

Information Exchange

• Clear and accepted

rules for encoding and

decoding

• Signals can be

different

• Networked

• Non-hierarchical

• www (Naughton 1999)

• Telephone lines

• Economic transactions

Given that the metaphors we use and 'live by' influence and guide our practice (McClintock 1996; Lakoff and

Johnson 1999), linear metaphors of communication can result in a conversational dynamic that some

experience as un-welcoming and coercive. Conceptions of learning as knowledge transference hold the

assumption that knowledge passes from the informed and masterful teacher, manager or policy-maker to the

uninformed and unable pupil, member of staff or practitioner (Hernes 1999; Ison and Russell 2000). The

speaker assumes him or herself as the expert while there is a blank slate on the part of the listener.

Sender Receiver

Signal

- 64 -

Table 3.3 Forms of 'second-order communication'. I define second-order communication as

involving self-referential, circular interactions. 'Regulation' is important in manufacturing, for

example, whereby humans monitor and regulate actions in the light of purposes and the criteria they

choose to evaluate actions, relative to purposes. I take 'conversation' to be a primary form of

communication; it entails self-referential interaction as well as interaction with other autonomous

living systems. I understand it to be at the heart of the story of the emergence of Life outlined in Box

1.1.

Communication type Characteristics Examples and their sources

Regulation• Monitoring

direction• Sender is also

receiver

• Self-referential

• Thermostat / steersman (Lane et al.2002)

• Production line quality monitoring(Johnson and Bröms 2000)

• Single-loop learning (Argyris andSchon 1978)

• Personal reflective practice (Schön1983)

Conversation• Interactive

• Negotiableconstraints

• Interpretive• Complex

• Fuzzyboundaries

• Possiblyemergent

• Open to learning• Potentially

transformative• Mutual

• Unpredictable• Appreciative• Exploratory• Dynamic

• Relational

• Daily conversation (Scott 2002;

Shaw 2002)• Dinner party• Middle Eastern market place• Improvising comedy

• Appreciative systems research(Vickers 1983, 1987; Checkland andScholes 1990; Checkland andHolwell 1998; Checkland 1999)

• Group dynamics• Double and triple-loop learning

(Argyris and Schon 1978)• Authentic participative researching

(Ison and Russell 2000)• Reflective encounters (Anderson

1997)

Comingtogether

Interaction

Transformingconstraints andpossibilities

- 65 -

In contrast to first-order notions of communication, therefore, second-order ideas view differences in

perspective and interpretation as biological and social inevitabilities. A second-order tradition avoids the

problems associated with both subjectivity and objectivity (Russell and Ison 2000b). A second-order

approach to communication and research finds a middle way between solipsism and objectivism, both of

which, in Krippendorf’s view (1999), are antisocial. Instead, a second-order perspective is one of embodied

relationality, where two observers face each other and can choose to 'acknowledge each other’s presence'

(ibid. p.138). It echoes notions of constructivism (Shaw 1999), social constructionism (Shotter 1993, 1998),

and management ideas on sensemaking (Weick 1995).

3.2.3 Locating myself for this research

Operating within a first-order research tradition, I could have assumed that those 'learning with TNS UK'

were acquiring knowledge from TNS UK via some kind of knowledge conduit, like water flowing through a

pipe. With this metaphor, what goes in one end is the same as what comes out of the other (Krippendorff

1993). Another popular metaphor used to describe this process stems from digital information theory. It

assumes a sender encodes messages and intended meanings using context-independent rules, sends the

message to a recipient, who receives it and who then decodes it according to the same context-independent

rules used by the sender (Ingold 1995). I thus could have engaged members of TNS UK's Pathfinder

Companies as if they were 'engines, fuelled by TNS UK's imparted knowledge', that 'carry out the work of

sustainable development' thereafter. Under this metaphor, the evaluation would have entailed my checking to

see whether they had the 'right amount and kind of fuel in their tanks'. Then I would tick the appropriate

boxes to ensure the operation of the engines was smooth according to whatever operational standards of

corporate sustainable development I would choose as a yardstick.

Unfortunately, both first-order metaphors – of the conduit and of data-transmission – conceal the interpretive

processes that are inescapably human. Our neurobiological structures will always entail interpretation in the

light of our historied biological, experiential and intellectual structures. I thought Krippendorff to be right in

pointing out that the conduit metaphor of learning denies the learner their capacity and tendency to derive

their own meaning from and interpretation of what is offered. By adopting a first-order research approach, I

perhaps would not have been so open to how members of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies could adapt TNS'

framework to their own situations. I perhaps would have been blind to the ways in which they found TNS'

framework to be meaningful, useful, and appropriate, or not, based on their experiences.

For some, second-order notions are particularly appropriate for considering the 'organisational dimensions to

global change' and sustainable development (Bouwen and Steyaert 1999; Gergen 1999; Kaczmarski and

Cooperrider 1999; Weick 1999). For example, Bouwen and Steyaert propose the notion of 'polyphony' as a

- 66 -

metaphor for imagining organisational forms for global change. The notion 'suggests a relational world of

harmony in which all voices are balanced and equilibrated' (Bouwen and Steyaert 1999, p.311).

Bradbury's emphasis on dialogic forms of social change that I discussed in Chapter 2.4.1 corresponded with

second-order, conversational forms of learning and inquiry, although her conception of systems thinking

appeared first-order. Other researchers investigating what I have called OLSD also appeared to operate

primarily within a first-order tradition, treating communication as something to be controlled, and

sustainability training as an activity entailing the imparting of information (e.g. Winter and Steger 1997).

Some, for example, described 'sustainability literacy' in an organisational learning context as

'a significant number of individuals having a basic level of knowledge and understanding about what

sustainable development means for their organisation and how to apply that knowledge in the

workplace […]. Corporate sustainability literacy requires the ability to mobilise, renew, refresh and

challenge corporate knowledge.' (Courtice and Swift 2002, p.95)

Where attention to communication was apparent (e.g. Clarke and Roome 1999; McIntosh and Arora 2001), I

found the treatment scant and often self-contradictory1.

Moreover, I thought it appropriate to avoid setting expectations on what specific organisational practices

those learning with TNS UK should or should not enact. This is not to say that I did not have clear ideas as to

what constitutes the practices of corporate sustainable development; I did – see Appendix 3. Avoiding

expectations was appropriate in the light of the lack of specificity of the designers of TNS' framework

regarding its implementation (see section 2.3). As Webber pointed out, imposing pre-determined measures

for pre-determined outcomes is an aspect of first-order research (Webber 2000). Second-order research, in

contrast, aims to listen to what is important to those involved in the research, and to evaluate why the

research might be meaningful for them.

This is not to say I discarded aspects of the well-established first-order research tradition. Indeed, I aimed to

retain the best of a first-order tradition – for example, a commitment to thoroughness. Having said that, I

found a number of second-order ideas particularly helpful. For example, second-order ideas sensitised me to

how others made sense of, and negotiated their roles and responsibilities in their daily practices in the light

of, their learning with TNS UK. These included the idea that knowing and learning occur as part of an

individual's sensemaking amidst ongoing manners of unique 'structural coupling', relative to his or her own

history as an embodied being (Maturana and Varela 1987). They included the idea that practitioners brought

1 I therefore chose not to include a review of these authors in Chapter 2.

- 67 -

with them their own patterns of perceiving and experiencing that arise from their various traditions of

understanding (Ison and Russell 2000) – for example, engineering or human 'resource' management. They

included the idea that one person's structural coupling in one organisational domain would be different to that

of another person in the same domain. In addition, they included the idea that an individual's structural

coupling would be different for the same person in different organisations, cultures, departments or project

teams.

Importantly, the second-order ideas I have outlined led me to vigilance. The status of my conceptions of the

social world would inevitably influence how I approach the social world. A second-order approach thus tries

to account for the origins, purposes, and anticipated futures of the conceptualisation process itself, just as

much as it does for the so-called empirical world to which these conceptualisations give rise (Russell and

Ison 2000a). I thus outlined the influences on my search for a means of evaluating OLSD with TNS UK in

Chapter 2. In addition, I discuss methodological underpinnings to my research in the next section, one of

which is the retention of the notion of empirical reality.

3.3 Methodological underpinnings

Research inevitably takes place in particular contexts at particular moments in time, and is done by people

who perceive only a small slice of, and have a particular perspective on, any given situation. My inquiry was

partial. I agreed with the claim that 'there are no purely objective discovery procedures for anything. We are

not equipped with the gift of immaculate perception' (Harré et al. 1999, p.100). In addition, research arises

out of, and is guided by, particular assumptions and traditions of understanding (Russell and Ison 2000b). It is

therefore legitimate for researchers to set out their theoretical prejudices, both for themselves and for others

to make sense of the research they undertook.

Methodology concerns the philosophy of method. It explores issues about the nature of reality – ontology –

and of knowledge – epistemology – that contextualise and influence the unfolding of the research itself. In

my view, methodology consists of the underpinning framework of justifications for a particular way of

designing and carrying out research.

I was aware of the claim that 'in real-world practice, methods can be separated from the epistemology out of

which they have emerged' (Patton 2002, p.136). While I questioned whether this separation was more a

matter of choice than fact – and whether it was a good choice2 – I nonetheless agreed that debates on

2 I suggest instead that clarifying an epistemological position can help make sense of the status of data and researchconclusions. For example, the researcher can offer them as causal explanations or as empathic narratives.

- 68 -

epistemology were unnecessary to research practice. The methodological underpinnings I adopted in this

research were pragmatic at heart. While I drew on each of the epistemological paradigms discussed by Shaw

– that is to say, those of realist post-positivism, constructivism, critical evaluation and pragmatism – my

approach was pragmatic with a realist orientation (Shaw 1999).

3.3.1 Pragmatism

My approach was pragmatic in that I was willing to make partial trade-offs. Post-positivist evaluators, said

Shaw, will sacrifice elements of 'rigour to gain relevance, precision to gain richness, theoretical elegance to

gain local applicability, and measures of outcomes to promote inquiry into process, meaning and local

context' (ibid. p.47).

As I discuss, my researching approach was informal, conversational and open-ended. The lack of a clear

indicator of evaluation at the outset limited the extent to which I was able to apply a systematic evaluation

framework. However, the three phases of inquiry that I detail in section 3.4 entailed a growing familiarity on

my part with the local contexts of the organisations TNS UK and its Pathfinder Company Network, and

meanings attributed to TNS' framework. The sense I was able to make from the investigation gave me a very

good basis to discern constraints and possibilities to learning with TNS UK, as I make evident in Chapters 5

and 6.

3.3.2 Embodied and relational realism

My research approach was realistic in that I took elements of the natural and social world to be real or, from a

heuristic point of view, which I could treat as if real and meaningful for my researching practice. I

conceptualised the situations and encounters I engaged with in the research as if belonging to a 'real world',

even though my knowledge about it could only ever be partial (Denzin and Lincoln 1998). In my realist

tendency, I acknowledged Lakoff and Johnson's notion of embodied realism (although I preferred the notion

of embodied relationality rather than realism). They argued that, 'Our concepts cannot be a direct reflection

of external, objective, mind-free reality because our sensorimotor system plays a crucial role in shaping them.

On the other hand, it is the involvement of the sensorimotor system in the conceptual system that keeps the

conceptual system very much in touch with the world' (Lakoff and Johnson 1999, p.44).

I thus hung onto a 'realistic notion of truth in some way' but assumed that 'no rules […] can be taken for

granted' and was wary of 'a positivistic naivete about knowledge' (Ginzburg, quoted in Boje 2001, p.47).

Positivism 'has been in decline for at least fifty years' (Shaw 1999, p.45), and has almost become a term of

abuse. However, realist post-positivists remain committed, as I did, to the notion that there is a world we

share. Otherwise, why talk at all if mutual participation in, and understanding of, the world were impossible?

- 69 -

However, I also assumed that we do not necessarily share the same experiential worlds, histories and

perspectives. Otherwise, why do we talk?

3.3.3 Social constructionism

My approach was social constructionist in the sense that I acknowledged that our experience and perception

of reality is mediated, inevitably, via social constructions, and that different research participants would hold

different perspectives (Patton 2002). As with the 'microstorians' Boje discussed, I took statements concerning

'the limitations, possibilities and measurability of rationality' to be 'unevaluable interpretations' (Boje 2001,

p.49). I noted that our talking of 'the real world' does not necessarily posit that, when I talk with someone

else, we talk of the same things. How people define something – for example, 'practice', 'The Natural Step', or

'context' – differs and depends on the person and their circumstances (Blackmore et al. 1998; Armson et al.

2000). I therefore took it as important to be receptive to the possibility that different people might have

different associations and interpretations of what constitutes the 'things' – be they entities, ideas or

experiences – 'connected' with these words. In addition, they will probably draw their boundaries around their

'systems of interest' differently to me (ibid.). For some systems practitioners, 'boundary critique' of the

definition of one's systems of interest is crucial for pursuing understanding, dialogue and collaborative

practice (e.g. Midgley 2000). My openness to the possibility of differing perspectives was both an ontological

assumption and an ethical position, therefore.

3.3.4 Critical, humanistic and action-oriented

Critical theories of power relations were also important. They inform the paradigm of critical evaluation. One

way in which methodologists have taken critical evaluation seriously has been in developing humanistic and

participative approaches to inquiry (Heron 1996; Reason 1998; Reason and Bradbury 2000b). These aim to

break down barriers between distant researchers who treat indispensable research participants as objects and

information resources who may experience outcomes as irrelevant or alienating. Critical humanist

methodologists might even question the expert role of the academic researcher. For them, groups of

practitioners interested in phenomena that they experience as meaningful can carry out research – for

example, appreciative inquiry – that is as valid as that carried out by researchers legitimised by academia.

I did not adopt a participative methodology, however, although I found some of its literature resonant and

helpful for my own practice. Viewing another person as unique, with their own experiential worlds,

encouraged me to stretch my ears and imagination in listening to their voice, and to be aware of impulses to

categorise. In particular, I found Krippendorff's (1995) analysis to be insightful. He took the proverbial lid off

critical theorists who themselves can assume privileged positions via their objectification of power relations.

Power, from his perspective, is something constituted in relationship and in the co-adaptation of two or more

- 70 -

observers. He suggested the mark of good critical research could be the extent to which it generates the

choices available to those in relationships. This contrasts with the approach often adopted by critical theorists

of analysing and objectifying power differentials in ways that are not faithful to the context of, and do little to

engage, the relationships discussed.

On one level, not adopting a participative methodology might seem strange. Notions of asymmetrical power

relations and justice are relevant to discourses of sustainable development. In particular, I had been excited

by critiques of the representative voice of corporations operating within neo-liberal capitalist structures, both

at national and international levels (Mander and Goldsmith 1996; Korten 1999; Hutton and Giddens 2000;

Shiva 2000).

However, my main aim for this research was to appreciate the experiences people 'inside' organisations have

of their working lives and contexts. As such, their stories did or did not include obvious references to

injustice and oppressive dynamics wrought by organisational practices. I was open to these issues if they

arose in conversation, but I did not hunt for evidence of such forces as a conversational starting point. If such

forces were evident in interviewees' stories and in my observational encounters, I bring them to light in

Chapters 5 and 6.

Pursuing an individual approach had pragmatic reasons as well. I questioned whether members of TNS UK or

its Pathfinder Companies had the time and personal resources to participate in participative approaches to

inquiry. Because I value the spirit with which others have developed participative methodologies, I wish to

justify the relevance of my approach. I argue that social research will not necessarily be more alienating or

less relevant just because one or more researchers uniquely carry it out in relation to a wider group.

Having said that, mine was a collaborative studentship. In addition to an ESRC (Economic and Social

Research Council) grant, I received sponsorship from TNS UK to evaluate their work. My experience was

that they were keen to benefit from my research. They generously gave of their time, supported my research

needs, and appeared keen to learn from my research. To these ends, I regularly reviewed the course of my

research with TNS UK members and my university supervisors. In addition, during the latter stages of the

research, I have contributed to and participated in strategic conversations at selected weekly team-meetings of

TNS UK, and have written a provisional report on my research for TNS UK's management board. In this

sense, my research has been action research (Russell 1986; Flood 2000; Reason and Bradbury 2000b;

Wadsworth 2000). Chapter 7 in this thesis also forms part of my feedback to TNS UK.

I envisaged researching to be less a search for an accurate representation of situations, although honesty and

faithfulness to the data remained important aspirations. Rather, within this methodological approach, the

purpose of researching became more a search for opportunities to reflect on, and enrich, existing

- 71 -

conversations, as well as to seek openings for new conversations (Bilson 1997). Researchers 'and their

'objects' of investigation are meeting in dialogue', and, because of their participation in a conversation, their

research findings are more relational than representational (Moser 2002, p.51). Along with understanding

research as an attempt 'to grasp and then make explicit […] the probable meaning of actions', I also

understood it as an attempt at generating possible meanings of past, present and future actions (Boje 2001,

p.49).

3.4 Methods-in-practice

3.4.1 Interviewing

I adopted an informal unstructured interviewing approach at the outset, which developed as my investigation

progressed into a semi-structured approach in which I used guiding themes (Patton 2002). Throughout I

aimed to open spaces for interviewees to tell their stories. I did so by giving what Webber called 'an

opportunity for narrative in interviewing', by 'showing a lack of hurry, engaging in preliminary talk, and

inviting detailed accounts at the outset' (Webber 2000, p.166). As Webber described it, questioning needed

'to be less frequent than would otherwise be the case in ordinary conversation. The entire basis of focus

is "what was the experience and how do you understand or make sense of it?"' (ibid.)

In conjunction with this approach, I tried to keep the interviews that I undertook relaxed. I did not try to

overly-manufacture researching conversations. Shaw expressed this well in her conversational approach to

working with organisations (Shaw 2002). She wrote,

'I am not trying to set up a special kind of interaction. These discussions have an "everyday quality" –

they are messy, branching, meandering, associative and engaging. They are similar to the mode people

value and recognise in many informal kinds of conversation. […] It is a very active, searching,

exploratory form of communication…' (Shaw 2002, pp.39-40)

As I will discuss, my researching journey involved three phases that took my investigation increasingly

deeper into Pathfinder Companies. The first entailed 'getting to know TNS UK'; the second entailed my

attending TNS UK's 'coal-face events' where they enacted their pedagogy, and interviewing representative

members of TNS UK's Pathfinder Company Network. Finally, the third entailed more in-depth interviewing

of members of three Pathfinder Companies themselves.

With face-to-face interviews in the second phase, I invited participants to diagram their organisation and their

position in relation to their wider organisation. None were the same as others stylistically or in terms of what

they represented. One was messy and complex, involving a rich web of interactions. Another diagram

- 72 -

entailed a typical silo organisation in which various departments undertook their specific business without

reference to other departments. In each case, the diagrams contributed to joint sensemaking about these

particular organisations, and, more importantly, led to further and more enriching conversation. These 'coal

face' research conversations led, in one or two instances, to follow-up meetings in which interviewees

divulged more personal perspectives concerning TNS' framework and TNS UK's relationships with them and

their employing organisation.

In face-to-face interviews in the third phase, I invited participants to diagram their key working relationships,

with individual colleagues, departments or external others. I present an example of a participant's 'relationship

diagram' in Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1 Example of an interviewee's 'relationship diagram'.

Because of diagramming his relationships, this Human Services Manager explained thathis role and its accompanying relationships were 'very much in transition'. The dottedline therefore denoted a working relationship about to be better established. He also sawsome relationships as more informal, but included them in his diagram to convey theimportance of these relationships to his work. I have edited the diagram, deletingpersonal names and adjusting departmental titles, to increase its anonymity. Relationshipdiagrams 'are used to display the connections between related components or conceptsrespectively, and help in the preliminary sorting out of those components or conceptswithin a particular situation or context' (Lane et al. 2002a, pp.61-2).

Most of the diagrams were radial rather than web-like. My main purpose in inviting participants to depict

their key working relationships was to catalyse conversations about their working situations. I regarded these

diagrams as aids to conversation and mutual sensemaking during interviews. With some interviewees there

CustomerSupport

Site HRManager

Marketing

HR Training

OperationsManagement

Trade Union

EmployeeDevelopmentProgramme

ContinentalHR Director

HumanServicesManager

Sales

- 73 -

was no need to invite them to diagram their situation as they had so much to say! I did not perceive any

differences in the kind of data collected from those interviews in which interviewees diagrammed their

relationships, and those who did not. Whether I invited research participants to depict their key relationships

in the form of a diagram or not, their stories, experiences and perspectives contributed to my sensemaking

about their role in their wider organisation, and to triggering further, more in-depth discussion about the

respective participant's organisational situation.

I got a sense, too, that my interviewing members of TNS UK and its Pathfinder Companies gave welcome

opportunities for interviewees to reflect on their experiences and share their perspectives. Many Pathfinder

Company members appeared to relish the opportunity to tell their stories. One TNS UK member expressed

his appreciation of our researching conversations by saying that he 'looked forward' to our meetings and that

he 'wished we had recorded some of our conversations'. Others spoke of their expectations of and interest in

my research; one, who had never been to university, said that he looked forward to reading my thesis.

3.4.2 Participant observation

The second research phase involved me observing interactions between, and participating in events organised

by, members of TNS UK, their accredited facilitators, members of other organisations, and invited guest

speakers and critical friends. At these events, I noted the content and course of conversations, specifying who

said what in any given sequence. That is to say, I focused on structured interactions (Patton 2002). This was

different from taking the kind of 'full fieldnotes' that ethnographers undertake (Fielding 1993, p.161). This

was unnecessary. All TNS UK 'coal face' events took place indoors, usually in corporate conference suites,

with presenters using electronic presentation equipment and facilitators and participants using flip charts and

white-boards when generating ideas and representing relative sustainability impacts3. In addition, to focusing

on structured interactions, I interacted informally with event participants, as I discussed in section 3.4.1.

My observing role at such meetings was overt (Fielding 1993); its members knew what my role was. For

example, I gave a presentation on my research to those present at a Pathfinder Company Network meeting. In

addition, I reiterated the rationale for my research when contacting Pathfinder Company Network

representatives through correspondence, and at the beginning of interviews. While I retained a certain level of

detachment during meetings and events, I also mingled and chatted during breakout times with meeting and

event participants.

3 See the TNS strategic methodology-cum-ABCD process in Box 1.1 and my discussion of it in section 3.5.1 in thischapter.

- 74 -

3.4.3 Desk research and personal reflection

I enriched my conversations with Pathfinder Company Network members with desk-research in which I read

company reports, presentation notes, publicity material and associated publications, for example, newspaper

and journal articles.

In addition to conducting researching conversations, I kept notebooks in which I would write reflections on

my involvement in the research, its unfolding process, and any ideas and insights that seemed appropriate.

3.4.4 Treatment of the data

As I did for all interviews, I wrote up notes that I then sent to participants, inviting them to edit and update in

any way they felt appropriate. I wrote the notes so as to capture all points arising in the course of an

interview, and attempting to remain faithful to their stories, experiences and perspectives. I also organised the

notes by clustering various themes under headings, which made the notes more digestible but interrupted a

sense of the conversational flow of the interviews. Those that responded to my invitation to edit gave minor

corrections and specified what was confidential information. The process of note checking ensured both

confidentiality and the validity of the notes in relation to an interviewee's perspectives. I assumed that those

who did not respond were satisfied with them, or did not see my invitation as a priority.

I cross-referenced my fieldwork notes with the minutes of meetings and reports of events, and I cross-

referenced interview notes with my participant observation during fieldwork and desk research.

Some research participants wanted me to do more than merely give back interview transcripts. Contributing

to further 'cycles of learning' with my co-researchers was a commitment I had made at the beginning of the

research studentship. A couple of Pathfinder Company Network representatives asked me to provide

feedback in the light of a set of interviews I had carried out with colleagues in their company at the end of

2001. At the time, they were reviewing their approach to facilitating in-house 'sustainability training'. The

focus of my feedback related to managing expectations regarding staff participation in the company's

sustainable development trajectory. Many of those with whom I spoke had participated in company-wide

sustainability training, and had become enthusiastic for sustainable development. However, they were not

sure what status they had in relation to their company's strategy at the time of interviewing and felt left in the

lurch by those at managerial levels. One of the Pathfinder Company Network's representatives said he found

my feedback useful and agreed with the picture I had formed.

In addition, towards the end of the research period, members of TNS UK were keen that I feed back to them

on my research. I therefore attended a few of their weekly team meetings and wrote a couple of papers.

- 75 -

Contributing to further learning helped to confirm the familiarity I had developed with TNS UK and

Pathfinder Company situations through my researching encounters.

An issue concerning the status of data arises in conjunction with the distinction between first- and second-

order research traditions, as discussed in section 3.2. With first-order data, its treatment is likely to revolve

around issues of accuracy and validity. This is particularly the case when the boundaries of the system under

study, the purpose of the research, and the methodological assumptions underpinning the research are

relatively uncontested. However, first-order data 'offers limited possibilities for effective decision making

when parties are in conflict over what is the most desirable action' (Russell and Ison 2000a, p.214). A first-

order tradition limits the discussion to the scientific quality of the data.

Second-order data, in contrast, is not only qualitative and open to interpretation. It also arises from the

rapport between researchers and those interviewed or from those 'reflecting on her or his own experience and

seeing these reflections as constituting valuable data' (ibid.). Disputes over second-order data are usually

intersubjective and political.

The data I collected is predominantly second-order, as will become evident in Chapters 5 and 6. For example,

one of my interviewees, referring to his colleagues, said,

'we’ve also felt that – and this has been recognised by the teams – there hasn’t been enough

interrelationship between the various bits of the business in here.' (PC 3.2)4

Russell and Ison (2000a) propose that, when considering desirable actions arising from research, it is

important to complement first-order data with second-order data and take 'the best of both points of view'

rather than see them in opposition (p.215).

3.5 Three emergent phases of inquiry

What emerged in the researching were three discernible phases to the inquiry, depicted in Figure 3.2, each

with their particular focus:

1. The first, what I call a 'getting to know' phase, involved my becoming acquainted with members of TNS

UK, their work, and TNS' framework;

4 This code is for reference purposes. I discuss the coding of interviewees later in this chapter.

- 76 -

2. In the second 'coal face' phase, I became acquainted with the locations in which, and the people with

whom, members of TNS UK interacted as part of their pedagogical and facilitative work;

3. Finally, in the third, 'in-deeper' phase, I undertook research with members of TNS UK's Pathfinder

Companies, with specific focus on their organisational contexts, to appreciate the factors that enabled and

constrained their learning with TNS UK.

Figure 3.2 Three phases of inquiry in the form of a river-map

The first phase entailed 'getting to know' members of TNS UK and their work. Thesecond 'coal-face' phase entailed my attending TNS UK pedagogical and advocacyevents, and my conducting initial interviews with Pathfinder Company Networkrepresentatives. The third 'in-deeper' phase entailed more in-depth interviewing withmembers of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies. This thesis contributes to a 'feedback'phase in which I have discussed the implications of my research with members of TNSUK through joining a few of their weekly team meetings.

While there was a loose chronological order to these three phases, the second arose out of and for a time

flowed concurrently with the first, and the third arose out of and flowed concurrently with the second. As

Figure 3.2 conveys, increasingly from mid 2001 onward, I disengaged from the first phase to concentrate on

October1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Induction atThe OpenUniversity First

phase Second phase

Third phase

Feedback

- 77 -

the third phase. In addition, from the end of 2002, I renewed contact with members of TNS UK to feed back

on my research, setting the conditions for exploring what implications the research might have, and starting

the write-up of this thesis in earnest.

The three phases concern my researching relationships with TNS UK and its Pathfinder Companies

specifically. It is worth noting that throughout my studentship, I also attended a series of related events

concerning the theory and praxis of organisational learning and sustainable development in general, which I

list in Appendix 4.

3.5.1 First, 'getting to know' phase

I knew a bare minimum about the theory-led inspiration of TNS' work at the outset, and knew nothing about

the constitution of the organisation TNS UK, or about its history with commercial organisations. My 'pre-

understanding' was insufficient to create a clear research strategy at the beginning of the project (Gummesson

2000). The first phase, therefore, was a 'getting to know' period and marked my initial immersion in the field

(Wadsworth 1997). Through desk-research, interviews, informal meetings, telephone conversations, and

attendance at training events, and internal meetings – see Table 3.4 – I developed a picture of 'the'

organisation, TNS UK, which I introduced in Chapter 1. I depicted the domain with which I engaged in this

first phase in Figure 1.1, a systems map of the organisation of TNS UK. This map emerged from within the

first and second inquiry phases, and from a number of iterations. Iteration is important because where

boundaries are drawn to think about a situation affects what, and how, actions are taken in the situation

(Blackmore and Ison 1998). This depiction is simple and satisfying in terms of introducing the organisation

that largely influenced my research purpose.

Particularly important was the task of developing good rapport with members of TNS UK. In open-ended

interviews, I invited members of TNS UK to talk about their career stories, and how they had 'initiated' or

'arrived at' TNS UK (Patton 1990). I listened to their perspectives on TNS' framework and their ongoing

work, for example, regarding their advocacy of TNS' framework, TNS UK's organisational structure and

strategy, and relationships with members of TNS UK's 'Pathfinder' Companies. In addition, I worked with

TNS UK's Chief Executive in formulating a memorandum of researching. This set out agreed expectations

concerning my research practice, the ethos with which I carried out the research, confidentiality, and

'intellectual property' issues – see Appendix 5.

This first phase also marked the start of my own ongoing learning journey concerning TNS' framework and

its implementation – see Box 1.1. Particularly relevant for my understanding in this phase were sustained

desk research and discussion with members of TNS UK. My active attendance at training events and some

- 78 -

meetings, which occurred as part of the second phase, also contributed to my learning journey and to ongoing

discussions with members of TNS UK and TNSI.

Table 3.4 'Getting-to-know' members of TNS UK. 'Interviews' refer to those conversations

undertaken with recording equipment and transcribed. 'Scheduled conversations' comprised informal

but scheduled meetings, conversations 'set-aside' from wider group events, and telephone calls – from

which I took notes. 'Conversations' refer to interactions that took place because of chance encounters. I

have given each member a code to which I refer when citing their quotations – see Chapter 1.3.3, for

example.

• TNS UK 1 – 1 interview with Founding Director of Forum for the Future & TNS

UK Management Board ChairmanJan 2000

• TNS UK 2 – 1 interview with Founding Director of Forum for the Future & TNS

UK Management Board memberFeb 2000

• TNS UK 3 – 3 interviews & > 7 scheduled conversations with Chief ExecutiveDec 1999 -

mid 2001

• TNS UK 4 – 2 interviews & > 5 scheduled conversations with Director of LearningDec 1999 -

mid 2001

• TNS UK 5 – 2 interviews & > 4 scheduled conversations with Director of Science,

on secondment

Jan 2000 -

mid 2001

• TNS UK 6 – > 3 scheduled conversations with Director of Business NetworksOct 2000 -

mid 2001

• TNS UK 7 – > 3 scheduled conversations with Senior AdvisorJun 2000 -

mid 2001

• TNS UK 8 – 3 scheduled conversations with Project OfficerMar 2000 -

mid 2001

• TNS UK 9 – 2 conversations with two Project OfficersFeb 2001 -

Feb 2003

• TNS UK 10 – 1 scheduled conversation, and 1 conversation with two

Sustainability Advisors on secondment

Jan - Feb

2003

- 79 -

Table 3.5 'Getting to know' TNS UK Facilitators (F), and those trained by TNS UK as

facilitators (T). Those trained by TNS UK as facilitators (T) were not contracted by TNS UK on

ongoing bases, unlike Facilitators (F). 'Scheduled conversations' refer to conversations organised

beforehand, while 'conversations' refer to chance encounters

• F 1 – > 4 scheduled conversationsDec 2000 -

Feb 2003

• F 2 – 1 scheduled conversation Dec 2000

• F 3 – 2 scheduled conversations, and > 2 conversationsMar 2001 -

Feb 2003

• T 1 – > 3 scheduled conversationsDec 2000 -

May 2002

• T 2 – 1 scheduled conversation, and 1 conversation Feb 2001

• T 3 – > 3 conversationsDec 2000 -

May 2003

• T 5 – 1 conversation May 2003

Table 3.6 'Getting to know' members of TNS Sweden (S)

• S 1 – 1 interview with Founder and Chairman of TNS Mar 2001

• S 2 – 1 interview with Secretary General of TNS International Mar 2001

Table 3.7 'Getting to know' members of TNS Sweden through a presentation on my

research (SP)

• SP 1 – Presentation to, and conversation with, members of TNS Sweden Mar 2001

- 80 -

During this first phase of inquiry, I interviewed both those contracted by TNS UK as facilitators, and those

trained by TNS UK as facilitators; see Table 3.5. I conducted interviews with the founding Chairman of TNS,

Karl Henrik Robèrt, and the Secretary General of TNS International; see Table 3.6. These interviews covered

such ground as the founding rationale behind TNS and their organisational practices in Sweden. I gave a

presentation to TNS UK's management board eight months into the research in May 2000. I also gave a

presentation to members of TNS Sweden in March 2001. The presentation to TNS Sweden led to some

interesting conversation that became an important source of data; thus, I code this presentation in Table 3.7.

I present how I characterise the core work of TNS UK members and their facilitators in the form of a

conceptual model (see Figure 3.3). A conceptual model represents 'a purposeful activity system through a set

of logical actions implied by the description of the system' (Lane et al. 2002a, p.72). I understand TNS UK's

work, following its mission statement, as a system to facilitate the understanding and practice of sustainable

development using TNS' framework and materials. The emphasis in a conceptual model is more on the

logical and theoretical ideal in any given activity system, than on actual activities and their sequences that are

conveyed in the activity sequence diagrams of operational researchers and engineers. The theoretical

emphasis of a conceptual model appeared more appropriate, given TNS' theory-led pedagogical approach to

enabling sustainable development.

The conceptual model in Figure 3.3 stems from the work of TNS UK as practised at a fully-fledged TNS UK-

organised training event, and as espoused in its Training Manual and Presentation handbook (TNS UK

1999b, 2000). The conceptual model reflects the theory of TNS' espoused ABCD strategic decision-making

process that is shared by all branches of TNSI as represented in Box 1.1. In Figure 3.3, Activities 2 and 6-8

are marked with 'ABCD' lettering, being the ones most obviously associated with TNS' ABCD process.

Activities 1-5 denote what TNS advocates do. These activities correspond primarily with the work of TNS

advocates, who explain TNS' principles of sustainability (activities 2-4). I understand they explain TNS'

principles with a view to creating the conversational conditions for applying TNS' ABCD decision-making

framework to a context deemed relevant by participants (activities 1-5). The shaded patch surrounding

activities 6-10 in Figure 3.3 corresponds with what decision-makers and practitioners do when they apply

TNS' framework, as espoused by TNS advocates. Activities 9-10 are in hyphenated lines because these have

not been explicitly theorised in TNS' literature and presentations, but they can and do happen in practice, to

varying degrees. I perceived TNS advocates to assume that practitioners would carry out activities 9 and 10,

alongside 6-8, and set up an ongoing action learning cycle.

- 81 -

Figure 3.3 Conceptual model of the core work of TNS UK members and facilitators

One-way arrows denote 'contribute to'. The two-way arrow, between activity 5 andactivities 6-10, denotes their interrelationship; one could translate it loosely as 'inconjunction with'.

4. Facilitatehypothetical exercises,role-plays and games,

if appropriate

1. IntroduceTNS

3. Draw on, and explain, theorybehind the framework – i.e. the'basic science', the 'emergenceof Life' story, 'the funnel' and

'the system conditions' – ifappropriate

2. Facilitateunderstanding of TNS'

principles ofsustainability

A

5. Facilitate use of TNS'framework for decisionmaking and strategising,

with reference to contextsand practices of audience

10. Reiterate applicationof TNS' framework forongoing practice and

changing contexts

8. Plan and enact steps to getfrom current practices (6) tosustainable scenario (7) and

choose the more practical andmost likely steps that will

maintain possibilities for futureongoing development

D

6. Analyse currentpractices in the lightof TNS' principles of

sustainability

B

7. Envisage practicesin a future sustainable

context

C

9. Reflect onoutcomes of actions

- 82 -

Members of TNS UK's core team have talked of varying degrees of engagement and types of relationship

they have had with client and Pathfinder Companies, as reflected in their ladder of engagement discussed in

Chapter 2.3.2. These ranged from one-off consulting projects to ongoing relationships of training, staff

development and occasionally collaborative research. They also talked about an ideal client or Pathfinder

Company member as one who 'gets it'5, or as 'enlightened'. They have described their work as enticing others

to enlightenment, concerning their understanding of sustainable development. TNS advocates aim to 'switch

lights on', 're-engineer mindsets', and 'change institutional DNA'. However, there were no developed means

of evaluating people's understanding.

Despite these mechanistic and knowledge transference metaphors, which reveal static forms of learning,

members of TNSI have espoused the intent to remain open to learning. TNS UK members expressed the

desire to learn through their sponsorship of this research. There was also evidence that one of the aims of

TNS advocates has been to encourage deep questioning about human activities – for example, with reference

to whole production and consumption life cycles (Everard 2002b). As I made clear in Chapter 2, its founder

and designers did not create TNS' framework to provide simple answers, or to install themselves as the

experts about the attributes of the sustainable society (Robèrt 1997, 2002). This openness would suggest a

dynamic and evolutionary form of learning, one consistent with records of the origins and development of

TNS (Bradbury 1998; Bradbury and Clair 1999; Robèrt 2002). I expected such evolutionary forms of

learning, which consist of people having insights and developing their perspectives and behaviours, to be

associated with second-order forms of communication and learning, as implied in Table 3.3.

However, in many ways, the narrative behind TNS' principles and espoused decision-making framework

communicates a particular certainty. The narrative echoes a common environmental education story, in which

the Human Race is lured by Industry away from a harmonious relationship with Planet Earth into 'a way of

life that has widespread destructive consequences' (Harré et al. 1999, p.79). Fortunately, help is at hand in the

form of Education. Of course, this analogy conceals the technical expertise embedded in TNS' framework,

and the sophistication with which advocates present and practitioners apply the framework. I do not introduce

the analogy to decry the validity of TNS' framework in terms of its scientific base. Many scientists have

acknowledged the value in the framework (The Johnson Foundation Inc. 1997). Nevertheless, according to

Harré et al, a narratological reading

5 My interpretation was that people who 'get it' are ones who will have an understanding of TNS' principles ofsustainability and decision-making framework that will enable her or him to undertake the process for sustainabledevelopment. They will grasp a sense of the urgency of sustainable development. Sustainable development is urgentbecause, according to Robèrt, 'our affluence [depends] on nature's ability to recycle waste into resources and provide uswith life-sustaining resources such as clean water and air' (Robèrt 2002, p.42). Thus, the affluence of society is at stakeif society continues to degrade nature.

- 83 -

'enables us to understand better the way in which the argument is laid out. It seems […] common sense

to suppose that conviction is more likely to be achieved by a story that fulfils some of the classical tale

than a mere catalogue of problems and their putative solutions.' (Harré et al. 1999, p.80)

It is reasonable, therefore, to regard TNS' advocates as storytellers. Based on my experience, I agree with

Upham's suggestion that there can be a strong rhetorical flavour to presentations of TNS' framework (Upham

1999a).

It has been less clear, however, whether TNS advocates giving presentations expected their audience to

interpret TNS' framework in realist or heuristic terms. One prominent member of TNS UK said that TNS'

principles of sustainability reflected 'how the world works' (CFE 8). However, this standpoint was qualified

when TNS' founder described TNS' framework in terms that were more heuristic (CFE 20). Deciding

between these two interpretations 'is neither easy nor secure' (Harré et al. 1999, p.56). Nevertheless, it is

important to know a presenter's expectations concerning whether an explanatory model 'is being used as an

aid to thought [or conversation] or whether it is an adequate representation of how the world really is' (ibid.).

A realist stance can engender particular interactive dynamics that do not easily make space for alternative

perspectives if a model is 'to serve as the basis to a program of action' (ibid.). A realist stance can engender

interactions in which people say, 'I am right and you are wrong' (Russell and Ison 2000a). Many will

experience such dynamics as uninviting (Bradbury 1998; Zimmer and Chapman 2000)! Indeed, some

participants at TNS UK events said as much; one described her experience of a TNS UK member giving her

'a slapped wrist' for misunderstanding an aspect of TNS' framework (CFE 20).

3.5.1.1 Emergent questions for researching

As discussed in Chapter 2.2.1.2, my formative evaluation strategy was twofold. In the sense that I hoped to

appreciate the experiences and needs of Pathfinder Company members in their learning with TNS, mine was

a goal-free, 'consumer-led' evaluation (Shaw 1999). In addition, in the sense that I set out to explore the

extent to which Pathfinder Company members' experiences, perspectives and activities corresponded with

those espoused in TNS' framework, mine was an implementation evaluation (Patton 2002).

I devised particular research questions from within this initial phase of the inquiry, as Patton (2002)

suggested. These questions were open-ended. They gave my researching a structure, and were as follows:

• What experiences did members of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies have of 'learning with TNS UK'? This

question arose with the insight that 'experience' has been much under-theorised (Clandinin and Connelly

1998), despite its phenomenological reality.

- 84 -

• What were the organisational contexts in which members of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies learnt with

TNS UK? This question arose from my interest in systems theory in which system-environment

relationships are a central concern (Lane et al. 2002b). I saw the perspectives of individuals to be my

primary data source, as I reflected in my model of OLSD in Chapter 2.7; therefore, organisations become

contextual to the individual, and part of an individual's environment.

• In what ways did members of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies enact – and have conversations that

conveyed explicit or implicit reference to – TNS' framework for sustainable development, in their

organisational contexts? I discussed the theories implicit in this question in Chapter 2.

• What enabled and what constrained members of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies to have conversations

around, and to enact, sustainable development as theorised in TNS' framework? Again, I discussed the

theories implicit in this question in Chapter 2.

• What were members of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies doing, and what had they done, that accorded

with the process of sustainable development as theorised in TNS' framework? See the strategic corollaries

and ABCD action-learning process in Box 1.1.

While this research was not a sustainability audit, and therefore did not measure operational impacts or assess

contributions to sustainability, I envisaged the perspectives and stories of Pathfinder Company members

would inevitably relate and consist of organisational activities and procedures.

3.5.2 Second, 'coal face' phase

This second, 'coal face' phase entailed my attending events where members of TNS UK carried out their

facilitation work, in which they taught and helped others, to understand, use and apply TNS' framework, at

such events. The 'coal face' locations whereby TNS UK members trained and facilitated other's understanding

included various Pathfinder Company Network meetings, TNS UK training events, and 'internal' meetings

such as their Stakeholder Review days – see Table 3.8. I portrayed TNS UK's Pathfinder Company Network

and its membership companies in Figure 1.2. I describe meetings as internal to denote those meetings in

which members of TNS UK reflected on their experiences, strategies and tools more openly than they

otherwise might have done when advocating TNS' framework. Some internal meetings (for example, CFE 7)

enabled reflective conversations around the theory behind TNS' principles of sustainability and TNS' ABCD

decision-making framework.

- 85 -

Table 3.8 TNS UK and TNSI 'coal face' events at which I undertook participantobservation and active learning ('CFE' stands for 'coal face event'). Events in bold script wereTNS UK's Pathfinder Company Network meetings. Events in normal script were those pedagogicalevents organised by TNS UK or partner organisations. Events in italicised script were those 'internal' toTNS UK.

• CFE 1 – TNS UK 'Training Manual' Development Meeting, London Feb 2000

• CFE 2 – TNS workshop for Marlborough & Swindon NHS Trust, Swindon Feb 2000

• CFE 3 – TNS UK '2020 Vision Series' Workshop at The Environment Agency,Bristol – 'Renewable Energy'

Mar 2000

• CFE 4 – Pathfinder Network Meeting, Hemel Hempstead April 2000

• CFE 5 – TNS UK & OU Systems Discipline Workshop, Milton Keynes – 'SystemsApproaches, TNS & the HE Curriculum'

May 2000

• CFE 6 – (Presentation to) TNS UK's Management Board Meeting, Cheltenham May 2000

• CFE 7 – TNSI Weekend Conference, Stroud Jun 2000

• CFE 8 – TNS UK Two day Training Workshop, Nailsworth July 2000

• CFE 9 – Pathfinder Network Meeting, Stonehouse Oct 2000

• CFE 10 – The Co-operative Bank 'Suppler Partnership Forum', Manchester Oct 2000

• CFE 11 – TNS UK Stakeholder Review Day, Cheltenham Oct 2000

• CFE 12 – Pathfinder Network Meeting, Gloucester Jan 2001

• CFE 13 – TNS UK Regional Waste Summit Conference, Stroud Mar 2001

• CFE 14 – Site Visit to Carillion's Hospital Relocation Project, Swindon, organisedby the Thames Valley Built Environment Trust

Mar 2001

• CFE 15 – Pathfinder Network Meeting, Swindon May 2001

• CFE 16 – TNS UK Stakeholder Review Day, Bath Sept 2001

• CFE 17 – Pathfinder Network Meeting, London Feb 2002

• CFE 18 – TNS USA's Sixth Conference on Sustainability, San Francisco –'Innovation and Inspiration for Enterprises and Communities'

May 2002

• CFE 19 – Pathfinder Network Meeting, Hereford May 2002

• CFE 20 – TNS UK Sustainability Masterclass, Cheltenham Jan 2003

- 86 -

Of particular interest to me amongst the coal face events were TNS UK's tri-annual Pathfinder Company

Network meetings.

Having written letters to members of the Network introducing myself, I attended my first Pathfinder Network

meeting in April 2000 at which I gave a presentation on my research and extended an invitation to members

to participate (CFE 4).

A development in the Pathfinder Network occurred that perhaps signified the opening up of new possibilities,

which struck some people as significant at a TNS UK Stakeholder Review Day (CFE 11). This was the

succession of Pathfinder Company members to the role of rotating chair of the Network, with this having

happened for the first time in January 2001 (CFE 12). Until that point, a member of TNS UK, usually TNS

UK's chief executive, chaired the Network. The development signified a growing confidence amongst

Pathfinder Network members to take responsibility for the meetings. It may also have signified moves toward

Pathfinder Company members becoming more self-determining in meeting their needs, aspirations and

expectations, although meeting agendas continued to be set in liaison with TNS UK's director of business

networks.

I conducted face-to-face and telephone interviews with Pathfinder Company members on the back of my

attendance at Pathfinder Company Network meetings – see Table 3.9. I was keen to build impressions about

Pathfinder Company organisational cultures, sustainable development strategies, organisational structures,

and relationships with TNS UK members. In these interviews, I inquired into:

• the history of TNS' involvement with their organisation;

• the history of their organisation's interest in sustainable development;

• how they came to be involved with TNS UK;

• what was going on in their organisation in conjunction with, or as a result of the input of TNS UK;

• what they thought of TNS' framework; and,

• what future they envisaged for their partnership with TNS UK.

- 87 -

Table 3.9 'Coal face' conversations with Pathfinder Network members (PNM) representing

TNS UK's client organisations. Each code refers to my interactions with one person, except PNM 9,

which refers to a number of Pathfinder representatives who attended Network meetings. Those referred

to by PNM 9 were those with whom I had very brief interactions, or made limited observations of them

owing to their relative quiet. 'Interviews' refer to recorded conversations that I transcribed. 'Scheduled

conversations' refers to one-to-one meetings from which I took notes. 'Network encounters' refer to

conversations I had with representative members during the course of Pathfinder Network meetings.

• PNM 1 – 5 face to face scheduled conversations, 4 network encountersApril 2000 -Dec 2002

• PNM 2 – 1 face to face interview, 3 network encounters Mar 2001 -Jan 2003

• PNM 3 – 1 phone interview, 1 network encounterOct - Dec2000

• PNM 4 – 1 face to face interview, 6 network encountersOct 2000 -May 2002

• PNM 5 – 1 phone interview, 2 network encounters Jan - May2001

• PNM 6 – 1 phone interview, 2 network encountersOct 2000 -Jan 2003

• PNM 7 – 1 phone interview, 4 network encounters Oct 2000 -May 2002

• PNM 8 – 1 face to face interview at which a member of TNS UK was present, 4network encounters

Apr 2000 -Feb 2002

• PNM 9 – 1-3 Network encounters with at least nine other Pathfinder companyrepresentative members

April 2000 -Jan 2003

I found out at a basic level about Pathfinder Company Network member's career histories, their experiences

of learning, and their organisation's involvement, with TNS UK. Pathfinder Company Network members

became involved with TNS UK for a number of reasons. These included invitations from TNS UK to

company chief executives, connections with other TNSI branches, participation in TNS training events,

'word-of-mouth', and personal enthusiasm.

Many Pathfinder Company members reported their appreciation of the Pathfinder Network in terms of it

providing opportunities for networking and conversation to discuss strategies, share experiences, possibly

develop political leverage, and provide support (PNM 1-3, 5, 7, 8 and CFE 15-17). One member spoke of her

experience of the Network being a place 'to recharge the batteries [and] you [almost] forget that you’ve been

there to benefit the environment' (PNM 8). Another member perceived the Network as bringing together a

group of people with a combined expertise for sustainable development that helped fill in knowledge-gaps

- 88 -

that individuals would inevitably have (PNM 2). Another member wondered whether there were

opportunities to test products between Network member companies, for example. A few said they would have

liked more opportunity for members of the Network to discuss issues from their perspectives, instead of

having to listen to the 'monologues' of TNS UK members (CFE 15).

The experiences of Pathfinder Company members of learning with TNS UK and of contributing to their

organisation's trajectories of sustainable development, which I investigated in both this second and the third

research phase, form the basis to Chapters 5 and 6.

3.5.3 Third, 'in-deeper' phase

The third phase developed out of the relationships I had established in the second phase, and entailed my

engaging more deeply with the organisational contexts of members of three TNS UK Pathfinder Companies –

see Table 3.10. As implied in sections 3.2 and 3.3, I did not seek an objective representation of a whole

organisation's 'organisational learning' with TNS UK. I took this to be both practically and theoretically over-

ambitious. I sought instead to engage organisational members over their experiences and perspectives as a

means of capturing reflections and echoes of TNS UK's influence in their respective organisations.

My reasons for choosing particular Pathfinder Company Network representative members were:

• relationships and rapport with organisational members that I had developed in the second phase;

• practicality and opportunity with reference to available resources and timing; and,

• relative depth of organisational engagement with TNS UK. My regular contact with one prominent

member of TNS UK gave TNS UK a 'voice' concerning their perspective of any given client organisation's

depth of engagement. This also gave this member of TNS UK the opportunity to express which

organisations were of particular interest. This member of TNS UK was the equivalent of a 'gatekeeper'

(Fielding 1993); rarely did members of TNS UK regulate my access to the field.

- 89 -

Table 3.10 'In-deeper' conversations with members of three of TNS UK's Pathfinder

Companies (PC's 1-3; PNM refers to Pathfinder Network Member – see Table 3.9). 'Preparatory

meetings' refer to meetings, from which notes were taken, that set up the in-deeper research phase in

respective Pathfinder companies. These preparatory meetings themselves were a source of relevant

data. 'Interviews' refer to recorded conversations that were transcribed and sent back to participants for

verification, and potential editing, before the notes became legitimate data.

• PC 1.1 – 1 preparatory meeting with two PNM's July 2001

• PC 1.2 – 1 phone interview with Senior Vice-President Oct 2001

• PC 1.3 – 1 interview with Product and Process Development Manager "

• PC 1.4 – 1 interview with Administration Manager "

• PC 1.5 – 1 interview with Learning Manager "

• PC 1.6 – 1 interview with Production Supervisor "

• PC 2.1 – 1 preparatory meeting with PNM July 2001

• PC 2.2 – 2 interviews with Research and Information Officer Sept 2001

• PC 2.3 – 1 interview with Business Development Manager "

• PC 2.4 – 1 interview with two internal Consultants "

• PC 2.5 – 1 interview with Business Partnership Development Officer "

• PC 3.1 – 1 preparatory meeting with Business PNM Jun 2001

• PC 3.2 – 1 interview with Director of Environment Nov 2001

• PC 3.3 – 1 group interview with a director and two company members Dec 2001

Members of one of the three companies who eventually participated in this in-deeper phase first heard about

the sponsored studentship with TNS UK before I began (PC 2). They were originally resistant to being

involved with the research. I heard two significant reasons for their initial resistance. When I first presented

my work and myself to TNS UK's Pathfinder Company Network, one of their representatives complained of

being 'researched-out', owing to the number of questionnaires and interviews she and colleagues encounter.

The company has had a significant reputation for its orientation to sustainable development. Another

expressed disillusion with past research that he and colleagues had participated in from which they received

no subsequent response, an alienating research approach (Reason 1998). I took their turn-around as a coup,

therefore, one that reflected the benefits of my conversational, 'goal-free', as opposed to theoretical-

- 90 -

framework-testing, research strategy. Once they had accepted my invitation, I said that I wanted to talk with

those who had had some direct or indirect involvement with the organisation's trajectory of sustainable

development, and with TNSI or TNS UK. This Pathfinder Company's representatives suggested appropriate

people for me to interview and set up times and dates for the interviews. He emphasised there would be a

limit on the number of interview participants, owing to potential concerns about my encroaching on staff

time. In addition to these interviews, I attended a TNS workshop that this organisation had arranged for some

of its suppliers.

Members of another Pathfinder Company who eventually participated in this in-deeper phase were

comfortable with me taking my research further with them (PC 1). I explained the nature of my interest at a

preparatory meeting at their offices, where I also learnt more about the structure and layout of their

organisation. Again, the respective Pathfinder Network representatives were helpful in coordinating

interviews with appropriate people.

I also engaged members of a third company in this phase, although this was less easy (PC 3). I lost contact

with the linking person who I had thought would set up a string of interviews. Other people I tried to contact

in this organisation were very busy and difficult to reach. However, I met another of this Pathfinder

Company's representatives who was able to put me in touch with some others. A visit to one of their business

sites that has had significant exposure within the sustainable development field helped me to enrich my

understanding of this company and its trajectory of sustainable development. In addition, I attended a TNS

training workshop that they had sponsored for their clients.

Not all Pathfinder Network members accepted my invitation. One member's organisation was experiencing

financial difficulties and upheaval at the time, although I was not certain this was the reason for the refusal.

Despite his own apparent eagerness to benefit from collaborative work, he had described his company as

'anti-intellectual' (CFE 9). I wondered whether this could have influenced the refusal of the company's human

resources manager.

For another company of particular interest to me, the PR and legal implications of their representation in my

thesis, which would end up in the public domain, were too daunting. Instead, I had a series of informal

conversations 'off the record' with this TNS UK Pathfinder Company's representative (PNM 1).

To re-emphasise, I wanted to conduct 'everyday conversations' insofar as that was possible. I invited

participants to tell their stories, relate their experiences, and share their perspectives. Despite limited

'employee time' available for me to exploit, I felt the rapport with research participants was generally very

good. Themes that oriented these researching conversations included

• career history;

- 91 -

• current role;

• key working relationships, with individuals and departments;

• involvement with TNS UK;

• perspectives on TNS' principles and decision-making framework;

• participation in the respective Pathfinder Company sustainability strategy;

• the nature and course of their organisation's change; and,

• anticipated future with regard to their organisation's unfolding sustainability strategy and action.

The outcomes of these 'in-deeper' phase researching-conversations form the heart of Chapters 5 and 6.

This chapter forms the end of Part 1 of the thesis. In Part 2, I define, discern, and present evidence for TNS-

related conversational lineages in TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies, which is how I evaluate OLSD with TNS

UK.


In this chapter, I have presented an 'audit trail' of both my methodology and my researching journey

(Morse 1998). I began by discussing broad 'meta-methodological' issues in terms of first- and second-

order research traditions, and then turned to well established methodological positions. I outlined my

methods-in-practice, and then charted my researching journey in terms of three inquiry phases that

took me progressively deeper into the investigation. The researching conversations and fieldwork

from the second and third inquiry phases form the basis to Chapters 5 and 6 where I discuss the

possibilities for and constraints to OLSD with TNS UK.

Second-order perspectives on research and communication were highly relevant to my research,

methodology and practice. In particular, I expected that a second-order research approach would help

open up 'spaces for learning' (High 2002), in which others and myself could reflect on what it meant

to learn with TNS. I based this expectation on positive pedagogical experiences during my studentship

at the OU, which I perceived as rooted in, and largely generated from, a second-order theoretical

tradition. These included supervision arrangements where agendas were set collaboratively. I took

part in a Rapid Institutional Appraisal in which participants 'were envisaged as co-creators of, as well

as beneficiaries of', the inquiry (Armson et al. 2001). In addition, I attended an OU Systems Summer

School in which students engaged with systems thinking through building relationships, role-playing

and group exercises.

- 92 -

These pedagogical experiences tended toward a second-order tradition because they emphasised the

importance of the quality of relationships over and above rationality. They placed personal learning

journeys, purpose and relevance at the heart of learning processes, rather than subject matter. One

could describe these experiences as emergent and systemic, rather than pre-designed and systematic

(Blackmore et al. 1998). They contrasted with the bulk of my schooling that entailed teacher-student

relationships consisting of minimal participation by students. I cannot remember teachers ever

approaching learning according to students' perspectives. I now look on my schooling in terms of a

first-order tradition of learning and inquiry.

The second-order aspects of my researching approach entailed acknowledging the Other and their

tendency and capacity to interpret situations and information in their own ways that were both

potentially, and probably, different to my own. Paying attention to changing emotional dispositions,

and the ways in which languaging can enable the opening up of spaces for conversation, became

important aspects of researching-in-practice (Fell and Russell 2000; High 2002). 'Being with' the other

person, and entering a relationship, became as, if not more, important than endeavouring to extract

particular information of interest to me as the researcher. Treating the quality of interaction as

relevant in itself – whereby I set out to accept the Other's perspective as valuable (Webber 2000) –

increased the likelihood of enabling the Other to express what was important for them, in my

experience.

I was aware that TNS' framework arose from what I came to regard as a first-order tradition of science.

TNS advocates often referred to TNS' principles of sustainability as first-order principles,

representative of the biophysical world regardless of the standpoint of the observer. Some reported

their perspective of TNS' sustainability principles as devoid of spirituality, and experienced the

implementation of TNS' framework as mechanistic (e.g. F 2). Moreover, others described a problem of

putting TNS' framework into their 'own language' (SP 1). My perspective on TNS' framework was that a

strict implementation risked precluding the vital aspects of the living world that its designers have

been aiming to preserve. By 'aspects of the living world', I mean such characteristics as emergence,

creativity and surprise. From my point of view, a strict implementation of TNS' framework risked

becoming a systematic process that could not enable the emergence of forms of organisation,

technology and relationship with the wider world that are so necessary for sustainable development.

Since engaging with this research, I have become interested in questions of how to create the

conditions to enable such systemic phenomena as emergence. I believe two 'conditions' entail creating

space for self-expression and 'sweeping in' as much information, and accounting for as many

perspectives, as possible in a process of situation definition. This is the kind of appreciative act

defined by Vickers (1983, 1987), and is one that has become a central aspect of the well-established,

second-order systemic approach espoused by Checkland (1990, 1999). In terms of interaction between

people, it is what Bouwen and Steyaert called a 'broadband kind of contact' in which 'the dominant

- 93 -

action logic' is not defined by one party for all the parties involved (Bouwen and Steyaert 1999,

p.314). There has been evidence of TNS UK enabling this kind of second-order systemic approach in

parts of their pedagogy – see step 5 in Figure 3.3. For example, they sometimes invited participants to

diagram the life cycle of a resource or product. This sensemaking act hints at being systemic, and is

one that could become a better-established part of TNS' 'ABCD' action-learning process, as I

recommend in Chapter 7.

I did not want to debunk the first-order epistemological assumptions about knowledge of the

biophysical world embedded in the design of TNS' framework. I did want to explore, however, how

people made sense of and applied this first-order tradition in practice within their organisations, and

in the networks of relations that constituted their organisation's organisation. I thought that, by

locating myself relative to a second-order tradition, I would less likely reinforce, or 'act out' (Patton

1990), any potentially constraining assumptions about the social world that a first-order tradition

could take for granted. Such constraining assumptions might be, for example, those concerning

communication and the role of language. I expected aspects of a second-order tradition would be

more appropriate for this, which I took as more likely to trigger action-oriented, conversational and

evolutionary learning for others and myself (Webber 2000).

This has been the longest chapter so far. Its length reflects my belief that a substantive methodological

substrate merits the innovative theory that framed my researching. As I have defined it in Chapter 2,

the nature of influence warranted clarity for researching-in-practice. Conversational lineages as

invisible patterns, and enthusiasm as a 'predisposition to act', are notions that are really only

discernible, surely, through establishing rapport and researching relationships that are more personal

than a limiting and presuming survey approach. Such potentially slippery notions justified robust

methodological treatment.

I aim to maintain the thoroughness I have pursued in this chapter in Chapter 4, to which I now turn.

In Chapter 4, I present my approach to and practice of the analysis of my data.

- 94 -

Part II

Evaluative inquiry

- 95 -

Chapter 4 Analytical approach and representation of OLSD

4.1 Introduction

4.2 A narrating approach

4.3 An analytical method

4.4 Representing OLSD

4.5 Constructing the narrative accounts

4.5.1 Tracing emotions

4.5.2 The process of construction

4.5.3 Choosing accounts for analysis and presentation in this thesis

4.6 The practice of analysis

4.6.1 Stage 1: distinguishing a set of TNS-related distinctions

4.6.2 Stage 2: analysing organisational levels

4.6.3 Stage 3: first meta-analysis discerning types of possibility for OLSD with TNS UK

4.6.4 Stage 4: second meta-analysis discerning 'potentially influential factors' for OLSD


4.1 Introduction

This chapter begins Part 2 of the thesis by explicating the methodological basis to my data analysis in

sections 4.2 and 4.3, the way in which I represented the data in sections 4.4 and 4.5, and the way in which I

carried out the analysis in section 4.6. It thus lays the groundwork for the presentation and analysis of

findings in Chapters 5 and 6. The analytical strategy for inquiring into OLSD fulfils my evaluative approach

discussed in Chapter 3, and constitutes the second, highlighted contribution from the research.

4.2 A narrating approach

Some of the phenomena and stories that I encountered in my researching had particular resonance for

Pathfinder organisational members themselves. The stories or phenomena were perhaps significant for others

outside the context of my researching encounters as well. For example, external organisations had given

awards for some of the sustainability reporting of Pathfinder Companies, or for a Pathfinder Company project

such as the new hospital that Carillion built in Swindon. Such stories and phenomena related to the

persistence of 'learning and sustainable development conversations' in organisational contexts, with particular

reference to TNS' framework and the work of TNS UK.

- 96 -

These stories, I realised, could form a 'backbone' to my representation of the data. To some extent, I thought I

would be able to tell the stories and discuss the phenomena directly from the words of their tellers. In other

instances I realised I would be able to construct and form the story by interweaving many voices and sources

into as coherent and cogent thread as I could. In this, my highlighting of particularly resonant stories was

close to 'stream analysis' as described by Boje (2001).

Boje discussed a variety of 'narrative methods for organizational and communication research', two of which

were 'story network analysis' and stream analysis. Story network analysis entails 'the categorising of story

fragments into narrative maps read as nodes and relationships (links) for abstract model building' (ibid. p.62).

The model is 'a map of the storytelling […] territory', charting 'connective interchanges' that helps to 're-enact

the interconnectivity of a story network' (ibid. p.62-3). The model displays 'a social architecture, how one

story or relationship is […] linked to another […] in a network display' (ibid. p.63). Boje pointed out a danger

with story network analysis. He argued that it is 'decidedly structuralist', entailing the reification of structures

at the expense of the processes of meaning making and 'embedded social historical dynamics' that construct

and transform networks (ibid. p.64). I did not adopt a story network analytical approach for this reason.

Stream analysis was more appropriate, on the other hand, but it did carry with it caveats. Stream analysis

'begins with the assumption that problems, events, people and routines in organizations are

interconnected and networked. The ultimate goal of stream analysis is to systematically chart chains of

cause and effect [the streams] that cross boundaries of function and structure. The end result is a series

of narratives about stream maps. […] The analysis proceeds by […] sorting [problems prominent in an

organization] into causal categories such as technical, physical setting, administrative, social system

etc. Then lines of causal probability are drawn to map a problem stream where causality needs to get

pinned down. Finally, there is story charting, where traces of the interconnection of a given problem to

other problems (events, people and routines) are depicted.' (Boje 2001, p.100)

Conversational lineages are not the same as chains of cause and effect, from my perspective, but the method

of stream analysis provided the basis to my analysis. The analysis would entail charting the chronology of an

emerged and developed TNS-related conversational lineage in the form of a narrative. This could be helpful

for discerning where the TNS-related conversational lineage emerged and developed in an organisation, and

could indicate the extent of OLSD with TNS UK in that organisation.

Boje was wary of a tendency in stream analysis to present such stories as idealised narratives in which agents

found clear solutions, via well-defined trajectories, to particular problems. Indeed, the events and experiences

gleaned from my interviews and fieldwork did not necessarily consist of obvious causal connections. Instead,

they were themselves part of 'embedded storytelling streams' that construct, deconstruct and reconstruct

- 97 -

narrative elements on a continual ongoing basis (ibid. p.101). From my emerging understanding of OLSD set

out in Chapter 2, I doubted that a strictly deterministic rendering of organisational change was appropriate.

However, I took causal attributions to be an inescapable part of narration, and it was reasonable to present

narratives of organisational change that consisted of causal links. To claim that a conversation might not have

happened without a chance encounter having taken place seemed acceptable to me. Unlike Boje (2001), I did

not think that 'narrative acts of retrospective causality destroy the antenarrative experience of multi-causality

and non-linear causality, and situations where the only cause is a fictive one' (ibid. p.94). Texts are always

contestable and open to interpretation (Boje 2001). All the same, I perceived causal attribution and narration,

however fleeting or premature, to be an inescapable part of sensemaking, and Boje himself cannot escape

constructing narratives with causal attributions1. Therefore, I found speculations concerning 'causes' and the

'significance' of particular phenomena to be more acceptable than strict causal attributions.

4.3 An analytical method

I did not adopt an inductive, Grounded Theory approach that aims to let the data 'speak for itself', and which

would involve systematically coding data according to emergent sampling frames (Strauss and Corbin 1998;

Locke 2001). Nor was my approach a hypothetico-deductive, theory-testing approach, which would begin

with theory, and collect and analyse data in ways at least constrained, and perhaps determined by, the initial

theory. I found a more appropriate means of approaching my data in Charles Peirce's 1955 'abductive'

method, which has a looser middle ground between induction and deduction and involves discerning

'relations in situated historical contexts' (Boje 2001, p.50).

Abduction entails creative inference and a synthetic logic that responds to surprise and anomaly (Aliseda

1988) – and is thus applicable for an emergent research strategy such as mine. Abduction possibly lies at the

root of all thinking and distinction making. According to Denzin,

'Facts do not speak for themselves. They must be interpreted. Previously developed deductive models

seldom conform with empirical data that are gathered. The method of abduction combines the

deductive and inductive models of proposition development and theory construction. It can be defined

as working from consequence back to cause or antecedent. The observer records the occurrence of a

1 The flow of Boje's (2001) narrative of 'assertions' consisting of 'claims' and 'counter-claims' between Nike on the onehand, and activists on the other, is 'path-dependent' and is thus a causal narrative of a kind. While not deterministic in thesense that a claim determines a response, the narrative concerns a conversational lineage in which people makeassertions with reference to previous claims. Each moment unfolds with particular constraints and possibilities,dependent on previous moments, but how the path unfolds is unpredictable.

- 98 -

particular event, and then works back in time in an effort to reconstruct the events (causes) that

produced the event (consequences) in question.' (quoted in Patton 2002, p.470)

Abduction tries to avoid a danger with Grounded Theory of taking stories out of context by 'exampling' them,

and coding them in 'the way one does in survey analysis' (Boje 2001, p.51). Grounded Theory can neglect the

intertextual and interpenetrating nature of stories and their contexts. 'Interviews, for example, can be

occasions where the situation elicits a story and is different from a story that emerges from the situation-at-

work with its entire in situ performance context' (ibid.). For Peirce, 'abduction' describes 'an ongoing inquiry

situation where scientists have a more spontaneous creative insight they speculate may be tied to their data, or

they select one among several plausible hypotheses' (ibid. pp.51-2).

In short, a Grounded Theory approach can reify details from the data to a realm of generalisability that might

be inappropriate. A strict reiterative categorising of the data would lead to a quagmire of details that inhibited

scope for finding patterns in and across stories of organisational change. In addition, I was concerned that

categorised data would lead to a disjointed form of representation in the text and a splintered ensuing

discussion.

The re-constructive work of abductive inference leads me to the narrative accounts of OLSD constructed

from my data and presented in Chapters 5 and 6. As such, my approach here to reporting qualitative data is a

storytelling approach that is distinct from case study approaches, which focus on predefined units of analysis

(Patton 2002). I discuss how I developed the accounts in section 4.5.

As explained in Chapter 2, my basic unit of analysis was that of the conversational lineage. I emphasise that

the narrative accounts of OLSD are not representations of conversational lineages themselves. I did not have

access to the dynamic of conversational lineages in real time during my fieldwork – it was not my original

intention to trace their development from the outset. However, I suggest that my researching conversations

formed the most up to date and 'live' point in those conversational lineages at those moments in time when

those research encounters took place. Therefore, I maintain that the narrative accounts in Chapters 5 and 6

point to the existence of conversational lineages. The accounts tell stories of conversations in the context of

initiatives that had occurred and that had developed over time. By tracing the occurrence of TNS-related

distinctions through these narrative accounts, I am able to abduct the existence of the TNS-related

conversational lineages in the given organisation and speculate on the influences that enabled and constrained

the development of those conversational lineages.

- 99 -

4.4 Representing OLSD

I assert that how we characterise OLSD profoundly contributes to our own facilitation and contributory

practices to it. Tendencies toward uni-directional conceptualisations can marginalise rather than harness

differences in perspective, and fail to shed much satisfying light on organisational learning processes from an

interactive, dialogical perspective (Jones and Welford 1997; Oswick et al. 2000; Boje 2001). Such tendencies

could actually hinder OLSD (Bouwen and Steyaert 1999; Gergen 1999). Differences in voice and perspective

could contribute to perceptions of complexity (Armson et al. 2000). I suggest that engaging and managing in

situations experienced as complex could engender a richer and more robust process of OLSD in practice.

Based on this stance, I take issue with Nattrass' (1999) case studies, which were, in the main, mono-vocal and

rarely included individual organisational members. Nattrass occasionally quoted those whom he regarded as

'key decision-makers', and occasionally narrated interpersonal encounters, but the bulk of his case studies

entailed personification of companies, with attributions of awareness, decision-making and relating

capabilities. For example:

'IKEA is clear that there are limits to what they can do to reduce their transport-related environmental

impact. […] These are areas where IKEA is building collaborative relationships to move the system in

the right direction. Wherever possible, IKEA plans to use rail transport and combined road-rail

transport. […] IKEA is working in close co-operation with its carriers to discover ways to reduce the

environmental impact of transport.' (Nattrass 1999, p.143)

The sparseness of individual voices in his case studies is common practice amongst corporate legal and

public relations exercises (Boje 2001), but it conceals contested, political and dialogic negotiation of realities.

In addition, in relation to the theoretical field, issues of structural constraint and political nuance provide a

basis to much sociological critique of management science's organisational learning theories (Easterby-Smith

1997; di Stefano 2000; Poell, Chivers et al. 2000). According to di Stefano, most of

'what is contributed [to the organisational learning field] comes from a management perspective. […]

Consequently, the employee experience is absent from the 'research' and from the literature. They

appear a compliant, passive body, reliably well intentioned as far as their employer is concerned, and

responsive to the various management strategies for learning. I believe this misrepresents the very

people whose knowledge, it is claimed, is so valuable to the company.' (di Stefano 2000, p.58,

emphasis unchanged)

Thus, despite his acknowledgement of the importance of members' participation, Nattrass' conceptualisation

bordered on the unitarist organisation reviewed in Chapter 2.5.1. Nattrass' was more an output-driven,

univocal conception of dialogue, the kind criticised by Oswick et al in favour of a richer, polyphonic

- 100 -

perspective (Oswick et al. 2000). While he and Altomare included a variety of voices in their second book

(2002), these, to my mind, conveyed little narrative of the kind that Nattrass adopted in his (1999) case

studies to connect them. Moreover, they provided little sense of the ways in which an organisation's network

of interpersonal interactions constrains or enables learning with TNS.

In addition to his (1999) thesis, Nattrass occasionally used metaphors of communication that appeared to

undermine dialogic notions of organisational learning. For example, he suggested that

'firms implementing [TNS] become conduits of information and education about a more holistic, social

metabolic view of the relationship between human and natural systems.' (Nattrass 1999, p.10, my

emphasis)

This metaphor, according to Krippendorff, refers to a communicative process in which participants send

messages that pass through a pipe and appear the other side in the same quantity and form (Krippendorff

1993). It is a metaphor in widespread use that conceals interpretive processes in any dialogic engagement.

Conversations oriented around such metaphors of communication are likely to become the repressive kind of

encounters that Bradbury (1998) suggested undermine the attractiveness of the conversation.

Such a uni-directional and deterministic conception of communication and organisational learning became

explicit in a later publication by Nattrass. There he observed that 'there is a pattern to the kind of change

required of organizations', namely, that espoused in Rogers' diffusion of innovation theory (Nattrass and

Altomare 2002, p.50). Accordingly,

'an innovation starts with a small group, sometimes even a single individual who has a "new" idea, that

is, an idea that is new to the culture of the population. The innovation spreads slowly at first through

the work of change agents who actively promote it. As more change agents in the social system adopt

the innovation and communicate it to others, more early adopters join the process until a critical mass

is reached and the idea takes off. […] The adoption of a new idea results from information exchange

through interpersonal networks. […] Reaching [the] "critical mass" is the focus of an effective

innovation diffusion strategy. The strategy succeeds by focusing on identifying, working with, and

supporting the early adopters.' (ibid. p.51-2)

In addition, Nattrass outlined Rogers' 'innovation-decision process', which developed through five

communication channels, beginning with knowledge and moving through persuasion, decision, and, if the

decision is adoption, implementation and confirmation (ibid. p.53).

While Rogers in part became aware of the critique of his diffusion theory as a one-way communication

process, some perceived his conceptualisation to remain one based on information transfer. Ison, for example,

- 101 -

reflected that diffusion theory 'fails to account for novelty – [namely,] our experience that facts and

technologies are constantly changing and are not simply reproduced' (Ison 2000c, p.68). Anyone who has

heard the telling of a story change with each teller will understand what Ison meant. Nattrass himself

suggested that those advocating sustainable development are telling a new and different story. While I agreed

with this, his reliance on diffusion of innovation theory suggests that the sustainability story he tells is more a

'closed' than an 'open' and dynamic 'linguistic system' (Harré et al. 1999). The latter would be open to

evolution, as was TNS' model of sustainability when it emerged through dialogic inquiry, as Bradbury (1998)

explained. A closed linguistic system, on the other hand, could become tedious like a scratched record and

repressive for those wanting to transcend its boundaries.

4.5 Constructing the narrative accounts

4.5.1 Tracing emotions

The first, pre-analysis task entailed my examining the data for the emotional tones that wove through the

perspectives and experiences of Pathfinder Company interviewees and Pathfinder Company members whom

I encountered during my fieldwork. By the emotional tone of my data, I mean the distinction between

enthusiasm and frustration. As discussed in Chapter 2.6, emotions influence the development of a

conversational lineage through the process of interactive coordination between its participants.

Discerning the basic emotional tone of the data would therefore convey a possibility for OLSD with TNS UK

and TNS' framework, or a constraint to OLSD with TNS UK and TNS' framework. An example of a narrative

of possibility that emerged entailed members of a project team contracted to design and build a new hospital

becoming 'evangelical' about sustainable development as a result of working with TNS UK. An example of a

narrative of constraint that emerged consisted of budgeting procedures that limited capital expenditure, and

thus blocked investment in energy-saving technologies that would make relatively greater savings over their

lifetime.

4.5.2 The process of construction

Having discerned possibilities and constraints, I built up the narrative accounts from transcribed interviews,

fieldwork notes, company reports and publications to include both the formal and informal voices of the

organisation (Stacey 1996; Gabriel 2000; Boje 2001). I constructed the narratives around Pathfinder

Company members who had

• initiated their organisation's sustainable development trajectory;

- 102 -

• engaged members of TNS UK directly (for example, in receiving personal 'coaching' in implementing

TNS' framework, or by arranging TNS-related strategy or 'train-the-trainer' workshops within their

organisation);

• attended or participated in TNS UK pedagogical events;

• indirectly learnt about TNS through other organisational members; and,

• contributed to their organisation's trajectory of sustainable development.

Not all Pathfinder Company members with whom I spoke had had direct contact with TNS UK, nor did they

class themselves as knowledgeable about TNS' framework. However, the Pathfinder Company Network

representatives who helped me organise my 'in-deeper' phase of the inquiry (see Chapter 3.5.3) arranged for

me to interview them. The Pathfinder Company representatives clearly regarded these members as significant

contributors to their organisation's sustainable development trajectory, despite their lack of 'TNS-knowledge'.

One representative warned me that not all those with whom I spoke would understand what I meant by TNS'

framework. These organisational members were important because they would help me trace the extent of

TNS-related conversational lineages, but would they relate experiences and perspectives, for example, that

implicitly corresponded with TNS' strategic corollaries?

I was keen to convey a variety of perspectives and experiences, where possible. The narrative accounts that

emerged, therefore, were rich with many voices. This was especially the case with those narrative accounts

that I was able to construct as a result of my third, 'in-deeper' inquiry phase. I wanted to represent a variety of

perspectives where they occurred, rather than present a singular trajectory of OLSD. The narrative accounts

would therefore reflect a multi-vocal, complex nature of organisations (Bouwen and Steyaert 1999), and

insinuate the kind of polyphonic and interactive dynamics that give rise to conversational lineages. Insofar as

they included a variety of perspectives and voices, one could regard the narrative accounts as echoes of the

storytelling nature of organisations. Boje (2001), for example, described multi-vocal organisations as

'storytelling organisations'.

While at times I personified companies, as did Nattrass, I balanced these personifications with quotes of

individual voices. In addition, I did not necessarily present the narrative accounts as well-crafted stories, with

clear beginnings, middles and ends, as I did with the story of Mark on the aeroplane in Chapter 2.6.1. As

such, I aimed to maintain the openness of these narratives for the sake of evolving conversational lineages,

thus keeping the possibilities of pre-narrative – what Boje (2001) called antenarrative – spaces alive.

- 103 -

4.5.3 Choosing accounts for analysis and presentation in this thesis

In the end, I constructed eight narrative accounts of possibility, and eight accounts of constraint. Having

constructed and analysed the sixteen narrative accounts, I then chose which to include in this thesis. Three

accounts conveyed the possibility of 'awareness raising'. Two of these did not provide as much insight into

the theme of awareness raising as the other did, and they had considerably less detail and richness. In

addition, they each did not have a concomitant narrative of constraint, as did the third. I found that having a

concomitant narrative of constraint to complement a narrative of possibility together would help illuminate

why a richer and more satisfying process of OLSD with TNS UK did not develop. I therefore found the two

narratives of awareness raising that did not have concomitant narratives of constraint more facile than the

third2, and chose to discard them in favour of the third.

I thus chose six narratives of possibility, and eight of constraint, which I present in Table 4.1. These fourteen

narratives emerged from my encounters with members of five TNS UK Pathfinder Companies. Three of the

five companies were those that that participated in the third, in-deeper phase of my research, discussed in

Chapter 3.5.3. These companies were The Co-operative Bank, Interface Europe, and Carillion – all

organisations that have made significant commitments to sustainable development at a management board

level. One of the accounts of possibility and one of the accounts of constraint concerned a subsidiary

company of one of the five Pathfinder Companies, hence the six accounts of possibility. The table includes

the respective sector of each company; the titles I have given each of the narratives; and, whether the account

concerned a possibility or constraint.

I present systems maps of each of the five organisations from Table 4.1 at the beginning of Chapter 5 in

Figures 5.1-5.

4.6 The practice of analysis

The practice of analysing OLSD with TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies involved four stages.

2 I explain this superficiality by the fact that one of the narratives arose from an interview that took place at thebeginning of the respective Pathfinder Company's pedagogical relationship with TNS UK. My interviewee's companylearning journey was thus at its early stages. The other narrative arose from a telephone interview with a PathfinderCompany Network representative who described her organisation as not having gone much further than 'awarenessraising' with TNS UK. I did not manage to develop a good sense of some of the constraining forces at work, andfrustrations involved in 'learning with TNS UK', and thus no concomitant narrative of constraint emerged.

- 104 -

Table 4.1 TNS UK Pathfinder Companies represented in this thesis (narratives ofpossibility are highlighted with a white background)

PathfinderCompanyinvolved

Core businessName of narrative

accountPossibility or

constraint

Chapterand

sectionnumber

'Making us think' Possibility 5.2An aviation

fuel company3

Aviation fueldistribution and

R&D 'Living in a commercialworld'

Constraint 6.2

'A landmark building'(Carillion Building)

Possibility 5.3

'A longish term thing'(Schal)

Possibility 5.4

Swings in society(Carillion Building &

Schal)Constraint 6.3

Carillion plc

Construction,infrastructure andfacilities services

management

'Like eating an elephant'(Carillion Building &

Schal)Constraint 6.4

Uncorking the GreenGenie

Possibility 5.5

'I've got targets to hit' Constraint 6.5

TheCo-operative

Bank

Personal andcorporate banking

Screening complexities Constraint 6.6

Questing to become arestorative enterprise

Possibility 5.6

'Undercurrents' Constraint 6.7Interface

Soft furnishingsmanufacturing

Reaching the edges Constraint 6.8

'Word getting about' Possibility 5.7Sainsbury's Food retail

Mixed messages Constraint 6.9

3 I maintain the anonymity of this organisation for reasons of confidentiality.

- 105 -

4.6.1 Stage 1: distinguishing a set of TNS-related distinctions

While I was clear that a narrative account was not equivalent to a conversational lineage, I constructed the

accounts of possibilities for OLSD in the belief that they pointed to the occurrence of TNS-related

conversational lineages. As discussed in Chapter 2.6, I hypothesise that a TNS-related conversational lineage

would reflect an organisation's trajectory of sustainable development, whether or not research participants

explicitly recognised, or referred to, the trajectory as TNS-influenced. The notion of a conversational lineage

is discernible via a persisting set of distinctions.

I therefore needed to devise a specific set of distinctions from TNS' framework in order to enable the tracing

of the emergence and evolution of TNS-related conversational lineages in the narrative accounts of

'possibilities for OLSD'. These 'TNS-distinctions' are presented in Table 4.2. They enabled me to observe that

Pathfinder Company members' learning was relevant to an ongoing, organisational trajectory of sustainable

development, as defined in TNS' framework. In the table, TNS-distinctions 1 to 5a-d constitute the theoretical

basis to TNS' framework, while TNS-distinctions 6 to 8a-d constitute the practice of implementing TNS'

framework.

I attributed the occurrence of TNS-distinctions 1 to 5a-d in the narrative accounts to relate to someone's

awareness of TNS' underlying theory; or, in the case of distinctions 5a-d, someone's intention to comply with

TNS' system conditions.

In addition, I attributed the occurrence of TNS-distinctions 6 to 8a-d to relate to the enacting of espoused

activities in TNS' framework. I took a company's 'sustainability auditing' procedures as a case of TNS-

distinction 6, for example. Moreover, I took a company arranging in-house TNS training workshops as cases

of TNS-distinction 8a; these kinds of events could lead to someone displaying the kind of knowledge of TNS'

framework embedded in TNS-distinctions 1 to 5a-d.

I then set about reviewing the narrative accounts for explicit and implicit TNS-related conversational

lineages. I marked the place where implicit or explicit TNS' framework-related distinctions occurred in the

narrative accounts with the acronym, 'TNSF', and the respective distinction number. The following example

presents a Pathfinder Company member's perspective in relation to her work assessing the 'sustainability

profiles' of companies that were potentially good investments. The way in which she perceived the concept of

environmental risk was

'very much based on the idea of the funnel. If a company is bouncing around in this funnel then

it's not as secure a company.' (PC 2.5)

- 106 -

Table 4.2 Eight distinctions related to TNS' action learning framework (see Box 1.1)

1(backcasting)

TNS' framework enables backcasting from principles of sustainability, which isthe opposite of forecasting and aims to ensure reliable and robust strategising,design and decision making

2(earth asclosed

system)

TNS' framework rests on the view that the planet earth is a 'materially closedsystem' in which Life evolves and reconstitutes matter through its dependency onsolar-energy-driven photosynthetic processes

3(dependence onphotosynthesis)

TNS' framework rests on the view that complex living systems such as humansdepend on the productivity and diversity of photosynthesising organisms fortheir survival

4

(thresholdhypothesis)

TNS' framework rests on the view that reliable data about the location of precisesustainability threshold levels (i.e. of ecosystems to support complex livingsystems) does not exist. It is possible, however, to hypothesise about theparameters of sustainability based on well established scientific theories,particularly the first and second laws of thermodynamics

TN

S-d

isti

nct

ion

s th

at c

on

vey

awar

enes

s o

f u

nd

erly

ing

th

eory

to

TN

S'

acti

on

-lea

rnin

g f

ram

ewo

rk

5a-d

(the systemconditions)

TNS' hypothesised principles of sustainability are as follows:

In a sustainable society, nature is not subject to systematically increasing

a) concentrations of substances extracted from the earth's crust;

b) concentrations of substances produced by society;

c) degradation by physical means.

And in that society,

d) human needs are met worldwide

6(systemat-

isation)

It is judicious to optimise positive impacts and reduce negative impactscontinuously, and to safeguard the conditions for long-term survivalsystematically.

7a-d

(strategiccorollaries)

The following are implications for behaviour as derived from TNS' systemconditions:

a) eliminate contributions to systematic increases in concentrations ofsubstances from the Earth's crust;

b) eliminate contributions to systematic increases in concentrations ofsubstances produced by society;

c) eliminate contributions to systematic physical degradation of nature; and,

d) optimise contributions to meeting human needs in society and worldwide

TN

S-d

isti

nct

ion

s th

at c

on

vey

the

enac

tin

g o

f T

NS

' fra

mew

ork

8a-d

(ABCDaction

learningprocess)

Making decisions using TNS' framework involves

a) understanding TNS' principles of sustainability, the system conditions;

b) analysing current activities in the light of the system conditions;

c) envisaging a sustainable future whereby activities comply with TNS'system conditions; and,

d) planning how to realise the sustainable future, and acting. Decisions shouldbe made with their implications for future decision-making and strategising inmind, such that choices made will, theoretically, keep desirable future optionsavailable and within reach

- 107 -

Her perspective therefore relates to both TNS-distinctions 2 and 3, namely those that underlie TNS' metaphor

of the funnel (see Box 1.1). I thus placed the following marker in the margin after the distinction occurred:

(TNSF 2,3)

I must emphasise that the occurrence of these distinctions cannot necessarily be attributable to the direct

influence of TNS UK, especially where the occurrence of a TNS-distinction is implicit in the narrative

account. Obviously, where someone explicitly talked about, for example, visioning (the third 'C' stage in

TNS' ABCD process), this is more easily attributable to TNS' pedagogical work.

I then counted the number of times particular distinctions occurred in each narrative account of 'possibility

for OLSD' in Chapter 5, and report these statistics at the end of the respective account. While TNS-

distinctions occurred in the narrative accounts of constraints to OLSD, their occurrence was more often than

not in connection to an emotional tone of frustration. Either these distinctions occurred in relation to an

aspired TNS-espoused activity that did not come to fruition, or to a TNS-espoused activity that had been

initiated but that was meeting constraints at the time of my researching. I therefore do not mark the

occurrence of TNS-distinctions in the accounts of 'constraints to OLSD' in Chapter 6.

4.6.2 Stage 2: analysing organisational levels

The distinctions elaborated in Table 4.2 helped me to assess the organisational levels in, from, and between

which TNS' related conversational lineages emerged and developed. I was able to do this by assessing how

the occurrence of a TNS-distinction connected to an intra- and inter-organisational network of relationships

and conversations.

I understand organisational levels to be personal, interpersonal, departmental, inter-departmental,

organisational, and inter-organisational4 – for example, with competitors, suppliers or stakeholders. As

discussed in Chapter 2.5, I understand organisation in conversational, interactive terms. With reference to the

model of OLSD in Figure 2.1, I regard organisational levels as aspects of organisation rather than

organisational structures. Thus, I suggest that conversational lineages give rise to distinct organisational

levels, by conscious or indirect design. These levels can then be manifest in structural elements, for example,

recruitment practices, the design of office layouts (McAndrew 1993), or salary packages.

An example of an organisational level that I discerned in my analysis was from the following narrative.

4 Here I expand on Pawlowsky's (2001) framework of organisational learning.

- 108 -

Dave began exploring whether things like recycling paper and plastic cups were possible, and

thought the best way would be to get all staff on site involved, because waste is created 'by

every individual in the bank' (PC 2.4). He organised collection bins for paper, aluminium cans

and plastic cups to be distributed across the site.

(TNSF 6)

He then realised he needed to get people to use them. The site had about 250 staff at the time. To

raise awareness he briefed senior management […] on what he wanted to do. He invited

members of staff to join him in an 'ecology focus group' consisting of representatives from each

department, roughly one rep per fifty members of staff who was 'keen on green issues' (ibid.).

This narrative excerpt conveyed a network of relationships involving senior managers, everyone on site, and

an emergent group who 'were keen on green issues'. I perceived this narrative as one that began what turned

out to be a conversational lineage that persisted at an organisational, rather than departmental or inter-

departmental, level.

As theorised in Chapter 2.5.4, particular barriers can inhibit the development of OLSD. Assessing the

organisational levels in, from and between which TNS-related conversational lineages do or do not emerge

and develop could indicate the extent of OLSD with TNS UK. The level at which a conversational lineage

developed could relate to the resources invested in a training programme, for example, the perceived

legitimacy of sustainable development by members of the management board, or the quality of inter-

departmental communication.

I present the analysis into organisational levels at the end of each narrative account of 'possibility for OLSD'

in Chapter 5. (For this part of the analysis, I took TNS UK's interactions with Pathfinder Company members

at an inter-organisational level to be implicit, and thus do not highlight this level at the end of each narrative

account.) I only attribute the explicit organisational levels present in the respective narrative, and, based on

my model of OLSD defined in Chapter 2.7, I assume that possibilities for OLSD arise through interpersonal

interactions. There is one account in which I specify an interpersonal level where TNS-related conversational

lineage occurred, however. This is because, when compared with other accounts, this was the level at which

OLSD with TNS UK explicitly took place in the account, and not at 'wider' organisational levels.

4.6.3 Stage 3: first meta-analysis discerning types of possibility for OLSD

The third stage of the analysis constituted a 'meta-analysis' that compared and contrasted all the narrative

accounts in order to document the range of possibilities for, and constraints to, OLSD with TNS UK. This

entailed a content analysis of the narrative accounts (Patton 2002).

- 109 -

The constraints were situation specific, which I discuss in my reflections at the end of each narrative account

of 'constraint to OLSD' in Chapter 6.

'Possibilities for OLSD' ranged from 'awareness raising' to 'systemic thinking', 'role or project focused

training', and, 'collaborative emergent learning'. I attribute the evident type of possibility for OLSD at the end

of each narrative account of possibility in Chapter 5 in the full awareness that the reader will not know the

detail of what these terms mean to me. I explain what evidence gave rise to each of these possibilities, and

what the terms mean, towards the end of Chapter 5, in section 5.8. Collaborative emergent learning became

the yardstick by which I assessed the extent of OLSD. Briefly, this referred to the possibility for TNS-related

conversational lineages developing and evolving to significant degrees across organisational levels, involving

a range of actors, and entailing a range of TNS-espoused activities.

4.6.4 Stage 4: second meta-analysis discerning 'potentially influential factors' for OLSD

The fourth and final stage of analysis was another meta-analysis. This second meta-analysis again involved

my revisiting all the narrative accounts, of both possibilities and constraints, but this time to determine a set

of 'potentially influential organisational and structural factors' for the development of OLSD. This process

was speculative. As discussed in section 4.2, I find speculations about causes to be an appropriate means of

apprehending the differences between the narrative accounts. I could speculate on the multiple 'causes', or

conditions, that existed prior to the conversation, and could regard a chance encounter as a logically

necessary 'material', 'contributory', 'necessary', or 'proximate' cause to a subsequent conversation (Boje 2001).

Hence, I refer to these speculations as 'potentially influential factors'. Revisiting the narrative accounts

enabled me to observe where these factors could or could not have been influential, and how the narrative

accounts were similar or differed from one another.

The set of potentially influential factors did not emerge from the actual data, but from the interplay between

the data, my learning journey, and what appeared to be relevant theories in the field (Shaw 1999; Patton

2002). An 'essential feature' of analysis, according to Strauss and Corbin, consists of 'the procedures of

making comparisons, asking questions, and sampling based on evolving theoretical concepts' (Strauss and

Corbin 1998, p.46). Through my researching encounters, both virtually via the literature, and actually with

research participants, some concepts such as those of 'conversation' and 'relationship', 'context', 'constraint'

and 'possibility', and 'emotion' and 'enthusiasm' kept surfacing as relevant. These concepts were very

influential in my developing a set of 'potentially influential organisational and structural factors'.

This second meta-analysis is presented at the beginning of Chapter 7, in section 7.2, after I have presented all

the narrative accounts of both possibilities and constraints, which will help contextualise my exploration into

- 110 -

the recommendations to TNS UK for their organisational development in that chapter. I will specify whether

these factors concern the organisation of organisations or organisational structures.

I revisited each of the narrative accounts of possibilities for OLSD to assess the extent of influence of these

'potentially influential factors', for example, the extent to which adequate investment was forthcoming. I

revisited the accounts of possibility rather than constraint because the thrust of this thesis is to reflect on TNS

UK's theory and praxis; neither TNS UK's members nor myself are interested in optimising constraints to

OLSD! I present an analysis of these potentially influential factors at the end of each narrative account of

possibility in Chapter 5. Again, I was fully aware that the reader would not yet understand the evidence on

which I discerned the set of factors, but I have structured my communication of the analysis in this way for

reference purposes.


In this chapter, I have discussed the narrative approach to analysing my data, which was neither

inductive nor deductive. Discerning patterns of possibility and constraint in the data and constructing

the narrative accounts entailed a form of synthetic, 'abductive' logic defined by Peirce.

As such, I avoided a Grounded Theory approach, which I felt would generate a superfluous amount of

detail that would not have addressed the specific nature of this research. This would have been a

superfluous amount of detail because, from my perspective, a conversational lineage is something that

forms between people over time, and probably in and across different domains. Understanding the

formation of a TNS-related conversational lineage therefore primarily involves a re-constructive

exercise, and an intricate process of data-categorisation is inappropriate.

In the practice of analysing my data, I also avoided the use of qualitative analysis computer-software.

This was partly from a position of not wishing to over-categorise the data, but it also had a practical

side. Qualitative analysis software stores one's categorisations of data in megabytes that are invisible

to the eye, making further stages of pattern-recognition that much harder. Spreading the transcripts

of my interviews and fieldwork notes across the floor gave me a very good sense of the 'whole' of my

data. Spreading papers out also helped me to observe correlations between data-segments, for

example, between someone's interview transcript and my notes of their contributions at Pathfinder

Network meetings.

My experience of constructing the narratives, it turned out, was enjoyable and led to what I think are

stories that give a good sense of the organisational situations and experiences of Pathfinder Company

members. In particular, the analytical strategy of first constructing the narratives around resonant

stories, then discerning types of possibility, and then speculating on influential factors on OLSD is

- 111 -

innovative methodologically and potentially useful for TNS UK's practice. I return to questions of

implications for TNS UK in Chapter 7, and to questions of the merits of this approach in Chapter 8.

I faced a significant choice regarding the format of presenting the accounts. The choice was between

presenting the accounts according to the companies from which they sprang, or according to the

theme of possibilities and constraints around which I had constructed them.

I chose the latter.

The advantage of this choice was that it draws attention onto the issues and away from the

organisational brand. In addition, the evaluation thrust in the thesis is towards recommending courses

of action for TNS UK and its facilitators. If Pathfinder Company members found any benefit and

insight from the thesis, that would be all to the good from my perspective. The disadvantage to

presenting the narrative accounts according to the themes of possibility and constraint is that it

becomes more difficult to see how the accounts of possibility and constraint from the same

organisation connect with each other. As will become clear, I think they are correlated.

I have addressed this disadvantage by emphasising the respective company from which they sprang in

the titles to the accounts. I also specify the Figure number of the systems map I have drawn for each

company in the title to each account; the systems maps are presented in the introduction to Chapter

5. I hope these measures are sufficient for helping the reader to make sense of the company from

where the accounts came.

I now turn to the six narrative accounts of possibilities for OLSD with TNS UK in Chapter 5.

- 112 -

Chapter 5 Possibilities for OLSD with TNS UK

5.1 Introduction

5.2 'Making us think' (An aviation fuel company – see Figure 5.1)

5.3 A 'landmark building' (Carillion Building – see Figure 5.2)

5.3.1 Introduction

5.3.2 'Falling across each other'

5.3.3 'No experts'

5.3.4 'Nothing but enthusiasm'

5.3.5 Involving the client

5.3.6 'A toolkit to waken a sleeping giant'

5.4 'A longish term thing' (Schal – see Figure 5.2)

5.5 Uncorking the Green Genie (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3)

5.5.1 Introduction

5.5.2 'Give me half an hour and I'll change your life'

5.5.3 'Banned in ten years time?'

5.5.4 The Green Genie

5.5.5 'None as far down the road as me!'

5.6 Questing to become a restorative enterprise (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

5.6.1 Introduction

5.6.2 'A vital leadership role'

5.6.3 'Really serious about it'

5.6.4 'Brains, heart and soul'

5.6.5 'Bugger it, we'll do it anyway'

5.6.6 'I've saved a tree!'

5.7 'Word getting about' (Sainsbury's – see Figure 5.5)

5.8 Meta-analysis 1: discerning types of possibility for OLSD


5.1 Introduction

In this chapter, I present the narrative accounts of possibilities for five Pathfinder Companies' OLSD with

TNS UK. They refer to TNS-related conversational lineages that evolved to varying degrees and are not

meant as representative of all the initiatives of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies, nor of all the activities in

any given company. However, they do suggest a range of possibilities for OLSD with TNS UK.

- 113 -

I have indented and formatted the accounts in italics to distinguish them from the rest of the thesis. Direct

quotes from recorded interviews or those I encountered during fieldwork are in bold, followed by the

appropriate code that I developed in Chapter 3.5 relating to an interviewee or fieldwork event. Quotes from

company reports remain in italicised script, and are not in bold. I have marked each account with the

distinctions relating to TNS' framework (TNSF) that I distinguished in Table 4.2, which I place on the left-

hand side of each account where they occurred explicitly or implicitly. To recap briefly:

From Table 4.2:

• TNSF 1 = backcasting;

• TNSF 2 = Life evolving in a materially-closed,sun-driven, whole-earth system;

• TNSF 3 = humans' ultimate dependence onphotosynthesis;

• TNSF 4 = precise threshold levels betweensustainability and non- sustainability areunknown;

• TNSF 5a-d = TNS' system conditions;

• TNSF 6 = systematisation;

• TNSF 7a-d = TNS' strategic corollariesderived from the system conditions;

• TNSF 8a-d = TNS' ABCD action-learning process.

Importantly, as I discussed in Chapter 4.6.1, I attribute TNS-distinctions 1 to 5a-d to mark someone's

awareness of TNS' theory, and TNSF 6 to 8a-d to mark the enacting of TNS-espoused activities.

I follow each account with my analysis and discussion. The analysis includes the occurrence of TNS-

distinctions (TNSF), and the organisational levels at and across which the TNS-related conversational

lineages arose (see 4.6.2). For this part of the analysis, I took TNS UK's interactions with Pathfinder

Company members at an inter-organisational level to be implicit.

I also include my analysis as to the type of possibility for OLSD with TNS UK (see Chapter 4.6.3) in these

analytical tables, which is for reference purposes only. I discuss what the types mean, and how I arrived at

them in section 5.8. In addition, I include the potentially influential organisational and structural factors on

the development of a TNS-related conversational lineage (see Chapter 4.6.4) in these tables. These factors are

largely self-explanatory, but again, I include these for reference purposes. I discuss how I arrived at them at

the beginning of Chapter 7.

I present systems maps of these five companies in Figures 5.1-5 for reference purposes when reading the

accounts.

- 114 -

Figure 5.1 Systems map of those parts of an aviation fuel company that I engaged, andwhich were relevant for my interviewee or those I encountered

R&D

Siteoperationsworldwide

HQ

Sales &Distribution

ManagementBoard

Environment,Health and Safety

An aviationfuel

company

Customers

Competitors

Interviewed:• Environmental LeaderAlso attended:• presentation by Health

and Safety Manager

TNS UK

- 115 -

Figure 5.2 Systems map of those parts of Carillion plc that I engaged, and which wererelevant for my interviewees or those I encountered

'Carillion Building' is a subsidiary of Carillion plc, and Schal is a business unit ofCarillion Building. HQ refers to the plc's headquarters in Wolverhampton.

Attended:• site visit to, and

presentations by projectteam on, hospital project

• TNS workshop for NHSTrust sponsored byCarillion Building

TNS UK

Suppliers

ManagementBoard

Other Carillionsubsidiaries

Carillion plc

HQ

CarillionBuilding

Schal BusinessDevelopment

Interviewed:• Director of Civil

Engineering &Environment

SwindonHospital Project

Interviewed:• Business

DevelopmentDirector

Interviewed:• Director• Environmental

Manager• Commercial

Manager

- 116 -

Figure 5.3 Systems map of those parts of The Co-operative Bank that I engaged, andwhich were relevant for my interviewees or those I encountered

'HQ' refers to the Manchester Head Office at which interviewees and those whom Iencountered were based.

The Ecology Unit

Purchasing &Facilities

Asset InvestmentManagement

Supply Chain

Ethical Policy Unit

Chief Executive& Management

Board

Bank Call Centres& Branches

The Co-operative Bank

TNS UK

Customers

Corporate division

UK Governmentand RegulatoryOrganisations

Interviewed:• Head of Ecology Unit• Ecological Analyst• Business Partnership

Development Officer

Interviewed:• Procurement

Consultant• Project Consultant

Attended and spokewith participants at

a Supplier'sPartnership Forum

Interviewed:• Business

DevelopmentManager

- 117 -

Figure 5.4 Systems map of those parts of Interface Inc that I engaged, and which wererelevant for my interviewees or those I encountered

The offices and factory at the village of Shelf in Yorkshire, in the UK, constituteInterface's largest concentration of employees worldwide, despite Interface being a US-based company.

US ManagementBoard Other Interface

factories and offices

UK Sales &Marketing

Learning & HumanServices Management

Research

Factory-floor

Interface USHuman Services

Management

Shelf, UK

InterfaceInc

TNS UK

Industry researchorganisations

RegulatoryorganisationsCustomers

TNSI / TNSUS

Interviewed:• Vice President

of HumanServices

Interviewed:• R&D Manager

Interviewed:• Sustainability Director• Sustainability

Marketing Director• Learning Manager• Payroll Administrative

Manager

Interviewed:• Production

SupervisorAlso taken on tour ofthe site by the directorof sustainability

- 118 -

Figure 5.5 Systems map of that part of Sainsbury's that I engaged, and which wasrelevant for my interviewee

In the Figures 5.1-5, I present the departments and domains, from where my interviews and those I

encountered came, as subsystems within thick dotted lines. The thin dotted lines that zoom out from these

subsystems specify individuals I interviewed and encountered. Those system-elements in the maps outside

the thick dotted line apart from TNS UK were not directly involved in the research, but were significant to

interviewees and those whom I encountered during the fieldwork.

Members of the companies I interviewed or encountered worked in wider organisations and networks of

relationships that I did not directly encounter. I did not expect to 'capture' all the interactions between

members of TNS UK and their Pathfinder Companies, and all potentially relevant organisational information.

Instead, I expected that the perspectives and experiences of event participants (Table 3.8) and interviewees

Sainsbury'sSupermarkets Ltd

GroupEnvironmentCommittee

GroupManagement

Board

Sainsbury'sGroup

Suppliers

Communications

TNS UK

EnvironmentalManagementDepartment Personnel

Interviewed:• Deputy

EnvironmentalManager

Supermarketbuyers

New productdevelopers

- 119 -

(Tables 3.4-7 and 3.9-10) would signify their participation in wider organisations in ways that were

meaningful for them. After all, I was not seeking a full objective representation. I did not seek a

representative picture of all experiences of organisational learning with TNS UK. Based on the view that

each person's experience is valuable and could trigger insights, I assumed that targeting a set number and

cross-section of research participants was less important than providing opportunities to reflect on

experiences and recount stories. An unbounded research strategy, as discussed in Chapters 2 and 3, is

acceptable. There could and probably would be multiple conversational lineages in any given organisation.

Instead of fully representing an organisation's trajectory of sustainable development, therefore, I wanted to

convey examples of the possibilities for and constraints to OLSD with TNS UK.

I begin with a narrative account that is a possibility for OLSD with TNS UK in an aviation fuel company.

5.2 'Making us think' (An aviation fuel company – see Figure 5.1)

The aviation fuel company that Tom worked for had little room for manoeuvre in developing its

products. As they perceived the situation, they had little influence over the users of their

products, who through their operations emitted about forty seven million tonnes of carbon

dioxide into the atmosphere each year. The operations of Tom's company emitted less than one

thousandth of the carbon dioxide emmitted by their customers. From Tom's perspective,

however, it was not a viable option to close down the operations of his company. He and some of

his colleagues perceived that others less concerned about ecological impacts than themselves

would take their place (PNM 1 & TNS UK 4).

In 1998, the company's chief executive signed a three-year contract with TNS UK to be one of its

Pathfinder Companies. The contract initially involved two pilot projects, one to raise awareness

amongst a selection of re-fuelling operational staff working 'on the ground' at airports, and to

seek operational improvements regarding their ecological impacts. Participants reportedly

found TNS' framework to be an

'effective way of involving staff, making the concept of sustainability meaningful, enabling

participants to identify short and longer term actions, and to develop the skills and

motivation to implement them.' (TNS UK 1999a, p.15)

(TNSF 8a)

For example, a concern of ground staff was their wasteful use of thick rubber gloves, which

protected their skin from direct contact with aviation fuel (PNM 1 & TNS UK 4); they usually

threw the gloves away after each use.

(TNSF 5c)

- 120 -

An outcome of these 'grassroots' workshops was an airports environmental sustainability guide,

created in collaboration with members of TNS UK and one of its accredited facilitators.

The other project entailed a review of the company's policy, and an exploration into possibilities

to take action in relation to the wider impacts of the aviation industry. The policy review

workshop

'identified several ways to initiate and develop [the] debate [with major airlines, aircraft

and engine manufacturers and joint venture partners, regarding the impacts of the

aviation industry]' (ibid. p.19).

(TNSF 8d)

In addition, participants

'recognised the contribution which The Natural Step can make by providing both an

objective framework and a shared language to address the issues' (ibid.).

Tom, who became the company's 'environmental leader' towards the end of its Pathfinder

contract, divulged his own perspective on TNS' framework, and the work of TNS UK as an

organisation. The more acquainted he had become with TNS' framework, the more he liked it

and the more 'it stood up' (PNM 1). The process of thinking with TNS' framework could help

people consider the implications of various choices, which he referred to as 'interested

disinterest' (ibid.).

Tom recalled a conversation with one of TNS UK's facilitators and a few of his colleagues, in

which they discussed the energy source of airport vehicles. He and his colleagues were

considering the introduction of electric vehicles at their various operations sites in Africa.

However, with the prompting of the TNS UK facilitator, they opted to retain the use of tractors,

which local mechanics with established maintenance expertise could easily maintain. The TNS

UK facilitator encouraged them to consider that introducing electric vehicles could 'load the

problem further upstream onto coal-fired power stations having to produce more

electricity [to recharge the vehicle batteries]' (PNM 1).

(TNSF 2,5a)

Moreover, the introduction of electric vehicles could lead to the redundancy of local mechanics,

(TNSF 5d)

and their retraining could require someone to fly from Europe to Africa on more than one

occasion.

- 121 -

As such, Tom appreciated that TNS' framework can help 'make us think' (ibid.). The input of

the TNS facilitator encouraged them to think more about the 'bigger picture'. He saw that TNS

UK's relationship involved an interest in another's activities, based on TNS' uncompromising

principles, without being an external auditor.

Some might regard the thinking provoked by the TNS UK facilitator as systemic thinking, as opposed to

systematic thinking (Lane et al. 2002b). Systemic thinking appreciates the complexity of a situation and a

range of potential implications of an activity. This was the awareness recommended by TNS UK's ex-director

of science, in his paper on priority chemicals lists, in which he encouraged sustained thought about, for

example, the contexts in which chemicals and materials are used (Everard 2002b). I present my analysis of

this narrative account in Table 5.1.

The TNS-related conversational lineage in Tom's company seemed to remain within the well-bounded

departments of onsite operations on the one hand, and a network of company policy-makers on the other.

While their training with TNS' framework clearly had some knowledge-based benefits, the account of Tom's

systemic thinking does point, perhaps, to one of the limitations of TNS' framework highlighted by Upham

(1999a). There are no clear guidelines about making trade-offs between the system conditions. Some might

make a counter-case to Tom's line of thinking in favour of introducing electric vehicles at the African

airports. For example, they might say that Tom's company surely had the investment capability to expand

(rather than replace) the skill-sets of local mechanics, to install solar panels to recharge the vehicle batteries,

and to fund a supply of spare parts.

In this case, I regard the extent of the formation of a TNS-related conversational lineage to be constrained. As

I convey in 6.2, Tom had his sights on an issue for which TNS' framework provided little immediate help to

Tom and his colleagues. This was a contextual issue that related to how the lack of an international regulatory

regime prevented Tom's company from selling a more environmentally benign product on the market.

- 122 -

Table 5.1 Assessment of 'Making us think'

Ticks – 4– relate to the organisational levels at which TNS-related conversational lineages primarily developedas conveyed in the narrative account.

Stars – H – depict the extent of potential influence of a factor in the development of collaborative emergentlearning. One star – H – conveys a qualified affirmation of influence; two stars – HH – conveys a definiteaffirmation; and three stars – HHH – conveys a resounding affirmation. A hollow circle – m – conveys nodiscernible influence.

Factors Assessment of degree

Total number of distinctions in narrative 6

% awareness of TNS' theory (1–5a-d) 67%

% systematisation of TNS-definedsustainable development (6)

% enacted TNS' strategic corollaries (7a-d)

TNS-distinctionsin the narrativeaccount

% enacted ABCD process (8a-d) 33%

Interpersonal4

(Systemic conversation with TNS UKfacilitator)

Departmental4

(ground-staff training and policy-maker'sawareness raising)

Inter-departmental

Organisational

Organisationallevelspredominantlyinvolved in TNS-relatedconversations

Inter-organisational

Type of evident possibility for OLSD with TNS UK Awareness raising and systemic thinking

People coming together HH

EnthusiasmH

(more like 'dedication')

Opportunities for exploratory, appreciativeconversations

H

To some extent

Relevant expertise for systematisation andABCD process

HH

Conversation-fostering organisation andstructures

H

Yes, within clearly bounded networks

Investment of adequate resourcesH

Apparently

Leadership of CEO and ManagementBoard

HH

Sustainable development strategy andvision

H

Nascent

Potentiallyinfluentialorganisationaland structuralfactors in thedevelopment ofTNS-relatedconversationallineages

Market signalsm

Barely recognisable (cf. 6.2)

- 123 -

5.3 A 'landmark building' (Carillion Building – see Figure 5.2)

5.3.1 Introduction

Construction work on a new Private Finance Initiative (PFI)1 acute general hospital on the

outskirts of Swindon began in 1999 to replace the town's old hospital.

The Swindon PFI hospital project was just one amongst many managed by Carillion plc, a civil

engineering, construction and infrastructure management company with a turnover of £1.9

billion in 2000 (Carillion plc 2000a). The construction industry is one that

'has increasingly come under the "sustainability spotlight" because of the significant

environmental and social impacts associated with its activities.' (Carillion plc 2000b, p.4)

The Swindon hospital project, however, has become a significant benchmark in the industry.

Following a variety of awards in recognition of their environmental performance and social and

environmental reporting,

(TNSF 6)

the company received the Building Magazine's award for sustainability, in large part thanks to

the Swindon hospital project (Carillion plc 2003c). Carillion's Chief Executive said the hospital

'received top marks from the Building Research Establishment as one of the UK’s most

sustainable buildings, where more sustainable methods have generated identifiable

savings of £1.8 million, including 30 per cent less energy consumption and 35 per cent

less carbon dioxide emissions.' (ibid.)

The Building Research Establishment

'also noted the social engagement, and economic drivers throughout the project, which in

some instances greatly exceeded all projects previously assessed.' (Carillion plc 2002)

1 PFI was a scheme initiated by the UK's New Labour Government in which private sector companies provide ongoingservices for the public sector.

- 124 -

5.3.2 'Falling across each other'

Such performance has not always been the case for Carillion, once the construction and

infrastructure management arm of Tarmac. In the mid 1990's, protests against the Twyford

Down 'congestion relief' road and the Manchester Airport runway development created negative

publicity that 'hammered' Tarmac, the company involved in both projects (PNM 2). The

publicity led to its management board waking up to the significance of environmental issues, the

establishment of an Independent Advisory Panel on the environment in 1994, and the annual

publication of Environment Reports (Carillion plc 2000b).

(TNSF 6)

Carillion plc was formed in 1999 after demerging from Tarmac, signifying an opportunity for

'more focused business' activity and 'impetus for a more sustainable approach' (ibid. p.2).

Before the demerger, the company's then Chief Executive, Sir Neville Simms, and TNS UK had

'fallen across each other', without planning, at the time when company members were starting

to ask where to go next (PC 3.1).

After becoming a TNS UK Pathfinder company in early 1998, a sub-group of the company –

Carillion Housing – piloted TNS in a social housing scheme in Bradford. Such were the

possibilities enabled by the partnership that Sir Neville Simms asked if the new Swindon hospital

could become the second TNS UK Pathfinder project. The hospital project team's brief was to

make 'better [commercially sensible] decisions' rather than merely to substitute these for

ecological decisions (PC 3.1).

(TNSF 8d)

While on the surface a request 'from the top', the request came from within an organisation

familiar with self-organising learning and peer-challenging networks that had been operating

prior to TNS UK becoming involved. One interviewee described this enabling approach as

'creating a pull rather than a push' (ibid.).

Responses, amongst members of the team 'volunteered' to take on the project, included cynicism

(PC 3.1). One of the main designers on the project summed it up in terms of people saying 'not

another initiative! Don't they realise we've got a hospital to build?' (CFE 14).

5.3.3 'No experts'

The project team held two one-day TNS workshops, with accredited TNS UK facilitators, in

January 1999.

(TNSF 8a)

- 125 -

The workshops resembled TNS' approach as outlined in the TNS UK Facilitator's Manual in the

main (TNS UK 1998), even if slightly adapted to suit the 'Carillion context' (AF 2).

With PFI and its 'longer lead-in times' came the prospect of more attention given to life cycle

costing (PC 3.1, 3.2 & 3.3). The same company would not only design and build the hospital, but

also manage its facilities over twenty-seven years. For Carillion, the income they would make

from their twenty-seven year non-clinical servicing of the hospital would surpass that received

for the actual design and construction of the hospital. They had a significant stake in bringing

others besides just the designers of the hospital into the same room at an early stage. They

therefore invited project designers to the TNS workshops along with members of

• Carillion Building Special Projects (the dedicated construction subsidiary);

• Carillion Services (the dedicated facilities management subsidiary); and,

• The Hospital Company (the special company formed by Carillion and investors to

coordinate the PFI project).

The team had to find their way through the 'sustainability issues' themselves. 'There were no

experts […and] we didn't get the big book from [TNS] Sweden with all the answers, but we

empowered people and we got knowledge coming through at all levels' (CFE 14).

Some of the ideas from the workshops were perhaps unrealistic, but the enthusiasm was evident.

The project team rationalised some of the outcomes having examined them in relation to TNS'

system conditions,

(TNSF 8b)

created 'Sustainability Action Plans' (SAPs), and made particular individuals responsible for the

implementation of particular items.

(TNSF 6)

The collaborative design and learning process and the emerging SAPs resembled the four stages

of the ABCD decision-making process in TNS' framework. One of the project managers was not

aware that the construction phase of a development had had such policy applied to it before

(CFE 2).

- 126 -

The SAPs were aspirational2, and covered the following areas: materials, energy reduction,

transport, waste minimisation, community relations, local employment and employment of

minority and underprivileged groups, nuisance, wildlife, and landscaping (Vetter, Weston, and

Martin 2000). Examples from each of these sustainability categories included the aims to reduce

the use of, and develop alternatives to PVC,

(TNSF 5b)

use timber from sustainable sources,

(TNSF 5c)

and to favour suppliers developing 'green' products (Carillion Building Special Projects 1999).

They aimed to incorporate energy efficient design features such as solar glazing, low energy

lighting and effective insulation.

(TNSF 5a)

They intended to use high-efficiency equipment.

(TNSF 5d)

They committed to plant native trees and develop a habitat management plan, use organic

materials in landscaping, and minimise pesticide and herbicide use.

(TNSF 5c)

They aimed to minimise road usage near housing and 'out of hours working' operations,

(TNSF 5d)

and to minimise vehicle movements and maximise vehicle loads.

(TNSF 5a)

They intended to liase with the local community.

(TNSF 5d)

They aimed to favour the purchasing of recycled materials and those with a long life,

(TNSF 5c)

to segregate all waste on site, and to cut the amount of waste sent to landfill by half of that sent

by a previous Carillion PFI hospital project at Dartford.

(TNSF 5c)

2 The SAPs reflected the project team's aims. When I asked the Carillion plc's director of environment and engineeringwhether he knew of any data about the extent of implementation of the SAP, he said he did not. I have therefore markedthe examples from the SAPs with TNS-distinctions relating to awareness of TNS' framework (i.e. TNSF 1 – 5a-d) ratherthan TNS-espoused activities (i.e. TNSF 6 – 8a-d).

- 127 -

With both designers, facilities managers and investors around the table at the beginning, they

were able to give more thought to the cost implications of, for example, insulation levels.

'An early proposal to double the insulation in the roof appeared at first to be ruled out

since the costs would increase in the same proportion.

(TNSF 5d)

Further exploration of the implications, however, showed that there would be a

consequent reduction in the number of radiators required to heat the upper floor of the

structure.

(TNSF 5a)

The savings made here proved to be in excess of the extra costs incurred in increasing the

insulation. Furthermore, it has been calculated that energy savings over the lifetime of the

building will be in the region of £250,000.' (Vetter et al. 2000)

The Sustainability Action Plans identified 'short-, medium- and long-term actions' that led to: a

seven percent saving 'the cost of the building envelope' (Carillion plc 2000b, p.32); a net saving

of £219,000 in energy running costs; and a net saving of £811,000 in materials and their

maintenance.

'The only quantifiable cost to the project was the cost of TNS membership and an

investment in initial training, at about one day per team member' (ibid.).

The workshops had triggered some innovation and 'joined-up', or systems, thinking. The project

design manager perceived a number of benefits of TNS' involvement (CFE 14). He saw that it

had introduced new expertise into the project team, which had contributed to team spirit. They

found opportunities they had not originally looked for, and had proved they could save money.

In addition, their measurement and subsequent publication of sustainability improvements

(TNSF 6)

led to them receiving awards for sustainable development. One of the attractions of TNS,

according to people's experience cited by a couple of interviewees, was its non-adversarial

scientific language that appealed to technicians and engineers (PC 2.1 & 2.2).

5.3.4 'Nothing but enthusiasm'

In August 1999, a month before financial closure on the project contract, the project team held a

TNS workshop for thirty-five participants from their preferred trade contractors. These included

G. Pearce Civil Engineering Ltd, Duffy Construction Ltd, Crown House Engineering, Trent

- 128 -

Concrete Cladding Ltd, and Broderick Structures. After a brief twenty-minute presentation,

devised in part around TNS' framework, the project team invited them to devise their own

Sustainability Action Plans. Despite no contracts having been finalised, the project team gave

the trade contractors the assurance that if points from the workshop were acted upon it would

place them in a more competitive position when they came to tender for contracts. 'There was

nothing but enthusiasm from the start' (CFE 14).

In May 2000, the project team requested trade contractor senior and project managers to feed

back on their experiences; each got a round of applause on describing what they each had done

(ibid.). One of the trade contractors, Pearce, calculated the project design saved 20,000 lorry

movements

(TNSF 7a)

– the imported stone came via the local railhead rather than the motorway. While the rate was a

few pence more, they considered it worthwhile. Moreover, by March 2001, and in collaboration

with Duffy, Pearce had recycled over 300 tonnes of concrete (CFE 14).

(TNSF 7c)

'Trent' worked with a window installer at their yards in Nottingham, installing the windows into

the pre-cast sections before fitting. Prefabrication significantly reduced the amount of waste sent

to landfill and eliminated the use of external scaffolding.

(TNSF 7c)

In addition, 'Duffy' developed timber recycling and took their initiative to another project.

(TNSF 7c)

An apparent innovation to emerge from people coming together and talking at the workshop was

the idea to collect plasterboard off-cuts and return them to manufacturers for recycling.

Working with Lafarge in Avonmouth, Carillion staff were able to negotiate an arrangement

whereby on-site contractors place offcuts into special containers, taking care to keep them

clean. Plasterboard suppliers then collected the offcuts when delivering fresh sheets, using the

returning vehicles to deliver waste material back to the manufacturing plants for recycling into

fresh plasterboard (Vetter et al. 2000, p.17).

(TNSF 7c)

For one of the project team designers, the keys to changing the behaviours of the trade

contractors again consisted of the 'empowerment' of workshop participants to convey their

expertise. He also cited the request for senior management involvement and feed back, and

Carillion member's liaison with trade contractor staff, as contributing factors to the success of

the format (CFE 14). His view was widely shared (CFE 2). People were motivated, according to

- 129 -

one of the senior project managers – 'it was remarkable seeing people really make a

difference' (CFE 2). Even the people 'pouring the concrete' got involved and were enthusiastic

(TNS UK 3).

5.3.5 Involving the client

So enamoured were they, in fact, that the project team financed a TNS workshop to communicate

the project's sustainability rationale for senior managers of the NHS Swindon and Marlborough

Trust, and eventual hospital staff, in February 2000 (CFE 2).

(TNSF 8a)

The hand-over of the hospital to the NHS Trust took place in November 2002.

5.3.6 'A toolkit to waken a sleeping giant'

Such were the stories emanating from Swindon and the TNS UK office that members of Carillion

Building's Management Board, based at the Carillion plc headquarters in Wolverhampton, sent

some Carillion Building business development managers 'to challenge and really understand

what was going on' (PC 3.1). They facilitated three discussion groups and 'really listened'

(ibid.). While at first sceptical, these envoys became convinced that something special – a

'landmark building' – had indeed happened (PC 3.1). One of them perceived that the people

involved had started from very different positions. Some had been very sceptical, while some had

taken it on very easily. He also perceived that the whole team in Swindon had bought in, and

had applied TNS' framework to what they did in personally relevant ways. In his view, the

hospital project 'gave people the opportunity to innovate' along environmentally and socially

progressive lines that were beneficial to Carillion 'on a purely commercial basis' (ibid.).

Because of 'the good vibes' from Swindon, he invited TNS UK's Chief Executive to give a two-

day TNS workshop with Carillion Building's Management Board,

(TNSF 8a)

which owned a third of the plc between its members. The workshop was initiated 'to fill in the

gaps, giving us the big picture' (ibid.). It led to people asking the question 'is it all too hard?'

and leading to a sense of the practical possibilities to influence the situation positively (ibid.).

(TNSF 8d)

The Board 'pretty much bought into it' (ibid.).

- 130 -

This business manager later geared the biannual in-house 'OPs' (Operations) conference – a

very task focused pragmatic forum – around TNS and sustainability.

(TNSF 8a)

He also devised a 'train the trainer' drive within the organisation to 'infect' a representative

sample of ten percent – around 140 employees – of the Carillion Building workforce with

awareness of sustainability (ibid.).

(TNSF 8a)

He told me about an 'enabling group' that formed to facilitate the initiative and involved three

management board members (ibid.).

(TNSF 6)

Rather than perceive sustainable development as a threat, members of Carillion increasingly

saw it as a business opportunity. The business manager, who described himself as a 'big picture

guy', had been involved with sustainable development and TNS for eighteen months (PC 3.1).

He said sustainable development was a 'real life-blood' for him and a 'real opportunity to

take the business forward' (ibid.). Resulting from its efforts to educate members of staff, reduce

their ecological impacts, and build relationships with local communities and various

stakeholders, he saw the company as 'starting to become more joined up [and] to penetrate

new fields' (ibid.). At the time of our meeting, he saw 'sustainability talk' starting to 'migrate up'

into the plc level and across into other parts of the Carillion group, for example, Infrastructure

Management. One of the project managers at Schal perceived the Swindon hospital project as

beneficial for in-house training in his business unit, because it gave 'people real examples that

they can latch on to' over and above 'academic theory' (PC 3.3).

The director of engineering and environment described himself as having learnt quite a lot since

the company clarified its sustainable development trajectory. At the time of interview, he did not

notice the issue of sustainability cropping up in conversations in the organisation eighteen

months previously, whereas, it had become something 'commonly spoken about' (PC 3.2). He

attributed this to 'the general sort of raising of awareness that happened particularly

through Carillion Building and TNS' programme that happened there.

(TNSF 8a)

It’s […] taking a little bit longer to get into other bits of the business' (ibid.).

While the PFI aspect of the project clearly enabled the coming together of people in

conversation and collaborative action at an early stage in the design, one should not overlook

TNS' influence, which gave the collaboration its sustainability focus. According to Carillion

plc's Chief Engineer, TNS' input 'accelerated' the collaborative action and helped trigger

- 131 -

enthusiasm. It helped Carillion, ultimately, to flag its sustainability credentials and eventually

win the contract (PNM 2 & PC 3.2). He had said that some of the project managers and

designers had 'become evangelists' about TNS (ibid.).

Possibly, the involvement of TNS UK – and the emphasis on the cyclical processes of ecosystems

in TNS' framework – also encouraged project managers to widen the net of invited suppliers

(PNM 2). As such, the project team avoided duplication and enhanced co-operation, avoiding

having to deal with each supplier on a one-to-one basis (ibid.). From the perspective of the

director of civil engineering and environment, this was a communication issue (ibid.). People

were happier working within a common framework. From his perspective, the input of the four

or five TNS UK members and facilitators involved had helped fire enthusiasm and people's belief

in the possible, and helped to coordinate action, in the Swindon hospital project (PNM 2). 'I

think that TNS opened up their eyes […]. The process of thinking about doing things

differently was accelerated enormously [by TNS UK's involvement]. The whole sort of

decision making process was better informed, shall we say, and with a certain sort of zeal

behind it as well [to] find a better solution to do the job with the objective of making it

more sustainable' (PC 3.2).

(TNSF 8d)

Before, 'commercial aspects' would have driven the design and decision-making moreso than

they did for the Swindon project (ibid.). Moreover, he welcomed TNS' framework in its

propensity to allow people to make decisions for themselves and develop their expertise (ibid.).

As such, he perceived TNS' framework as a 'toolkit to waken a sleeping giant' (ibid.). He

perceived TNS' input as good in giving people the context to talk (ibid.). He said that he and

others were learning that there was so much latent knowledge amongst members of Carillion,

although they did not necessarily know what they did not know (ibid.).

While the PFI contract and TNS' input legitimised the invitation to more stakeholders to

participate in the design process, members of Carillion were also predisposed to intra-

organisational learning in the guise of its company learning networks (PC 3.1 & PNM 2).

With the design of the Swindon hospital came the second opportunity for Carillion to pilot TNS' framework.

In the event, things clicked into place, taking management board and plc level, and even the project team

members involved, by surprise. The Swindon hospital project story resonated significantly for interviewees,

and concerned a conversational lineage that both fostered and was receptive to organisational member's

enthusiasm. It led to significant learning. The participation of various members in their organisation's

- 132 -

emerging sustainable development trajectory also brought them reputational benefits, both within and outside

their organisation. I judge the formation of TNS-related conversational lineage took place in departmental,

and across inter-departmental and inter-organisational levels. I present my analysis of this narrative account

in Table 5.2.

The input of TNS UK members and facilitators played a significant role in this 'landmark building' story. A

clear TNS-related conversational lineage developed, with enthusiasm building from an initial request from

the Chief Executive of Carillion plc, and a reluctant response (PC 2.1 & CFE 14). The enthusiasm was able to

ferry TNS' input across significant domains, namely from the project team, to the network of trade

contractors, and to the NHS Trust. Those on the management board in Wolverhampton heard the stories

emerging from the Swindon project, and, because of their interest, invited TNS UK to give them a workshop.

Moreover, one of the business development managers organised the biannual 'OP's' conference around

sustainability, and initiated an organisation-wide 'train-the-trainer' programme. Of course, not all those in

Carillion plc were as inspired as the Swindon hospital project team, as conveyed in section 5.4, although the

project did give those at Schal concrete examples of sustainability contributions. Enthusiasm and people's

involvement arose as a result of invitations from the project team to participate and contribute. The

conversations that emerged seemed to glisten with ideas and possibilities for design and construction practice.

As two interviewees mused, the company's enabling culture and predisposition to learning, as evidenced in its

company learning networks, may have related to this (PC's 3.1&2).

There were questions raised about the extent to which TNS' input would 'catch on' in other business groups

under the plc umbrella (cf. section 5.4). This was especially the case for those business groups undertaking

non-PFI projects (cf. Chapter 6.3). Non-PFI projects mounted to three-quarters of Carillion's business, a lot of

which involved maintenance rather than new construction (PC 3.2). Often there were few opportunities to

influence clients in design decision-making and specification. TNS' input intermingled in a PFI project that

engendered the conditions for more stakeholders to participate in its design from the beginning. Significantly,

each of my interviewees and the Carillion members who gave presentations at particular events (CFE's 2 &

14) suggested that the PFI nature of the contract contributed to the progress made regarding the projects'

ecological and social impacts. This influential factor of market signals is something to which I return in

Chapter 6.3. Only time will adjudicate the 'sustainability' of the hospital project as a whole. The hospital

project received favourable attention regarding its 'sustainable construction', but its being part of the UK

Government's new Private Finance Initiative (PFI), in some circles, did not. PFI entails construction firms

and investors joining to 'design, build, finance and operate' public services for periods of up to thirty years

(Pollock 2001), and has courted controversy. Some have seen PFI as both the invasion of public services by

the private sector and questionable accounting on the Government's part, echoing, perhaps, concerns in

sustainable development discourses (see, for example, Shiva 2000).

- 133 -

Table 5.2 Assessment of 'A "landmark building"'







16%

% enacted TNS' strategic corollaries (7a-d) 16%



Interpersonal (implicit)

Departmental4

(project specific within Carillion BuildingSpecial Projects)

Inter-departmental

4

(facilities managers as well as engineers andarchitects involved in design)

Organisational4

(train-the-trainer initiative and the OP'sconference oriented around sustainability)


Inter-organisational4

(collaborating with trade contractors, and thenorganising a workshop for the client)

Type of evident possibility for OLSD with TNS UK Collaborative emergent learning

People coming together HHH

Enthusiasm HHH

Opportunities for exploratory, appreciativeconversations HH

Relevant expertise for systematisation andABCD process HH


HHIntra-company learning networks (but rumours

of dearth of opportunities in the wider,everyday organisation)

Investment of adequate resources HHH


HH(Open-minded)


HHEmergent – target setting by respective business

units


Market signalsH

Mixed – clearer from public sector, unclearfrom private sector (cf. Chapter 6.3)

- 134 -

5.4 'A longish term thing' (Schal – see Figure 5.2)

Schal is a specialist project-management business unit of Carillion Building, itself a subsidiary

of the construction company, Carillion plc. Senior managers in Schal decided to introduce

sustainability training into their company.

(TNSF 8a)

This was an internal decision to Schal. A director at Schal said, 'apart from […] having

[sustainability] targets allocated to us [by Carillion plc]

(TNSF 6)

albeit with [a Schal colleague's] input, we’ve also done other things in our own right within

Schal. So for example we tied up with – I always get mixed up with the Natural Step and

Forum for the Future – but we tied up with the Natural Step. Twenty people from Schal

went on the course, a two day course that said "this is sustainability, here’s some shocking

facts to get your attention, and it’s all about sustainability and some of the problems",

(TNSF 8a)

and some workshops about what could we actually do about it.

(TNSF 8b-c)

And probably, by and large, at the end of the two days those twenty people won round to

the cause as it were and understood in some way what they could actually do. […The

training] was generally fairly well received and those twenty people had a task of rolling

out their own training to the rest of Schal – a couple of hundred [people].

(TNSF 6,8a)

So probably, I’d say, [twenty members of the company took] materials they were given at

that two day workshop and [trained] themselves or [got] the message across as they saw it.

(TNSF 8a)

We didn’t see [that] it was absolutely critical [that the training] was word for word what

TNS came up with, but the principle came across' (PC 3.3).

John, a commercial manager at Schal, was one of the twenty participants on the initial 'train-

the-trainer' course. In conversation with the Schal director, operations manager and I, John felt

the training for two days was 'too long', although he acknowledged this was his perspective and

different to that of others (PC 3.3). He appreciated the opportunities for course participants to

contribute and be creative, but he felt that the facilitators could have taught more of the course

content. 'I think […] some of those gaps that we filled in could have been taught, because

they knew what they wanted to teach us. Some of [the course] was good, some of it

[involved] genuine creativity. […But] the amount that they had in that two days and the

way they produced the course I think made it too long a time to go with what they actually

- 135 -

had as content' (ibid.). He felt that his company was already 'well versed' in doing 'the

environmental things that companies do now, particularly companies like Schal' (ibid.).

However, he experienced some of the course material relating to the five capitals model of

sustainability3 as 'a language I’ve not really come across so it’s all fairly new in that respect.

So it was […] very interesting [–] an eye-opener as to the various things that we should be

doing and looking at. [It also presents a challenge] to find ways [… to make] better money,

because I think [many] people don’t actually think that’s possible' (PC 3.3).

Although John, the commercial manager, eventually found some of the concepts difficult to

explain, especially TNS' metaphor of the funnel, he used much of the new found theory when

training others in the organisation. However, he aimed to emphasise the practicality of the

theory. 'So I started basically by getting people to look twenty years ahead and try and link

[the] sustainability idea from now to then.

(TNSF 8c)

And I’d built on that by looking at a single example of a development and bringing in the

ideas of the various capitals, the triple bottom line and then build up to gap analysis and

incremental planning.

(TNSF 8b-d)

So I was looking at the features of the sorts of things that you might do if you were

required to do sustainability on a particular project as opposed to looking at broader

sustainability, […] at what sustainability is. So I squeezed out some of the theoretical

aspects of sustainability and looked at actual building blocks that people can use on

individual projects because that’s how they’ll come across it really. They won’t be looking

at it in terms of, you know, sitting in their arm chair in the evening and thinking about

what sustainability is. [Instead, they'll be] thinking about it in terms of, "well, we’ve got to

sell this project or we’ve got to do this project and put sustainability into all those things,

and what can we do about it?" So I put those skills in. That’s how I felt it should have been

done' (PC 3.3).

Having trained a variety of colleagues in the commercial department, John reflected on how

others in his department regarded sustainable development. He said they saw it more as a long-

term issue and of not such importance in the short term.

3 Cf. Forum for the Future (1999).

- 136 -

Chris, an operations manager at Schal, echoed this emphasis on timescales and the relative

impact of the training. 'In terms of my own awareness [TNS' Framework has] obviously

helped because I’ve got an overall direction,

(TNSF 8a)

it’s a longish term thing. I’m taking a few steps at a time, so it’s important the way I

approach things' (PC 3.3). There had been the instruction from Carillion plc to become ISO

14001 accredited, but regarding TNS' framework, Chris said he had not 'approached it like

that, [that is to say] as a building block [from which I could] take another step forward. As

far as awareness amongst the troops go as I’d say [TNS' framework] hasn’t affected us

very much at all yet' (ibid.).

However, Chris emphasised that Carillion Building's Swindon hospital project [which I give an

account of in section 5.3] gave 'people real examples that they can latch on to and you can

actually [integrate those] as part of an educational programme' (PC 3.3). Regarding the TNS

training, he reflected that there is 'only so much of theory you can take at the front' (ibid.). In

contrast to John's experience, he found the training 'slightly squashed, I think it was the first

time they’d done it in two days instead of three days. Carillion insisted they weren’t going

to take their staff out for more than two days' (PC 3.3). He left the training workshop

'wanting to put it into practice. It became tangible, yes, and I think having the worked

examples […] was good' (ibid.). However, he would have liked an opportunity to follow up 'to

take you on from there – "yeah, yeah, yeah", all enthusiastic [but asking] "what do we do

now? […]" So you need to put it into practice' (ibid.).

The 'sustainability learning journey' of one of the directors at Schal entailed him joining the

Cambridge Sustainability Learning Network for business people, which lasted over an eight-

month period. He attended it with a couple of others from Carillion. His perspective was that it

'obviously took us much, much further than a two-day [TNS training] course, so over an

eight-month period we’ve had two two-day residential workshops with Cambridge and

we’ve done three projects… So that’s given us a much wider perspective and the course is

very good actually, […] lots of visiting lecturers, group discussions and that kind of thing.

So Interface, for example, came along and did their spiel and it was one of the more

interesting ones' (PC 3.3). Resulting from his experience there, Chris decided to explore the

notion of corporate social responsibility further. From his perspective, the idea would become

'much more important. I think the environmental argument is won. [There are] very few

- 137 -

people who would stand there now and say it’s much ado about nothing anymore,

everybody’s bought into it4.

(TNSF 8a)

But on the social side there seems to be a much greater swing in society for openness and

demanding better ethical performance from companies.

(TNSF 5d)

And you can look anywhere and see evidence of that demand and I think that it’s slowly –

but accelerating – forming itself into a shape that will demand things from businesses in

the future. And so for Schal's purposes I’ve tried to come up with, or I have come up with

this plan for introducing social auditing' (PC 3.3).

(TNSF 7d)

I analyse the narrative account of 'A longish term thing' in Table 5.3.

There was no clear evidence of rich TNS-related conversational lineages in Schal, in which my interviewees

related their own experiences of design, decision making and strategising for sustainable development. This

is not to say these things did not happen. It merely emphasises that these things were not part of the

conversational lineages that I tapped into with them. The focus of my researching conversations were on

awareness raising, and the conversations people were having in the organisation regarding their TNS-related

training. As Table 5.3 conveys, the majority of TNS-distinctions were related to the ABCD process, of which

the majority (i.e. 6 out of 9) of those related to the awareness raising 'A' stage of the ABCD process. In

addition, analysing the account shows that the other three related more to Pathfinder Company members'

virtual enacting of the ABCD process during training than beyond.

While Carillion Building's Swindon Hospital Project gave training participants concrete examples of

contributions to sustainability, the emphasis in the above account was on the question of how their training

could be put into practice. Sustainable development was seen to be a 'longish term thing' (PC 3.3). I had the

sense that the directors at Schal embarked on this intra-organisational training initiative because the

importance of sustainable development was rising in Carillion plc. This was largely because another part of

Carillion Building (the umbrella organisation to Schal) had been making waves throughout Carillion plc

thanks to its Swindon hospital project, which I discussed in section 5.3. I discuss factors that perhaps

constrained the further development of TNS-related conversational lineages, and thus OLSD, in Chapter 6.3

and 6.4.

4 One of my supervisors disagreed. From her point of view, not everyone has 'brought into it'.

- 138 -

Table 5.3 Assessment of "A longish term thing"







13%





Departmental

Inter-departmental

Organisational4

(representative members throughoutorganisation involved in training)



Type of evident possibility for OLSD with TNS UK Awareness raising

People coming together HH

EnthusiasmH

(more like 'interested')


Relevant expertise for systematisation andABCD process HH


HHIn evidence in interview (my initial interviewee

invited in two others)


Apparently


H(Open-minded)


Hvia Carillion plc


Market signalsH

Mixed – clearer from public sector, unclearfrom private sector (cf. Chapter 6.3)

- 139 -

5.5 Uncorking the Green Genie (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3)

5.5.1 Introduction

Following the Co-operative Bank's introduction of its overarching Ethical Mission Statement in

1992, the bank set up its Ecology Unit in 1996 to operationalise its Ecological Mission

Statement, itself oriented around TNS' system conditions (Co-operative Bank 1998-2003).

(TNSF 1,8a)

It did so having surveyed its customers' ethical concerns in 1992.

(TNSF 7d)

The Ecological Mission Statement, publicised in 1996, expressed the commitment of the bank

'to continually assess all our activities and implement a programme of ecological

improvement based on the pursuit of [TNS'] four scientific principles', the system

conditions.

(TNSF 6)

'We consider the pursuit of [TNS'] principles constitutes a path of ecological excellence

and will secure future prosperity for society by economic activity.' (Co-operative Bank

2003, p.62)

Moreover, the bank has consistently maintained the view that accreditation-standards for

environmental management systems such as ISO 14001 and BS7750

'offer little in terms of added value. […They] do not help in any way to identify what is

and is not sustainable [when compared with TNS' methodology]. At any rate, all the

critical elements of such environmental management systems are already in place and

active within The Co-operative Bank: policy is formulated, organisation and personnel

have been established, objectives have been set, records are maintained (and are open to

scrutiny from external auditors) and we are committed to a process of active review.' (Co-

operative Bank 1998, p.42-3)

(TNSF 6)

5.5.2 'Give me half an hour and I'll change your life'

The then managing director of the bank, Terry Thomas, first made a connection with TNS

Sweden in the first half of the 1990's during an evening conversation with a colleague in the

International Co-operative Movement, Hans Dahlberg, at a conference. Hans Dahlberg

allegedly said, 'Give me half an hour and I will change your life', and proceeded to tell him

- 140 -

about TNS (PC 2.1). Owing to that conversation, Terry Thomas invited Karl-Henrik Robèrt to

talk to members of staff at the bank.

(TNSF 8a)

An environmental manager – who eventually became head of the bank's Ecology Unit – was

present at Robèrt's talk. Despite initial reluctance, he was won over by the 'so open message'

and Robèrt's 'humble delivery' (PC 2.1). He came to regard TNS' framework as 'fantastic',

and when Terry Thomas asked him what he thought about TNS, he recommended that the bank

'get on with it', that is to say, adopt and use it (ibid.). He said that it was easy for environmental

scientists to get lost in the leaves and the branches of a situation, and saw TNS' framework as 'a

brilliant system for bringing people back to fundamentals' (ibid.). TNS was 'fantastically

effective at bringing people on board' to the sustainable development strategies of the bank

(ibid.).

(TNSF 8a)

Moreover, he found the framework useful in decision-making – 'without it I'd have made many

wrong decisions which would have shown up over time;

(TNSF 1)

it's enabled me to do my job' (PC 2.1).

Originally – exhibiting the thinking behind the sustainable development strategy of the bank –

TNS' framework was 'rolled out' through newsletters and seminars for managers (PNM 3),

(TNSF 8a)

which supposedly impressed on people the importance of the issues. Moreover, the Ecological

Mission Statement appears each year in the annual Partnership Reports.

(TNSF 8a)

Liz, the main compiler of the information therein, referred to the Partnership Report as an

internal lever in the bank for inducing improved behaviour. She spoke of the possibility of 'our

recommendations [not] being carried through. [In such a scenario] the relevant business

unit would know that they're accountable and they'll have it explained [to them] that [their

failure to act would] be included in the Partnership Report if it's not taken up. [The

Partnership Report] is circulated to our directors and chief executive and he could turn

round and ask why we hadn't done it. It's hard, because everyone does have their budget

and are working within constraints constantly. In many ways the reputation [of the

reports] brings in benefits such that people in these departments can be swayed to pay

extra on certain things' (PC 2.2).

(TNSF 6)

- 141 -

Having said that, few in the bank would describe themselves as being intimately familiar with

TNS' framework. When I prepared the ground for my more 'in-depth' researching with The Co-

operative Bank, the head of the Ecology Unit warned me that 'people will look at me weird' if I

asked them to 'recite' TNS' system conditions. He advised me instead to 'ask them about their

work in ecology and listen out for TNS-related stuff' (PC 2.2). His advice was appropriate,

although it at first troubled me because I was unsure whether I would have a basis to initiate

conversations around 'learning with TNS'.

The Ecology Unit consisted of five people at the time of interviewing – the head of the Unit, an

ecological analyst, a social and financial values analyst, and two business partnership

development officers.

Sarah, who specialised in building partnerships with social and environmental businesses, was

one of the latter. Her self-professed level of knowledge, as being relatively unfamiliar with TNS'

framework, revealed a grasp of what seemed to me to be some of its important underlying

principles. She had helped to organise a seminar exploring the issue of bulk printing with

members of TNS UK,

(TNSF 8a)

and had attended a TNS-oriented Suppliers Partnership Forum (CFE 10). She described herself

as knowing 'a bit about how [TNS UK] operates and what [TNS' framework is] all about,

really' (PC 2.5). She added that she had 'a vague understanding of [the bank's use of TNS'

framework] in terms of [the aim of not] breaching the system conditions […].

(TNSF 8b)

I can't recount [the system conditions] off the top of my head, but [I'm aware] that you

don’t do certain things because [they] will breach [TNS'] system conditions […] and

therefore [they are] not viable routes to travel down.

(TNSF 2,3)

When we did the [bulk] printing seminar, we did a little brainstorming session and the

visioning exercise to look forward.

(TNSF 8c)

I do have a very vague grasp of it, but… [Apart from the head of the Ecology Unit and

Liz,] if you spoke to [my nearest colleague in the Ecology Unit] he will probably have a full

grasp of what The Natural Step is about. And [the ethical policy manager] will as well. So

there's not many who can go into detail about it, but I think the ideas are there. The

principles are there and people understand those' (PC 2.5). Having been an economics

student at Manchester Metropolitan University, she was aware of some of the notions in

environmental economics. Yet, she found TNS' metaphor of the funnel 'a much nicer and

- 142 -

simpler explanation of it all' than some of the concepts she came across in her degree (ibid.).

'At university they tend to complicate things', with there being lots of jargon in textbooks

(ibid.). In her work assessing companies, she perceived the concept of environmental risk to be

'very much based on the idea of the funnel. If a company is bouncing around in this funnel

then it's not as secure a company.

(TNSF 2,3)

Whereas if you take a nice line through it, through the funnel of environmental legislation

[for example], then they're a better bet long term' (ibid.).

While Sarah's knowledge of TNS' framework formed a background to her work, Liz was one of

the ones in the Ecology Unit who had a greater familiarity with TNS' framework. In addition,

while she did not regard her screening work to follow TNS' ABCD process explicitly (see

Chapter 6.6) she did view TNS' framework to be 'almost inherent in many ways' (PC 2.2).

'Working knowledge' around TNS' framework therefore seemed to lie in three members of the

Ecology Unit in particular, and a few senior managers connected with the Purchasing and

Facilities department and the Ethical Policy Unit. Having said that, others who worked closely

with the Ecology Unit conveyed an understanding of the strategic theory embedded in TNS'

framework.

A few members of the bank therefore found TNS' framework to have been helpful in making

sense of the 'big picture'. However, this did not extend to everybody who encountered the

sustainable development trajectory of the bank. For example, few suppliers felt inspired by TNS'

framework based on the Suppliers Partnership Forum (CFE 10),

(TNSF 8a)

according to the head of the Ecology Unit. This was born out for me in an encounter with one

supplier who attended the Forum so as to ensure his company's compliance with the bank's

purchasing criteria.

5.5.3 'Banned in ten years time?'

The head of the Ecology Unit particularly cited one example of TNS' framework helping him

make better decisions. This was the decision to find more environmentally benign substitutes to

organochlorines – CFCs, HCFCs, and HFCs5 – in the air conditioning systems in the bank.

(TNSF 5b)

5 Chlorofluorocarbons, Hydrochlorofluorocarbons, and Hydrofluorocarbons respectively.

- 143 -

The substitutes they prioritised had reduced global warming and ozone depletion potential (Co-

operative Bank 2003, p.68). While seemingly rational in the light of TNS' framework, the

decision attracted the attention of the MP, John Gummer, the ex-Secretary of State for the

Environment, who sent fourteen letters complaining about the decision. Despite this pressure,

the head of the Ecology Unit maintained his stance. From his perspective, while the Montreal

Protocol focused on phasing out CFCs, he perceived that people would wake up to the

damaging potential of other organochlorines. He asked himself, 'do I really believe that HFCs,

for example, which are far more worse in terms of global warming than CFCs, won't be

banned in ten years time?' (ibid.).

(TNSF 1,5b,8c)

As such, his knowledge of TNS' framework, and particularly the metaphor of the closing walls of

the funnel6, presumably enabled him to pre-empt possible future regulation and avoid what he

saw as future costs. The decision cost the bank an 'additional […] £45,000' in the short term, a

cost that they were presumably willing to bear owing to the profitability of the bank's ethical

reputation (Co-operative Bank 2003, p.68).

(TNSF 8d)

The head of the Ecology Unit stated the bank's belief that, 'TNS helps us to pursue [the

ecological dimension of sustainable development] in a profitable manner' (PC 2.1).

(TNSF 8d)

Dave, a Facilities Project Manager, echoed the head of the Ecology Unit's stance on

organochlorines in air conditioning systems. In his view, there was 'a general feeling that,

whilst the UK government and the [Montreal Protocol] are trying to phase out ozone

depletion, in time they'll also look at anything with a global-warming potential.

(TNSF 1)

That's as much of an issue. The ones who are putting in […] gases that still have a global-

warming potential may get caught at a later date and may have to replace them.

(TNSF 2,3)

The gases that we use don't damage the atmosphere: they're natural products; they break

down, so they don't cause any damage, they don't persist in the environment for any great

length of time, so they'll never be illegal' (PC 2.4).

(TNSF 1,5b,8c)

6 See Box 1.1.

- 144 -

5.5.4 The Green Genie

Soon after it was set up in 1996, the Ecology Unit invited a panel of experts to audit the

ecological impacts of its five main locations – Manchester, Skelmersdale, Stockport, London and

Salford – using TNS' system conditions as an auditing lens. Amongst a variety of

recommendations – for example, monitoring energy use and reducing car mileage – one

'medium priority' recommendation concerned waste management.

(TNSF 6)

The auditors recommended

'the Bank monitor volume and nature of all waste produced in order to identify problem

areas, set targets and suggest systematic solutions in accordance with the priorities set

out in the waste management hierarchy: reduce, reuse, and recycle.' (Co-operative Bank

1998, p.53)

In response, action plans were set up.

(TNSF 6)

Dave had originally been a messenger boy, based in the post room. However, his role at the

bank had evolved from there. He became an office removal man and then, in the mid-1990's, a

Facilities Officer at the Salford site. Having shown the auditors around the Salford site, Dave

got wind of the auditor's report. He thought, 'it was quite obvious the main thing [from the

report] was going to be waste management and recycling' (PC 2.4). Because his role covered

waste management, he took the initiative. He thought, 'I do waste management, so I can sort

that out' (ibid.). The only recycling that had occurred at the time was for the disposal of

confidential information rather than for recycling principles per se.

Dave began exploring whether things like recycling paper and plastic cups were possible, and

thought the best way would be to get all staff on site involved, because waste is created 'by

every individual in the bank' (PC 2.4). He organised collection bins for paper, aluminium cans

and plastic cups to be distributed across the site7.

(TNSF 6)

He then realised he needed to get people to use them.

7 There is some contention as to whether recycling is the optimal response to waste issues. Some at the OU, and possiblyin TNSI, would argue that it is more important to address 'input' issues such as product ingredients or excessivepackaging, which would be a better approach because it addresses the situation at a 'higher system level' (Lane et al.2002b). However, given the bank's sphere of influence, it is noteworthy that they are responding to the situation at theirorganisational level.

- 145 -

The site had about 250 staff at the time. To raise awareness he briefed senior management at

Salford on what he wanted to do. He invited members of staff to join him in an 'ecology focus

group' consisting of representatives from each department, roughly one rep per fifty members of

staff who was 'keen on green issues' (ibid.). One member suggested the name, the 'Green Genie'

group. Another hand-drew an image of a green genie that has, up to the time of my interviewing,

resisted attempts at updating, for example through a computer, because this, they said, was 'a

staff thing' (ibid. & PC 2.1).

The Green Genie group's original brief was to raise awareness about the recycling facilities

amongst their teams on site, but when they came together, their conversation ranged beyond the

remit. At a feed back session, they had a variety of questions, for example, why lights were still

on at 8pm, or why the building was being cooled at 6am.

(TNSF 5d)

These were 'spin-offs', according to Dave, that they dealt with locally or passed on to the more

appropriate departments.

As an example of their influence, Dave told me about the numbers of cups that were recycled.

(TNSF 6)

In 1997, the Salford, Manchester and Skelmersdale sites together recycled 7.5% of all plastic

cups used by the bank, while the London and Stockport sites recycled none. No aluminium cans

were recycled across the five main sites over that year (Co-operative Bank 1998).

In 1998, the Salford site recycled 84.3% of all its plastic cups and 63.2% of all cans.

(TNSF 7c)

Even so, the figures for the five sites as a whole were 16.6% for cups and 22.6% for cans (Co-

operative Bank 1999). The Salford site was out-performing other sites by far.

Changes in the business decreed that 'the ecology side was going to be a major, major thing',

and the bank needed someone to pull major national projects together in terms of waste

management (PC 2.4). Dave was offered the role. After 12 months coordinating the Green Genie

Group at Salford, Dave moved into a project management role based at Skelmersdale. His remit

was, amongst other things, to 'roll out' Green Genie to the other major occupancy sites (PC

2.4).

One obstacle he encountered in his new role was his relative anonymity to those at other sites.

Everyone knew him at Salford – 'it was one big happy family, and pretty easy to get things

up and running and keep them running' (ibid.). He had had a good relationship with the

cleaning staff there, 'who were also key players' (ibid.). However, no one knew him elsewhere,

- 146 -

so there was perhaps more resistance. He also found different challenges in different buildings.

In team-office environments, such as call centres, 'it's very easy to put something in place

because everyone talks to each other every day and no one is locked away in an office on

their own' (ibid.). In contrast, in the Head Office where there were many departments, it was

difficult 'to get twenty people round the table [… so] it just takes longer to get things in

place' (ibid.).

With his persistence, however, 'eventually the penny started to drop' (PC 2.4). Dave co-

ordinated and visited the groups from each site for quarterly meetings to check how things were

going. Once he had secured people's buy-in, the ball started rolling, and such was the

enthusiasm that some 'Green Genies' came up with innovative ideas to raise awareness. One of

the site groups at Stockport 'kidnapped' people's bins on the basis that they were mistreating

them (ibid.). They told members of staff that they could have them back if they promised not to

put things in them that they should not! Dave was 'horrified' when he was told what they had

done, 'waiting for the phone to ring from all these irate managers' (PC 2.4). However, out of

the 130 people, only one person made a minor complaint, and 30% of staff said they did not

want their bin back. At the time of interview, the Green Genie groups at the various sites ran

themselves and Dave had 'a reduced but high-level involvement' (ibid.); he had realised that it

would be better if there was more localised control.

Sarah, who was one of the Green Genies at Stockport before she joined the Ecology Unit,

described the group as 'a really fun thing to get involved with – people get really

enthusiastic about it' (PC 2.5). When Dave visited, she described him as 'really gee'd up

about it, he really believed in it, it wasn't just paying lip-service to an idea; he got us all

really excited about it' (ibid.). Although she sometimes found people's laziness infuriating, for

example 'chucking their cups in the paper bin', she thinks it is now an established behaviour,

for example to crush one's cans for recycling (ibid.).

(TNSF 7c)

She thinks the Green Genie groups have 'definitely changed the way people think and work'

(ibid.).

Dave thought that there needed to be an incentive for the five locations, so he thought of getting

them to compete against each other.

(TNSF 6)

He talked with the Ecology Unit and PR and came up with the idea of an annual award, with a

presentation ceremony of the award. For the first two years, the Chief Executive awarded it to

the best site. All the senior managers, group members and local facilities team were invited to

the ceremony. The Chief Executive gave a speech about how their ecological mission was good

- 147 -

for their business, giving them a competitive edge in the market place. It was flattering for Dave

to get such high level support, and it 'showed me how seriously the bank were taking it. I

found it very useful to persuade people that this wasn't just my idea, this was a bank thing.

It's part of the establishment and therefore you should get involved' (PC 2.4)

Dave added that the Green Genie initiative also provided the opportunity to provide information

for auditing purposes. Because the Partnership Report is externally audited, the information

provided in it about the bank's performance over a range of social, economic and environmental

indicators needs to be externally verified. Information on the amount of waste sent to landfill by

law had to be provided by the company taking the waste away. However, this did not apply to

companies taking material for recycling away, so there was no reliable data on the latter. Dave

worked with one of the bank's suppliers and asked if they could provide accurate data on how

much material was being taken away, so the bank could measure its improvement.

(TNSF 6)

No other company was doing this at the time. Dave contacted other companies who had

reported that they were recycling all their plastic cups, incredulous because the bank was only

managing to recycle around 60% in 2000 after 4 years. They merely replied that they had

installed recycling bins in the offices and had asked staff to use them. Dave expected that most of

the cups were being thrown into the bins under people's desks, based on his own experience at

the bank. He said the only way to quantify what is happening is to have accurate information

coming back from one's recycling companies, alongside information on the number of cups

bought.

By 2001, the five main locations were recycling 69.3% of all cups and 76.8% of all cans (Co-

operative Bank 2002).

(TNSF 7c)

The Partnership Report attributed the increase 'to the tremendous efforts of its Green Genie

groups. [The groups…] continue to raise awareness and encourage waste reduction and

recycling' (Co-operative Bank 2002, p.65).

Although these figures relate to one indicator amongst sixty-six financial, social and ecological

indicators for the bank as a whole audited in the Partnership Report, Dave reflected that he

'couldn't think of anything else to compare [the Green Genie groups] to' in terms of

catalysing collective enthusiasm (PC 2.4). 'It's really been very good in raising awareness

amongst staff. It's one of the few things that are actually staff focused. It's something that

everyone can get involved in [unlike policy things], and with no disrespect to anyone else's

efforts, probably the one environmental action that the staff can identify with… It's so

simple, and it's a small thing but it's something where every member of staff can take part'

- 148 -

(ibid.). Dave's colleague, Eric, a Procurement Consultant within the Facilities Management

Department, who shared the interview, agreed.

The enthusiasm bubbling up through the Green Genie groups arose in parallel to, perhaps in

spite of, the bank having made significant progress in other, perhaps more ecologically and

socially far-reaching, areas as well. For example,

'carbon dioxide emissions from [bank] buildings have reduced by 83% per customer

account since 1997 (with 98% of all electricity used now being from renewable sources).'

(Co-operative Bank 2002, p.5)

(TNSF 7a)

Ninety-five percent of staff reported they enjoyed their working relationships with colleagues in

the bank (ibid. p.32). In addition, some believe the bank's ethical stance, leading to the bank

foregoing an estimated £2,528,000 in annualised gross income based on their ethical screening

of investment opportunities (ibid. p.41), has actually led to profitability of around 20% (ibid.

p.4).

(TNSF 7d)

5.5.5 'None as far down the road as me!'

In addition to furthering his professional development, the Green Genie initiative gave Dave a

sense of his own learning journey in relation to people in other companies. 'One of the things

I've noticed when I started down this road, when I had done it for 12 months, I started to

look round where I could get some advice from. I remember going to some event that the

Environment Council ran, I think in Birmingham, and it was like a networking session.

There were different working groups going on in this place, and one of them was focus

groups in the workplace – it was basically a home session where everyone could get round

the table and talk about what they had done. I thought, great, it sounds good, it sounds like

I can learn something from that. I actually found when I went there that I did all the

talking, and everyone else had gone along to learn! So had I, but no one was as far down

the road as me! It was disappointing in that I didn’t come away having learnt anything,

but at the same time it was very flattering to be helpful to companies like GEC, and United

Utilities' (PC 2.4).

Since co-ordinating the Green Genies throughout the bank nationally, Dave became a project

consultant in the Purchasing and Facilities department, and often worked with Eric, a

procurement consultant. His remit has widened. The Green Genie initiative itself was only one

that Dave had been involved in and told me about. For example, both Eric and Dave sourced the

- 149 -

chemical substitutes for the air conditioning, discussed above in 6.5.2. They helped to source

'biopol', a biodegradable plastic, for their credit cards.

(TNSF 7b)

Eric described the bank's vetting procedures of their suppliers to me.

(TNSF 6)

In addition, they both described the bank's decommissioning of a building riddled with asbestos

that went beyond their legislative obligations,

(TNSF 7a)

partly to avoid any potential negative publicity that the bank was losing its edge.

A colleague in the Ecology Unit, reflecting on the progressive culture of the bank, spoke of how

supportive the bank could be, and she gave Dave as an example. 'If you've got an individual

who's willing to give it a go they're behind you and they're keen to help you develop. Dave

is a prime example of how somebody can go from being, for example, a messenger as he

was in the post room only four or five years ago. And you look at the level and the detail of

the work that he's involved in now, and the professional qualifications he's followed up

within the Property side and the portfolio he manages now, and you'd think it's

phenomenal. He's done a lot of the hard work, but as he's the first to admit, if the bank

hadn't given him the opportunity [his career development] wouldn't have transpired' (PC

2.2).

In this narrative account, TNS-related conversational lineages developed primarily because of the Ecology

Unit's role in helping define the bank's Ecological Mission Statement, in attempting to 'roll out' TNS initially,

and as a hub for inter-departmental sustainability conversations. Other departments included, the Purchasing

and Facilities department, especially, but also the Ethical Policy Unit, the Corporate Division through the

work of Sarah and her colleague, and Asset Finance – see 6.5. Dave was not alone in reflecting on the

Ecology Unit's importance. When I asked him whether he gave presentations externally about his work and

that of the bank, he said he did not very often. Those in the Ecology Unit did the majority of them because

they were 'better placed because they can see the whole picture' and had more time to research the issues (PC

2.4).

I present my analysis of this narrative account in Table 5.4.

- 150 -

Table 5.4 Assessment of 'Uncorking the Green Genie'







20%





Departmental4

(in Ecology Unit)

Inter-departmental

4

(between Ecology Unit, Ethical Policy Unitand Purchasing and Facilities, but also

with more customer-facing departments –cf. 6.5)

Organisational4

(Green Genie groups across all the mainsites)



(conversing with external organisations forscreening – cf. 6.6)


People coming together HHH

Enthusiasm HHH



HH

(Cf. 6.6)

Conversation-fostering organisation andstructures HHH

Investment of adequate resourcesHH

(Cf. 6.5)

Leadership of CEO and ManagementBoard HHH

Sustainable development strategy andvision HHH


Market signals HHH

- 151 -

TNS-distinctions are instituted well inside the bank through the Ecological Mission Statement, which is

emphasised yearly in the Partnership Reports, themselves organised and compiled in the Ecology Unit. This

is born out in the number of TNS-distinctions that concerned the systematisation of TNS-defined sustainable

development (20%). The Partnership Report acted as an 'internal lever' in the organisation, both as carrot and

stick, adding pressure on decision makers to optimise decisions regarding sustainability even when the choice

cost more (PC 2.2).

However, the extent to which conversational lineages developed because of the reports was not as generative

as in the Green Genie initiative, from the perspective of my researching experience. I would expect Dave's

has been an influential story in the company and one that would play a very significant role in other people's

sensemaking. His story was one recommended to me, unprompted, by all but one of my six interviewees.

The irony with the Green Genie story is that TNS' influence, let alone that of members of TNS UK, was

peripheral. The closest Dave had come to encountering TNS, to his mind, was briefly to show 'TNS

environmental auditors' around the Salford site where he was Facilities Officer at the time of the audit. In

addition, outside the boundaries of the story, Dave helped refurbish the offices of the National Business

Council for Sustainability (NCBS) – a Co-operative Bank initiated organisation that offers accredited TNS

training events (PC 2.4). Other than these two occasions, Dave had not been in close contact with members of

TNS UK, nor studiously engaged with TNS' philosophy.

The concentration of self-reported familiarity with TNS' framework resided primarily in three members of the

Ecology Unit in particular, and an alleged handful of others in the organisation. Having said that, my

perception was that others, such as Sarah in the Ecology Unit, demonstrated an awareness of the basic

strategic underpinnings to TNS' framework.

In telling the Green Genie story to me, Dave expressed his enthusiasm in the sense of 'a predisposition to act'

(Ison and Russell 2000). I sensed his story to be 'in progress'. Dave's enthusiasm in his storytelling suggested

to me that the trajectory he was on had a future. The story reflects the open-ended, unpredictable, in this case

positive, 'outcomes' of conversations. It also portrays a supportive organisational culture that permitted

someone to explore and develop his enthusiasm, an enthusiasm that was enabling of OLSD. Various factors

supported Dave's relationships and conversations. For example, his senior managers at Salford accepted his

idea to start an 'ecology focus group'. Executives at the Manchester Head Office acknowledged the

significance of the bank's environmental impacts and offered Dave the role of co-ordinating national office

waste management. Most importantly, members of the Green Genie groups came forward, participated in

their respective groups' work, and continued to contribute to the conversations and activities of the groups

themselves. Moreover, such was their enthusiasm that the conversations within the group ranged beyond their

immediate remit of raising awareness about the recycling facilities.

- 152 -

In the case of 'Uncorking the Green Genie', there was plenty of evidence of TNS-related conversational

lineages and a self-sustaining trajectory of OLSD. This is not to say that there were no constraints to learning

in the Co-operative Bank. Indeed, there were, and I turn to those in Chapter 6.5 and 6.6. It could be

significant that the bank's suppliers did not respond to TNS' workshop (in 5.5.2) in the same way as

Carillion's suppliers. This is possibly because TNS' framework is better suited for those in a position to

design a project, product or process afresh, as they were in 'A landmark building' (5.3). This is a potential

issue regarding TNS' framework that I address in Chapter 7.

5.6 Questing to become a restorative enterprise (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

5.6.1 Introduction

Senior managers at Interface Inc have earnt a significant reputation, even amongst competitors

and high-principled environmentalists, for their dedication and clarification of a vision for

sustainable development. For example, the technical director of one of Interface's main

competitors agreed about this analysis, when I met and talked with him in London in December

2001. He acknowledged that Interface had a committed culture and vision regarding sustainable

development – and that its founder and Chief Executive, Ray Anderson, provided 'a vital

leadership role', which his own company did not have. One of my interviewees – a managing

director of an Interface subsidiary company at the time – believed that sustainable development

'wouldn’t work in Interface' without Ray Anderson’s commitment, and that of 'other top

people' (PNM 6). That some who had looked at the business world with critical eyes have been

impressed with Interface's claims and activities is reflected in David Brower having become a

close ally. Brower, 'the patriarch of the American environmental movement' and former

executive director of The Sierra Club in the United States, joined Ray Anderson's 'Dream Team'

of 'experts […] to remake Interface into a leader of sustainability' (Interface Research

Corporation 1997, p.13).

5.6.2 'A vital leadership role'

The story behind Interface's sustainable development trajectory is well documented. Anderson's

keen business inclinations led him to founding the company in 1973 and building it into a billion

dollar enterprise – 'the world's largest producer of contract commercial carpet' – in twenty-five

years (Anderson 1998, p.37).

In terms of legislative compliance, according to Anderson, Interface was 'clean' (ibid. p.38).

However, his perspective on his company's relationship to the wider world changed

dramatically when an in-house environmental review task force asked him, in 1994, to give a

- 153 -

presentation on the company's environmental vision. The domain was not his forte, and he was

reluctant to accept the invitation.

Coincidentally, a colleague lent him a book that her daughter – an environmental studies

master's graduate – had read at the time (PC 1.2). The book was The Ecology of Commerce by

Paul Hawken. 'It hit me right between the eyes' (Anderson 1998, p.39). He described Hawken's

message, about the negative impacts of business on the natural world, as 'a spear in the chest'

that he has felt ever since, and he became determined to 'reinvent' Interface into a 'restorative'

enterprise.

'At Interface, we seek to become the first sustainable corporation in the world, and

following that, the first restorative company. It means creating the technologies of the

future – kinder, gentler technologies that emulate nature's systems.

(TNSF 2,3)

I believe that's where we will find the right model' (Interface Research Corporation 1997).

Anderson was convinced that

'in the 21st Century, the most resource efficient companies will win!

(TNSF 2,3)

The sustainable [company] will win big when oil's price finally reflects its cost and is

$100, even $200 per barrel. Someday the market (and the economists) will wake up and

the price will reflect the cost. That's the day for which we, as a company, are preparing.'

(ibid. pp.73-4)

(TNSF 1)

When he eventually gave the speech, he wrote

'I gave that task force a kick-off speech that, frankly, surprised me, stunned them, and then

galvanized all of us into action. With and through them we are energizing our whole

company to step up to our responsibility to lead. Unless somebody leads, nobody will.

That's axiomatic. I asked, "Why not us?" Their answer has become a tidal wave of change

within our company.' (Anderson 1998, p.43)

After reading The Ecology of Commerce, Anderson invited Paul Hawken to join his 'Dream

Team' of experts. Hawken became the co-chair of the US branch of TNS, and Interface adopted

TNS' 'unrelenting principles', the system conditions, in 1996 'as our compass in our search for

the path to sustainability' (Anderson 1998, p.91).

(TNSF 1)

- 154 -

The 1997 Sustainability Report stated two things the company must do to

'achieve sustainability […]: proceed in the proper direction and build shareholder value.

Each step needs to build a platform for future steps, and must be confirmed by economic

results as well as positive ecological effects.' (Interface Research Corporation 1997, p.11)

(TNSF 8d)

Anderson's newfound commitment rippled out into the organisation and beyond, which, with

manufacturing sites in over twenty countries, and offices spanning over one hundred, was large.

What emerged was the company's seven-stepped 'path to sustainability'

(TNSF 1,6)

that entailed

1 the elimination of waste;

(TNSF 5a,b,c)

2 benign emissions;

(TNSF 5a,b)

3 renewable energies;

(TNSF 5a)

4 closure of the manufacturing loop;

(TNSF 2,3)

5 resource efficient transportation;

(TNSF 5d)

6 sensitising 'all our constituencies [organisational members and stakeholders] to

Earth's needs and to what sustainability truly means to all of us' (Anderson 1998); and,

(TNSF 8a)

7 the redesign of patterns of commerce, focusing on providing services as opposed to

materials. Interface's Evergreen Lease, for example, aimed to lease, involving the

replacement and recycling of worn, carpet tiles (Interface Research Corporation 1997,

p.4).

(TNSF 5d)

Operationalising the seven-stepped strategy, Interface executives initiated a number of efforts.

These included the search for decision-making yardsticks in the light of complex trade-offs,

(TNSF 8d)

- 155 -

and the quest to reduce, even eliminate, waste in all its forms, which they called the Quest

programme.

(TNSF 6)

Anderson wrote that, at Interface, they

'define waste as any cost that goes into our product that does not add value to our

customers. Value, of course, embraces product quality, and more – aesthetics, utility,

durability, resource efficiency. Since in pursuit of maximum value any waste is bad, we're

measuring progress against a zero-based waste goal. A revolutionary notion itself, our

definition of waste includes not just off-quality and scrap (the traditional notion of waste);

it also means anything else we don't do right the first time – a misdirected shipment, a

mispriced invoice, a bad debt, and so forth.' (Anderson 1998, p.15)

(TNSF 6)

5.6.3 'Really serious about it'

Senior executives of Interface decided that they would provide a two-day TNS-oriented training

for every member of the organisation. This would, they hoped, engage everyone in the

company's sustainable development trajectory, and energise such initiatives as the Quest

programme. Senior managers invited all members of Interface to learn the principles of TNS'

framework

'and how [they relate] to Interface's vision. […] Rather than have one or two people

qualified to lead sustainability classes, Interface has several knowledgeable associates

throughout the companies who can lead a class at any time. This is not only an efficient

training method, but ensures that the availability of trainers at a given location will never

be a problem.' (Interface Inc. 2003a)

(TNSF 8a)

The employees I interviewed, from the Vice-President of Human Services in the US to the

factory-floor production supervisor at Shelf, Interface's factory in a Yorkshire village in the UK

(see Figure 5.4), had participated if not co-facilitated TNS training with other Interface

employees. In 2002, seventy-four percent of employees felt they had understood 'the

sustainability message (Interface Inc. 2003b). Perhaps this was unsurprising, given that the

training was given to all members, including new staff. For example, as part of their TNS

training, all new staff go onto the factory floor 'to find something that sits uncomfortably in

the light of TNS' system conditions' (PNM 6).

(TNSF 6,8b)

- 156 -

The ex-managing director of an Interface subsidiary in the UK designed the original TNS

training programme for Interface in the UK with his UK colleagues and a TNS UK accredited

facilitator. (Members of TNS International subsequently asked if they could use this training

programme themselves.) He saw it as important to take the time, present the facts and engage

people at an emotional level, because, quoting Paul Hawken, this was 'serious shit' (PNM 6).

From his point of view, spending time with people on environmental issues was key to changing

the organisation's orientation toward sustainability. On reflection, he did not know of anyone

who did not 'get it' – that is to say, appreciate both the relevance and theory of TNS' framework

– because of the training (ibid.). He did not know of anyone who had not been 'deeply, deeply

challenged and affected by it' (ibid.). From his point of view, this had been a big advantage for

changing the company's culture.

The learning manager at Shelf was involved in the logistics of organising the two day training,

which involved getting the facilitators together. He had done the five-day training beforehand

run by a TNS UK accredited facilitator and the-then director of learning. He himself was

bemused, originally, by Ray Anderson's goal of changing Interface into a 'sustainable

manufacturing organisation. […] How can you do that? Waste is inherent! You cannot

produce carpet without waste!' (PC 1.5). The message of sustainability was not one he had

heard of much before. He had been aware of 'dependency-chains' in nature, about which he

came to know could be spoken of in terms of 'a web of life' (ibid.).

(TNSF 2,3)

He had been concerned to some extent, for example, with levels of fertiliser use in farming, such

that environmental issues had a strong 'resonance' for him (ibid.). However, behaviourally he

did not see himself to be particularly environmentally sensitive. After the TNS training, he came

to view the notion of sustainability as 'an interesting thing to work towards' (ibid.).

Most of those who became in-house TNS facilitators were not experienced facilitators. Whilst

not needing to learn how to present to an audience and manage a training event, they 'did need

to learn about the scientific principles, their meaning and how to phrase them. There were

huge long debates about the system conditions, particularly four

(TNSF 5d)

(the first three are fairly straightforward), which gave us no end of problems, in relation to

what it meant to the business – "is social sustainability about communism?"' (PC 1.5). His

reflection was that most people would agree in principle with TNS' framework, and through

conversations with the sustainability director, he has clarified his understanding around system

condition four. However, he thought that perhaps there were many in the company who would

- 157 -

think it the responsibility of others, particularly the research and development department and

executive managers, to optimise Interface's contributions to sustainability.

An administrative manager appreciated the importance to the company of the workshop,

because it was for everybody. The two days were separated by a few months, and each daylong

session was attended by between twelve and twenty staff from a variety of levels and

departments. Everybody was invited, and nearly all two hundred Shelf staff attended. 'It cost

them a lot of money to have everyone away for two days – they were really serious about it.

It was overwhelming in a way that a company could think that way and could want to

think that way, because making a profit had been the be-all and end-all. To even think

about using some of the profits for sustainability was a totally new idea.

(TNSF 8d)

They believed in it. And I was pleased to be part of it. I got a good feeling' (PC 1.4).

Moreover, she said that 'for some time afterwards I couldn't stop talking about it. People do

still talk about it, and use some of the phrases that were brought out, and I think… it's in

the managers hands really to keep promoting it. I haven't heard anything company-wide

since then. The Quest programme has been probably the focal point that the company has

taken on and that we hear about, which is obviously part of the [sustainable development]

process anyway' (ibid.).

The perspective of the research and development manager at Shelf on TNS' framework changed

from scepticism to appreciation, resulting from the workshops. He thought the TNS training

workshops 'were very good', but when he was first shown TNS' four system conditions he

thought 'odd bits didn't sound right' (PC 1.3). For example, regarding system condition one,

(TNSF 5a)

he thought, 'that's a load of rubbish because everything is in nature' (ibid.). His initial

scepticism about TNS' framework was countered by the training, and he was pleased by how 'a

lot of others on the course were really keen on it, and became enthusiastic by it' (ibid.).

Many on the course did not have a scientific background, and their enthusiasm may have helped

counter his scepticism. He came to understand what the designers of TNS' framework 'were

trying to get at', as he had thought a lot about such things before (ibid.). He had a degree in

chemistry, and had studied various engineering modules with The Open University. 'I realised

that [my scepticism] resulted from people trying to find a decent set of words for

[sustainability], and [TNS' framework] was probably the best they came up with for what

most people could understand' (ibid.). He understood the 'meaning behind the words'. That is

to say, regarding system condition one, for example, he understood that material from the

earth's crust 'mustn't be systematically taken out and put almost anywhere else within the

- 158 -

earth's atmosphere, without a way in which it can be re-incorporated back naturally'

(ibid.). He saw this to mean that anything that 'isn't a closed loop shouldn't really take place.

(TNSF 2,3)

It probably sounds a bit extreme, but it's correct' (ibid.).

He added, however, that from his point of view, 'there are different degrees of being wrong, so

that taking material out is wrong, but there are different degrees of it. Fossil material that

has taken thousands of years to form, is taken out and then used just once I think is a

terrible waste, as are the [negative ecological impacts] of it: CO2 and global warming.

(TNSF 5a)

It is bad. But I think that if it's something that has no great detriment – for example,

mining sand or limestone and doing something useful with it

(TNSF 7d)

– in the end when it collapses in a heap you've still got sand or limestone somewhere, even

if it isn't quite where it was. If it's not creating a toxic situation, then it's probably alright.

(TNSF 2,3)

If it's being useful, and preventing someone from using a scarce resource, I guess it's bad

but it's not too bad' (ibid.).

From the point of view of the production supervisor at Shelf, 'with The Natural Step, we were

taken into it rather abruptly, really. We were thrown in at the deep end. I think a lot of the

employees didn't quite understand it. […] It was technical at the time, and crammed into a

short space of time, which Interface tend to do with courses. You come out of them

wondering what they were on about; 'what did he say?' and you can't remember. But then

someone would say something a few days later and you'll remember. The Natural Step was

one of those things. [A member of the research and development department] was our

tutor for the day, and he's a very technical man, and you can lose him in a conversation

quite easily' (PC 1.6). He described himself as someone who could not listen to someone talk

for very long. Concerning the TNS training, he says he could not 'take it all in. I prefer to sit

and read it. I can go over it a few times and it starts to sink in a bit more. And I found it

quite technical at the time. Obviously since then I've become more familiar with it, but at

the time, those in [the research and development department] and the more technically

minded were more relaxed with it. It's sunk in that bit more having talked to a few

people… I'm still not a hundred percent on what everything means, but if there's anything

I'm not sure about, I'll always ask. Most of our technical staff are pretty good. If there's

anything you need to know, they'll tell you. […] There's always somebody there who knows

the answer' (ibid.).

- 159 -

The director of sustainability based at Shelf regarded TNS' model of sustainability as a

worldview that informed his vision of a sustainable society (PNM 5). For him, TNS' system

conditions would be at the 'back of his mind' when thinking about business impacts,

(TNSF 8d)

and he thought the act of backcasting

(TNSF 1)

made good sense, although he realised it was not specific to TNS. For him, TNS' framework was

a useful educational, communication and learning tool, about the systems approach to

sustainability, to help people understand the knock-on effects of actions and resource loops.

(TNSF 2,3)

However, TNS' framework did not influence his thinking regarding social sustainability. His

favourite concept was that of quality of life. For him people-dimensions of sustainable

development provided more motivation than the environment most of the time. He placed

importance on the inclusion of minority views, and saw sustainable development as a holistic

concept that involved looking at spiritual and mental health dimensions just as much, if not more

than, material wealth8.

5.6.4 'Brains, heart and soul'

Operationally, as an outcome of the educational initiative, members of Interface achieved a

great deal. For example, in their 'quest for resource efficiency', they calculated that 'the $1

billion of sales […] in 1996 consumed 19 percent less material per dollar of sales than we

consumed in 1995. […] Cumulative progress over three years is an increase of about 22.5

percent in resource efficiency' (Anderson 1998, p.73);

(TNSF 6)

over this time, their share price tripled. Between 1996 and 2002, they reduced overall

energy use by nine percent,

(TNSF 7d)

and decreased water consumption by twenty-seven percent per unit of product (Interface

Inc. 2003b).

(TNSF 7d)

8 In expressing this view, he may have been referring to an earlier wording of TNS' system condition four, which statedthat 'resources are used fairly and efficiently in order to meet basic human needs worldwide' (Robert 2000, p.245).

- 160 -

Accounting for the purchase or sale of subsidiary companies, they cut carbon dioxide gas

emissions by twenty-nine percent (ibid.).

(TNSF 7a)

In addition, the number of employees feeling they had been praised 'where praise is due' had

risen by ten percent in 2002, and seventy percent felt their managers listened to their

suggestions (ibid.).

(TNSF 7d)

The then-managing director of an Interface subsidiary company said the theme of sustainability

constantly cropped up at board meetings (PNM 6). Interface members 'live and breathe the

stuff', and belong to 'an emotionally alive business' (ibid.). He suggested that the far-reaching

TNS principles were perhaps better suited to top-level strategising,

(TNSF 8c)

but that 'buy-in' throughout the organisation was important (ibid.).

The educational initiative marked a significant change in managerial expectations and

organisational strategy and culture. The senior executive in the US referred to the difficulty of

involving all employees internationally, for the first time, to bring their 'brains, […] heart and

soul' to work (PC 1.2). This was especially difficult because, for many years, they expected

employees merely to show up and do what was required of them. The learning manager in

human services at Shelf whom I spoke with reiterated this point. He said, 'it's difficult for

people to participate more fully when historically the business has expected them to turn

up for work and just provide their labour. We've got to climb out of that first to get to a

position where people are more willing to take part' (PC 1.5). The administrative manager at

Shelf recognised that it takes time to change. What managers were expecting of the company

was 'a big culture change for a lot of people, for example, to suddenly be aware of what

they should and shouldn't send to landfill' (PC 1.4).

(TNSF 7c)

Sustainability was 'much more a part of the leadership team's thinking', according to the

learning manager in the human services department (PC 1.5). He worked closely with those

facilitating the sustainable development trajectory for Interface Europe and Asia Pacific. He

described sustainability as being 'much more at the forefront, [it is] not just something nice

to do if we can afford it now, which [from his perspective] it was' when he joined the

company in 1996 (ibid.). Then, they thought they were 'progressive' having just become the first

carpet manufacturer to achieve ISO 14001 (ibid.). He reflected on how the focus of in-house

training had changed since he had arrived. In 1996, there was a particular focus on dealing

with problems, such as 'spills', as 'the main environmental training in practical terms here.

- 161 -

As part of their jobs, [employees] are [now] taught what they should do if they have some

waste plastic, or waste yarn: where do they go?' (ibid.).

(TNSF 8b)

There was a clear strategic reason for educating all Interface members of staff, from his point of

view. Conflict could result from an overall organisational strategy at odds with the person on

the shop floor 'pulling in a different direction' (PNM 6.).

(TNSF 1,6)

In addition, he believed that if employees were not 'convicted at an emotional level', they

would not change, and sustainable development would be 'a paper exercise' (ibid.). Senior

management commitment to sustainable development has to be 'driven down through all levels

and driven hard' (ibid.).

(TNSF 6)

Indeed, the notion of 'emotional buy-in' was important for the Pathfinder Network

representatives with whom I met in preparation for the more in-depth interviewing phase at

Interface (PC 1.1). When asked what questions, if any, they would like me to ask their

colleagues, they wanted to know what 'level' of emotional buy-in the TNS training workshops

engendered amongst their participants. (This coincided with my interest in investigating the

organisational conditions that fostered or inhibited enthusiasm.)

Certainly, a couple of the senior managers at Shelf acknowledged a disparity in levels of

enthusiasm between different individuals and possibly across departments (PC's 1.1 & 1.3).

However, senior managers' concerns over the lack of emotional buy-in amongst employees did

not coincide with the perspectives of the few members of staff invited for interview with me.

The enthusiasm generated by the initial workshops at the Shelf site, in Yorkshire in the UK, was

palpable. The senior manager from the research and development department reported a time,

'not far into the Quest programme, when guys in the plant would twiddle some knobs to

reduce the weight of the [product ingredients] and make a big saving.

(TNSF 6)

They were really proud of it. People did become enthusiastic. At one stage we were

inundated with good ideas' (PC 1.3). He described how, in his department they had 'made a

lot of changes to the product, removing things that were perceived to be possible toxic

problems, such as the heat stabilisers in PVC [which] used to be heavy metals such as lead,

cadmium and barium.

(TNSF 7a)

- 162 -

But we moved onto calcium and zinc, which as metals go are not as toxic as most. We also

eliminated a lot of things that were volatile, things that could be classed as solvents.

(TNSF 7b)

We did and continue to do that at whatever rate we can' (ibid.).

(TNSF 7a)

Concerning processes of product research and design, the research and development manager

said that 'we have tried to keep the four principles in mind, when thinking about some of

these future developments, and alternative [carpet] backing systems;

(TNSF 1,8d)

[we've been thinking about] what we do when we don't [use] PVC [for example].

(TNSF 7b)

The requirements are basically that, whatever it is, it's got to be a cyclical process,

(TNSF 2,3)

and it's got to obey the four system conditions.

(TNSF 1)

If someone can design something that fits in with that, then it's got a high chance of

working and being successful, because it's economical as well.

(TNSF 8d)

So we've used those and tried to generate ideas around them' (PC 1.3).

(TNSF 1)

He thought TNS' principles 'were there at the beginning when we assessed [alternatives to

PVC]', inherent in the research process, although they did not grade design choices against

each system condition. He thought TNS' framework as a reference was 'a good tool, it's right',

and thought they would have simply assessed materials on the basis of their availability and

toxicity beforehand, and not thought much about closing the loop. He saw the brainstorming

around PVC alternatives to have been productive in terms of arriving at 'the correct technical

solution; it's just a case of waiting for people to agree and spend the money' (ibid.). He

agreed that 'there are definitely answers out there' and that 'it is only a matter of time'

before they found them (ibid.). Instead of designing a new product and screening it against the

TNS' system conditions at Interface, they had a matrix system to assess potential ecological

impacts (PNM 6 & PC 1.3).

(TNSF 6)

This same manager perceived enthusiasm also to emerge amongst those in sales and marketing,

although this sometimes led to misrepresentation of product specification. Some in marketing

'perhaps [became] a little over-enthusiastic, describing [a new product] as fully-recyclable,

- 163 -

even though it isn't really; [the new product is] an improvement on other things, but it's

not fully there' (ibid.).

5.6.5 'Bugger it, we'll do it anyway'

The production supervisor at Shelf with whom I spoke acknowledged how those at Interface

'were pretty good' (PC 1.6). He described the company as 'trying not to produce things that

we can't get rid of, as we are trying with PVC,

(TNSF 5b)

which is something we've had for many years. We are trying to find other products that we

can run. For example, the machines that make [a particular Interface product] came from

[abroad and enabled] us to make another product from PVC waste. [… We] make those

tiles from old plastic tubing from hospitals, for example, drip tubes and oxygen masks that

have been used once or twice and put in the bin. We take them, churn them up, and make

tiles out of them.

(TNSF 7c)

I've seen a lot worse places. For example, at the hospital where I worked for nine years

[before coming to Interface], The Natural Step and things like that were non-existent. We

had an incinerator, which was amazing what we burned in there, parts of them were

human!' (ibid.).

This production supervisor mused that there might be a lot more 'that could be done' to reduce

waste and recycle more (ibid.). He thought more bins around the site would enable them to

separate 'other bits and pieces' that usually go in the waste bin; 'if you're going to do it, you

might as well do it the whole hog! And keep everything separated' (ibid.).

(TNSF 6)

Reflecting on the company's quest to eliminate waste, this Shelf production supervisor attributed

the seriousness with which they approached it to TNS' training workshop. Since then they have

begun 'looking at scrap-tiles and asking, "is it scrap and can we save it?'" (ibid.). Moreover,

he felt the company 'could take [employee involvement in its sustainable development

initiative] quite a bit further, maybe [we could] have a refresher course.

(TNSF 6,8a)

There are many new employees who have never done this, and occasionally you see them

doing something that the more experienced of us wouldn't. While more waste-bins would

be very helpful, a refresher course would be more helpful' (ibid.).

- 164 -

He described how the change in attitude to waste was manifest in one aspect of production,

namely the storage of fibreglass fleece rolls9 and their eventual disposal. Prior to the Quest

initiative, fibreglass fleece was wasted because 'bits were left on rolls instead of running them

right down. […] In days gone by we used to have a rack that was just full of part-rolls of

fleeces, or part rolls of paper. Someone had taken it off a machine to run another product,

because it was a different width product. But when they reverted to the original size, they

got a new roll, because it's easier! We wouldn't have to do as many fleece changes then

after it. So the small roll was just put in a rack and left there, perhaps for months or years,

and then we threw them in the skip because they were blocking good storage space. It was

a total waste; we could of used that' (ibid.). Running down the fibreglass fleece rolls is now

done, and the cardboard tubes are sent back to their supplier for re-use.

(TNSF 7c)

The production supervisor's own receptivity to the value of Interface's sustainable development

initiative also translated into enthusiasm, both his – he enjoyed reading Forum for the Future's

publication, Green Futures – and amongst his colleagues. He relished telling me the story of

how he and some colleagues in production experimented with a new bonding method in the

carpet tufting process. 'Up until 2-3 years ago, they used to put [high viscosity] paste on the

'I-bond' [process], which created a 'tuft-pull' of about 2.2, sometimes 1.8, which was very

low and not so good. [Those of us in production] suggested putting wet-on-wet on, which is

the low viscosity paste, which is the one that does the bonding – we never used to put it on

I-bond. [Those in the research and development department] weren't keen on that idea.

But we said, "bugger it, we're going to do it anyway", and we tried it, and we proved that

it's actually cheaper to run it wet-on-wet than without it. We got better tuft-pulls, the

product itself improved its quality, and we were getting less waste. So eventually they came

round to the right idea, and they said, [The production supervisor put on a begrudging

tone of voice] "go on, then". We still use it! We've actually reduced the amount of paste

we've put on now to 1/70,000th inch of paste.

(TNSF 7b)

We'd not have been able to do that before with just the high viscosity paste. Things like

that all helps. We're getting there' (PC 1.6).

9 Fibreglass was used for carpet-backing.

- 165 -

5.6.6 'I've saved a tree!'

The administrative manager was pleased her company was investing in employees' training

around a subject close to her heart. She had loved 'the outdoors' for many years, having been

closely involved in the scout movement. She described how, 'in the Scouts we used to have

recycling for aluminium cans, we used to do the paper collections around the streets, but I

still didn't realise the impacts of not recycling until this course. The awareness that was

there became that much greater and deeper after The Natural Step' (PC 1.4). She had even

introduced phrases she had learnt on the TNS training course into her training of scout leaders,

such as 'everything changes, nothing disappears' (PC 1.4).

(TNSF 2)

She was keen to have 'refresher courses' about sustainability in the company. In addition, she

felt there needed to be more messages around the Shelf site that were explicit about

sustainability, and what the company had done and was doing, such that people could not miss

them.

The administrative manager was convinced of her ability to contribute to sustainable

development, but only felt her contribution would be significant if she brought 'others on board'

as well (PC 1.4).

It seemed that others in her department were predisposed to their organisation's initiative. She

said that TNS' 2-day course for members of staff also changed their thinking about the paperless

office. They used to use a lot of paper – 'it was incredible because we [would print] reports of

everything' (ibid.). After the workshop, their perspectives changed, with more attention paid to

how much paper they used and for what purpose. They might now say, for example, 'I've saved

a tree', when restraining their paper use,

(TNSF 7c)

language the administrative manager said emanated from the TNS workshop (ibid.). 'There is a

continuing monitoring of what can be done, certainly as regards paper' (ibid.).

(TNSF 6)

People were reading more from their screens. Pay slips were still printed, but they were

'looking at an electronic interface between the Payroll and Finance systems' (ibid.). They

now sent memos via email rather than paper;

(TNSF 6)

of course, 'if you print out your emails you don't save paper!' (ibid.).

- 166 -

I present my analysis of these stories in Table 5.5. At Interface, TNS' input connected with the stated goals of

the Chief Executive to transform the company into a restorative enterprise. Senior managers were keen to 'roll

out' TNS to everyone in the company to stimulate action for the company's sustainable development

trajectory. The training was more than merely raising awareness of a particular issue. It was a systematic

attempt to affect people's values and beliefs in certain directions, and formed a part of an overall company

redirection, or 'mid-course correction' as Anderson called it (Anderson 1998). Moreover, it led to staff

suggestions and a host of activities and reductions in waste and materials use, and, for example, a search for a

PVC substitute for the carpet backing.

From my interviews, there was ample evidence of enthusiasm, interest in, and willingness to contribute to the

company's sustainable development trajectory. I concluded that TNS-related conversational lineages were

widespread throughout the organisation, and this is born out in the fact that 49% of the 76 TNS-distinctions

discerned related to awareness of the theory in TNS' framework. It could be said that the role of the TNS

training at Interface influenced the dispositions of organisational members, related to their own orientations

both to sustainable development and to the company. My impression of all those with whom I spoke was that

they understood the corporate vision, and actively contributed to the company's sustainable development

trajectory.

There were indications of new organisational forms emerging, in particular, the Evergreen Lease arrangement

– the seventh step of the company's sustainability strategy, presented in 5.6.2. This may have represented

seeds of future conversational lineages that had not yet evolved into actual practices, activities, experiences,

personal reflections and further conversations of Interface employees. Anecdotal evidence suggested that the

Evergreen Lease innovation had not yet taken off as quickly as some would have liked, however (CFE 18).

As such, I experienced the organisation's overall strategy to become a restorative enterprise to have

significantly influenced the company's culture (Dawson 1996). The role of TNS' training, organised around

TNS' framework, enabled a conversational focus and a shared sense of direction, from which the seven-

stepped strategy emerged.

Much in the above narrative, however, reflected past enthusiasms. People did become enthusiastic in the

Quest initiative, they generated many ideas and made 'big savings' (PC 1.3). At the time of interviewing,

interviewees conveyed these phenomena in the past tense, and there were echoes of despondency looming

somewhere in the background. Interviewees relayed experiences that conveyed frustrations as well as their

enthusiasm. I explore these in terms of constraints to OLSD in Chapter 6.7 and 6.8. Of course, the moods

expressed then by those involved in my research may be different now.

- 167 -

Table 5.5 Assessment of 'Questing to become a restorative enterprise'







17%





Departmental4

(production staff initiating wet-on-wetprocess for 'I-bond')

Inter-departmental4

(train the trainers crossing departmentalboundaries)

Organisational4

(company-wide sustainability training)



(liasing with research association andtesting labs – PC 1.3)


People coming togetherHH

(Cf. 6.7)

Enthusiasm HHH


HH

(Cf. 6.7)


HH

(Cf. 6.8)


H

(cf. 6.7)

Investment of adequate resources HHH

Leadership of CEO and ManagementBoard HHH

Sustainable development strategy andvision HHH


Market signals

HH

Positive response by stock market, butanecdotal evidence of limited customer

uptake of Evergreen Lease scheme (CFE18)

- 168 -

In addition, the extent to which TNS' framework enabled detailed and systematic design, sense- and decision-

making was questionable, as highlighted by the ex-managing director of the subsidiary company and the

research and development manager in 5.6.4 and 5.6.5 respectively. For this reason, I perceived backcasting to

be more tacit than explicit for daily practice and decision making. I will return to this topic in Chapter 7.

5.7 'Word getting about' (Sainsbury's – see Figure 5.5)

Jay, the deputy environmental manager at Sainsbury's, referred to herself as keeping the 'little

flame' of TNS alive at her and the practitioner level in the organisation (PNM 8). She described

her company as not having sustainable development on the agenda at the Chief Executive and

Management Board level, but that 'confidential shifts [were] being made in the right

direction. In the current business climate, it’s a case of surviving today and getting [the

idea of sustainable development] in at the right time, in the right climate, in the right way'

(ibid.).

Jay said she had already 'made sustainable development her own' when she and senior

colleagues in the environmental management department were approached, by the Chairman of

TNS UK's Management Board in 1997, to pilot TNS (PNM 8). She undertook a cost-benefit

analysis of working with TNS in comparison with two other potential partner organisations (The

Environment Council and SustainAbility) after which she and colleagues decided to pilot TNS.

The pilot project involved TNS training with 'key packaging coordinators, some suppliers,

some buyers [who purchased many of the products sold via the company] and [some from]

marketing' (ibid.). They ran two seminars, the first being for 'a day on TNS teachings',

(TNSF 8a)

and the second being a whole day off-site 'visioning, backcasting and developing ideas' (PNM

8).

(TNSF 1,8b-c)

While there were a range of responses from the participants, some were interested. After a

follow-up meeting, Jay discovered that one of her suppliers had minimised their packaging

waste significantly, saving £15,000.

(TNSF 7b)

She also received feed back from a couple of buyers who 'had found TNS quite useful. They

felt better informed to give suppliers guidelines without having to know the technical

solutions' (ibid.). This was good because 'they had thought that previously they would have

needed expert knowledge' (ibid.). Having said that, following the piloting of TNS training for

- 169 -

supermarket buyers and 'organics' suppliers around packaging, she said colleagues were

unimpressed that nothing 'big' or 'fantastic' had happened (PNM 8).

Shortly after the pilot project, the Personnel department contacted Jay because they were setting

up training courses for newly employed buyers, and 'they wanted to include the environment

in the training' (PNM 8). Jay seized the opportunity 'to do TNS with the buyers' (ibid.).

(TNSF 8a)

She had been 'getting nowhere at the top level', so that there was demand from within the

organisation was a welcome relief (ibid.). They developed a training course with one of TNS

UK's accredited facilitators, which involved 'talking about environmental issues and what

was important to the company' (ibid.).

(TNSF 8a)

Participants then would analyse a product using the system conditions, and fill in a simply

structured form that diagnoses problems associated with the product.

(TNSF 8b)

Jay made it a precondition of the training that she would sign off their forms.

(TNSF 6)

She described the training as 'going from strength to strength' (PNM 8). The young people

doing the course as 'very knowledgeable and keen about environment. With a little

structure they get ninety-nine to one hundred percent of the issues related to a product and

that’s with no background or training other than what they get with TNS. That’s very

powerful to my thinking' (ibid.). Jay said she continued to get good feed back on these courses.

Such was the impression the course had on its participants that those in the Personnel

department organised a course for new product development people with the same TNS UK

accredited facilitator, without Jay's knowledge – 'brilliant!' (PNM 8). Course participants

returned, asking 'why isn’t this on my agenda, why can’t I do this or that?' (ibid.). Jay said

they wanted 'more information about their products – they are the technical people',

(TNSF 6)

rather than TNS alone, but 'that’s fine, as it’s telling me we’ve got the right framework to

start thinking about it' (ibid.).

Based on this work, she and colleagues were going to recommend more training of buyers and

new product development people to the Management Board. They also developed a brochure for

suppliers, in which TNS' framework featured prominently, communicating their expectations

regarding the environment, and giving them guidance (Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd 2001).

- 170 -

Alongside explanations of environmental management systems and four essential impacts

relating to energy, transport, packaging and waste the brochure outlined TNS' framework.

'Looking at the environmental impacts of a product can be daunting – how do you know

where to start? […] By using the same framework, we can work together to help each

other identify the key environmental impacts of manufacturing processes and products

throughout their life cycle, and find ways to improve their environmental impact. At

Sainsbury's we have begun to use a framework called The Natural Step.' (ibid. p.10)

(TNSF 8a)

Jay regarded herself as introducing 'sustainability by stealth', working with a bottom-up

approach, exploring opportunities as they presented themselves (PNM 8). She contrasted her

approach to that of pursuing what she saw as the preferred strategy of members of TNS UK of

targeting the management board. She saw TNS' framework as something that blended in easily

with one's thinking. 'It’s so simple but once you’ve got TNS, TNS starts to disappear and it

becomes part of life and you start thinking a bit differently into a particular language. […]

as with the packaging people, you can see they’re thinking thoughts that two years

previously they wouldn’t have had at all' (ibid.).

At the time of our interview, TNS' framework did not crop up much in conversations within the

company. At a Pathfinder Network presentation in January 2001, Jay said she would 'hardly

mention the "s" word [i.e. sustainability]' (CFE 12). However, she saw word to be 'getting

about' (PNM 8). Jay valued TNS' framework for its ability to provide 'a common language'

(ibid.). From her perspective, there were many environmental consultants with differing

'languages' that were not necessarily of the standard she would have liked. She regarded those

who spoke the language of TNS' framework as having 'a seal of approval' (ibid.). For her, when

someone had 'got' TNS' framework, 'you know how they are thinking' (ibid.). Being

conversant with TNS' framework was like being 'a member of a club' (ibid.).

My analysis of this narrative account, in Table 5.6, conveys Jay's ground-up, emergent approach. The high

percentage of TNS-distinctions relating to the enacting of TNS' ABCD action-learning process predominantly

related to the 'A' stage of awareness raising. In addition, an analysis of the narrative account conveys that the

systematisation of TNS-defined sustainable development occurred at the level of personal initiative. An

example of this was that Jay ensured that she would have to sign off the sheets of new product developers on

which they analysed activities in the light of the system conditions (the 'B' phase of TNS' ABCD process).

- 171 -

Table 5.6 Assessment of "Word getting about"







18%





Departmental4

(role-specific: buyers and new-productdevelopers

Inter-departmental

Organisational


Inter-organisational4 (suppliers in first workshop and

guidelines for suppliers)

Type of evident possibility for OLSD with TNS UK Project-focused learning

People coming togetherH

(related to roles and departments)

EnthusiasmHH

(of Jay)


H(cf. 6.9)


HH


H(cf. 6.9)


(for training purposes)


m(unclear; cf. 6.9)


m(unclear; cf. 6.9)


Market signals

HMixed – good PR from the new futuristicand 'green' store at Greenwich, London,

with, for example, its design thatmaximised natural lighting (CFE 12); but,

obviously, supermarket customers 'votewith their feet'. The sale of organic

produce has been growing in the UK, butas an exclusive, niche market (Zadek 2001)

- 172 -

The organisational levels involved were departmental primarily, concentrating on buyers in the first

workshop, and new product developers in the ongoing training programme. It was also inter-organisational,

in that suppliers were involved in the first workshop, and guidelines were written for suppliers.

While the narrative account of 'Word getting about' suggests few large waves were rippling throughout the

organisation, it does convey a sense of a TNS-related conversational lineage emerging gradually over time.

5.8 Meta-analysis 1: discerning types of possibility for OLSD

This section forms the first meta-analysis I undertook into the range of possibilities for OLSD, as discussed in

Chapter 4.6.3.

First, I present and discuss summary tables of the occurrence of TNS-distinctions and of the organisational

levels involved in TNS-related conversational lineages respectively, which I construct from the analytic

tables at the end of each narrative account of possibility. These tables include my attributions of 'possibility

for OLSD' types in their right hand columns, which is for reference purposes for when I come to discuss how

I arrived at these 'possibility types' later in the section.

As Table 5.7 clearly shows, there were varying degrees of emphasis in the occurrence of TNS distinctions in

the narrative accounts of possibilities. Two accounts showed a significant skew in the occurrence of TNS-

distinctions, tending toward TNS-activities rather than an awareness of TNS-theory. These were 'A longish

term thing' (5.4) and 'Word getting about' (5.5). On closer analysis, however, the activities presented in these

two accounts tended to concern the 'A' stage in TNS' ABCD action-learning process, that is to say, the

awareness raising stage rather than any significant operational activities that might have involved enacting

TNS' strategic corollaries. Moreover, both accounts show that the enacting of the other ABCD stages

consisted more of 'virtual' enacting in the training process, rather than actual enacting in the context of the

organisation's everyday operations.

Similarly, the emphasis in the account, 'Making us think' (5.2) was on awareness and the act of awareness

raising, rather than TNS-espoused activities, but here there was greater emphasis on awareness of the content

of TNS-theory (TNSF 2 & 5a,b,d), and thinking in the light of that content (TNSF 8d). These three accounts

(5.2, 5.4 and 5.7) discussed above contrasted significantly with the others. In 'Uncorking the Green Genie

(5.5) there was plenty of evidence of TNS-espoused activities, on top of what was, from an analysis of the

account, an implicit awareness of the theory in TNS' framework in The Co-operative Bank. In 'Questing to

become a restorative enterprise' (5.6) there was an even spread of TNS-distinctions between those relating to

awareness of TNS-theory and those relating to TNS-espoused activities. In addition, in 'A landmark building'

(5.2), there was evidence of both awareness of TNS' system conditions, acts of awareness raising, design and

decision making in the light of TNS' strategic corollaries.

- 173 -

Table 5.7 Summary table of number and percentage of TNS-related distinctions

Greyed-out boxes denote zero distinctions.

Awareness of theory in TNS' framework Enacted TNS-espoused activities

TNSF 2-4 –underlying

theories

TNSF 5a-d –system conditions

TNSF7a-d –strategic corollaries

TNSF 8a-d –ABCD process

Narrativeaccount (&company

name)

Totalno.

TN

SF

1 –

bac

kcas

tin

g2 3 4 5a 5b 5c 5d T

NS

F 6

–sy

stem

atis

-at

ion

7a 7b 7c 7d 8a 8b 8c 8d

Attribution ofpossibility for

OLSD type

1 1 1 1 1 15.2 'Makingus think' (Anaviation fuelcompany)

617% 50% 33%

Awareness raisingand systemic

thinking

3 1 4 4 5 1 4 6 1 35.3 'A

landmarkbuilding'('CarillionBuilding')

3238% 16% 16% 30%

Collaborativeemergent learning

1 2 1 6 2 2 15.4 'A longishterm thing(Carillion'Schal')

157% 13% 7% 73%

Awareness raising

5 3 3 3 1 10 2 1 3 1 7 1 3 25.5 Uncorking

the GreenGenie (The

Co-operativeBank)

5110% 12% 8% 20% 15% 25%


8 9 8 5 3 1 3 13 3 3 4 4 3 2 1 65.6 Questingto become arestorativeenterprise(Interface)

7611% 22% 16% 17% 18% 16%


1 2 1 4 2 15.7 'Wordgetting about'(Sainsbury's)

119% 18% 9% 63%

Role/project-focused training

- 174 -

All the accounts showed degrees of systematising a TNS-defined process of sustainable development, except

'Making us think' (5.2), perhaps unsurprisingly given that the account did not convey the enacting of any

strategic corollaries. Systematisation occurred frequently in 'A landmark building' (5.3), 'Uncorking the

Green Genie' (5.4), and 'Questing to become a restorative enterprise' (5.6). In particular, this was owing to

organisational processes for sustainability auditing, but also to interpersonal processes such as inviting new

staff at Interface to go round the factory and pick out something that did not sit easily in the light of the

system conditions. Systematisation occurred in 'A longish term thing' (5.4) in relation to Schal's systematic,

organisation-wide process of awareness raising, and in relation to the act of sustainability target-setting by

Schal's parent organisation, Carillion plc. As mentioned in my commentary at the end of the account,

systematisation only occurred in 'Word getting about' (5.7) at a micro, interpersonal level.

One TNS-distinction did not feature in any of the narrative accounts of 'possibility for OLSD', namely TNSF

4 that related to the lack of data regarding the thresholds between sustainability and non-sustainability. In

some ways, this is surprising given a common assumption that managers in businesses respond to 'hard

numbers', making the lack of hard numbers in TNS' framework a potential issue for TNS UK's business

audiences. Although this particular issue arose for one Pathfinder Company member, which I discuss in a

brief account towards the end of the next chapter (6.10.1.2), his was not a commonly articulated perspective.

Moreover, the issue did not prevent him from suggesting other members in his organisation, whom he

presumably respected, as having 'become evangelists' about TNS (PNM 2); there was no hint of incredulity

that they should have done when he described them as such. In addition, they had become 'evangelists' in an

engineering company that one would expect orients its business around calculations and quantifications. Yet

the account, 'A landmark building' (5.3) is abundant with evidence of enthusiasm in the sense of 'a

predisposition to act'.

A pattern is starting to emerge from an analysis of the occurrence of TNS-distinctions. However, I refrain

from elaborating on differences in types of possibility for OLSD until I have discussed the organisational

levels at which TNS-related conversational lineages emerged and developed, which I present in Table 5.8.

As Table 5.8 conveys, there were marked differences in the organisational levels at which TNS-related

conversational lineages appeared. In 'A landmark building' (5.3), 'Uncorking the Green Genie' (5.5), and

'Questing to become a restorative enterprise' (5.6), TNS-related conversational lineages emerged at a number

of levels – departmental, inter-departmental, organisational, and inter-organisational. In addition, an analysis

of the narrative accounts shows there were clear connections between the lineages developing at different

levels.

- 175 -

Table 5.8 Summary table of organisational levels at which TNS-related conversational lineages emerged

Ticks – 4– relate to the organisational levels at which TNS-related conversational lineages primarily developed as conveyed in the narrative account.

Organisational levelsNarrative account(& company name)

Interpersonal DepartmentalInter-

departmentalOrganisational


Attribution ofpossibility for

OLSD type

5.2 'Making us think'(An aviation fuel

company)

4

(Systemic conversationwith TNS UK facilitator)

4

(ground-staff trainingand policy-maker'sawareness raising)

Awareness raising andsystemic thinking

5.3 'A landmarkbuilding' ('Carillion

Building')(implicit)

4

(project specific withinCarillion BuildingSpecial Projects)

4

(facilities managers aswell as engineers andarchitects involved in

design)

4

(train-the-trainerinitiative and the OP's

conference orientedaround sustainability)

4

(collaborating withtrade contractors, and

then organising aworkshop for the client)


5.4 'A longish termthing (Carillion 'Schal')

(implicit)

4

(representative membersthroughout organisation

involved in training)

Awareness raising

5.5 Uncorking theGreen Genie (TheCo-operative Bank)

(implicit) 4(in Ecology Unit)

4(between Ecology Unit,and other departments,

but also with morecustomer-facing

departments – cf. 6.5)

4(Green Genie groupsacross all the main

sites)

4(conversing with

external organisationsfor screening – cf. 6.6)


5.6 Questing tobecome a restorativeenterprise (Interface)

(implicit)

4(production staff

initiating wet-on-wetprocess for 'I-bond')

4('train-the-trainers'

crossing departmentalboundaries)

4(company-wide

sustainability training)

4(liasing with researchassociation and testing

labs – PC 1.3)


5.7 'Word gettingabout' (Sainsbury's)

(implicit)

4(role-specific: buyers

and new-productdevelopers

4(suppliers involved in

the first workshop, andguidelines written for

suppliers)

Role/project-focusedtraining

- 176 -

For example, the TNS-related lineage that developed for the project team in 'A landmark building' (5.3)

evolved into a lineage at the inter-organisational level when the trade contractors became involved. The

lineage then evolved at the organisational level for Carillion Building when the management board 'bought

into it' and an organisation-wide train-the-trainer initiative was set up. Similar connections in the evolution of

TNS-related conversational lineages can be discerned in 5.5 and 5.6. The other three accounts (5.2, 5.4 and

5.7) conveyed two or less levels at which lineages developed, and for the two accounts where lineages

developed in more than two levels (5.2 and 5.7), the connections between the lineages were perhaps more

implicit than explicit.

On the bases of comparing and contrasting the narrative accounts in the light of Tables 5.7 and 5.8, I was able

to discern a range of four types of possibility for OLSD with TNS UK. Each type relates to a stage in a

process that becomes more complex and a progressively 'deeper' form of OLSD. These types of possibility

were:

1. Awareness raising – which is partly self-explanatory10, and relates to TNS UK's pedagogical work

discussed in Chapter 3.2.1 and 3.3. All the accounts in this chapter (5.2-7) conveyed conversational

lineages associated with awareness raising;

2. Systemic thinking, which emerges from awareness of TNS' underlying theories and entails thinking about

complex trade-offs in relation to the 'bigger picture', and may involve decision making as was the case in

the 'Making us think' (5.2);

3. Role or project focused training, which entails more fully-fledged practical design, decision making and

strategising (and thus involves systemic thinking), but appears restricted within organisational locations

and levels. This was the case in 'Word getting about' (5.7); and,

4. Collaborative emergent learning, which points to the evolution of conversational lineages and stories that

seemed to have the most resonance for respective Pathfinder Company members. I would also suggest it is

the form of OLSD that is most likely to lead to a transformation in an 'organisation's organisation' and its

structures (see Chapter 2.5). Collaborative emergent learning entails the following:

10 I say 'partly self-explanatory' because I think it can also be understood in second-order cybernetic terms as the firststage in Reyes and Zarama's (1998) 'process of embodying distinctions', which is a potentially powerful means ofunderstanding, and complementing an understanding of, systemic action learning (Bell et al. 2000). Reyes and Zarama'sfirst stage entails drawing a distinction between 'this' and 'that'. In the context of raising awareness with TNS'framework, a basic distinction is between that of sustainability and non-sustainability. I leave this theorising about thefour OLSD possibility types discerned above, here. I will return to theoretical reflections in Chapter 7.2, in the secondmeta-analysis, when I speculate on the potentially influential organisational and structural factors on OLSD.

- 177 -

n a number of actors crossing departmental and organisational boundaries come together and engage

in sustainability conversations and activities, perhaps as a result of project focused learning, as

was the case in 'A landmark building' (5.3), 'Uncorking the Green Genie' (5.5) and 'Questing to

become a restorative enterprise' (5.6);

n their 'learning' is not predicted and emerges from the networks of conversation that involve, but

transcend, awareness raising, systemic thinking, and role/project-focused training, as was the case

in the accounts in 5.3, 5.5 and 5.6. Sensemaking and activities give rise to learning and the

transcendence of the familiar (see Chapter 2.6.1) – new information, insights, practices,

relationships and associated patterns of organisation. For example, new TNS-related practices

would consist of systematically reducing, or substituting for, contributions to non-sustainability,

innovation, and optimising meeting human needs. I would add stakeholder engagement to this list

for learning to arise. In this, I follow Zadek (2001) and Sabapathy et al (2002) in believing

stakeholder engagement to be critical for enabling corporate responsibility and 'sustainability

innovation', and hence, OLSD. Stakeholder engagement is not explicitly part of TNS' framework,

but arguably it is implicit in system condition 4 (see Box 1.1). The Co-operative Bank, for

example, instituted stakeholder engagement by first surveying its customers' values, then adopting

its Ethical and Ecological Mission Statements, and then annually reporting on its activities and

relationships with its 'partners' in its Partnership Report;

n 'going beyond' established organisational boundaries. In 'A landmark building' (5.3), for example,

facilities service managers and trade contractors were brought into the design process, partly

because of the PFI contract, but also because the emerging sustainability innovations encouraged

the project team to widen the net of participants. The presence of so wide a range participants was

unusual up-front in the design stage. In addition, in 'Uncorking the Green Genie' (5.5), the bank

surveyed its customers' values, not something they had done before, and on that basis oriented its

operations along more ethical lines accordingly.

n as with role/project focused training, the initiatives of those coming together involve design and

decision making, but on a more ongoing basis. That is to say, processes of improvement become

systematised as they did in 5.3, 5.5 and 5.6. I would also speculate that opportunities for

sensemaking and exploratory conversations regularly arise in order for learning processes to

continue; and,

n unlike role or project focused training, collaborative emergent learning would also entail

strategising (TNS-distinction 1 and 8d – backcasting and strategic planning) because leaders, key

decision-makers, company strategists and executives are involved as they did particularly in the

case of 'Questing to become a restorative enterprise' (5.6).

- 178 -

I retrospectively revisited each of the narrative accounts of possibility to attribute them with a basic

'possibility for OLSD' type, as conveyed in the tables at the end of each account throughout this chapter.

I suggest that collaborative emergent learning is the most substantive reflection of OLSD with TNS UK.

A basic comparison between both Tables 5.7 and 5.8 shows that significantly more TNS-distinctions

occurred and organisational levels were involved for what I have attributed as the three collaborative

emergent learning accounts (5.3, 5.5 and 5.6) than for the others. This could reflect the fact that these three

organisations were involved in the third, 'in-deeper' phase of my inquiry, which entailed significantly more

interviews and encounters (see Tables 3.9 and 3.10, and Figures 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4). This raises a very

significant question. Do the collaborative emergent learning accounts reflect actual developments of

conversational lineages in their respective organisations, or do they merely reflect the fact of my more in-

depth researching? My response is both of these answers. I will return to this question in Chapter 8.


I keep this section, and my reflections at the end of Chapter 6, brief and free of theoretical discussion.

This is partly out of a wish to let the narrative accounts 'sink in' before I engage with the second meta-

analysis in Chapter 7, which revisits all the narrative accounts of both possibility and constraint

together. The second meta-analysis will be where I refer to theories discussed in previous chapters,

particularly Chapters 2 and 3, and point to potentials for improvements in the organisation and

structure of TNS UK's facilitation activities. My suggestions may be pertinent to those in their

Pathfinder Companies aiming to facilitate further OLSD as well. The narrative accounts are long and

each followed by a commentary; I have thus decided that the fewer personal reflections at this stage

the better. I leave discussion about my methodological and analytic strategies until Chapter 8, where I

reflect on their utility, relevance and trustworthiness.

This chapter presented six narrative accounts of possibility for OLSD with TNS UK, which I then

analysed to discern four types of possibility for OLSD. These were, namely, awareness raising, systemic

thinking, project/role-focused training and collaborative emergent learning. I present these types of

possibility for OLSD with TNS UK, in Figure 5.6, in the form of a spray diagram (Lane et al. 2002a). I

believe this typology adds significant substance to what was a perhaps-mild typology in the guise of

TNS UK's ladder of engagement, discussed in Chapter 2.3.2. The notions in my typology are grounded

in the data and could be used directly by TNS UK as evaluation criteria. Collaborative emergent

learning in particular, which I suggest is the clearest indication of OLSD in practice, appears to be a

rich conceptualisation of an 'enlightened' relationship towards which members of TNS UK could orient

their facilitation, as I recommend in Chapter 7.

- 179 -

Figure 5.6 Spray diagram of possibilities of OLSD with TNS UK.

The circular dotted line with arrowheads conveys the direction in which the stages of aprocess of OLSD with TNS UK might progress. As one moves around the circle fromawareness raising to collaborative emergent learning the stages become increasinglymore complex forms of OLSD. In addition, each stage is implicit in the next. I includeexamples for each of the four possibility types, relating them to the respective narrativeaccounts (the numbers in brackets); for awareness raising, I have given a variety ofdirect quotes for the narrative accounts to emphasise how this stage occurred in all theaccounts.

Possibilities of OLSDwith TNS UK

Awareness raisingwith TNS

Role/project focusedtraining

Action learning withbuyers and new-product

developers (5.7)

Systemic thinking

Collaborative emergent learning

Green Genie andinter-departmental

decision making(5.5) Swindon hospital

project andsustainability

evaluation (5.3)

Quest programmeand seven stepped

strategy (5.6)

Definition of 'whatsustainability is'

(5.4)

Sense of 'long-termdirection' (5.4)

'Toolkit to awaken asleeping giant' (5.3)

'Winning' people 'tothe cause' (5.4)

Not loadingproblems upstream

(5.2)

A 'commonframework' enablingcommunication (5.3)

'A commonlanguage'

(5.7)

'Effective forbringing peopleon board' (5.5)

'System for bringingpeople back to

fundamentals' (5.5)TNS' framework'stood up' (5.2)

'An interesting thing towork towards' (5.6)

Creating 'gentlertechnologies thatemulate nature's

systems' (5.6)

- 180 -

Interestingly, at one point in my research, some members of TNS UK viewed Carillion's Swindon

hospital project conveyed in 5.3 as the clearest example of a company enacting TNS' framework (TNS

UK 3, 5 and 6). Certainly, their 'Sustainability Action Plans' were the most explicit example of TNS'

ABCD process having been enacted that I came across. However, I believe the implicit occurrence of

TNS-distinctions that I marked in other narrative accounts merits recognition. It was perhaps ironic

that Dave in the Green Genie story (5.5), for example, had only encountered TNS' framework

tangentially via the ecological report written by 'TNS-leaning' auditors. Yet the work of the Green

Genie groups was, from his perspective, one of the few in-house initiatives that staff could engage in

and 'identify with'. His was a story that certainly had resonance for those of his colleagues with whom

I engaged.

As I convey in the narrative accounts of constraints to OLSD in Chapter 6, there may be contextual

constraints that could restrict the ease with which such conversational lineages might develop in the

future. This could be the case for members of the project team in Carillion Building who designed the

Swindon hospital just as much as it could be for those in other parts of Carillion, such as Schal, where

managers arranged an organisation-wide awareness raising initiative (5.4).

The issue of constraints, to which I now turn, faced all the companies represented in this chapter.

- 181 -

Chapter 6 Constraints to OLSD with TNS UK

6.1 Introduction

6.2 'Living in a commercial world' (An aviation fuel company – see Figure 5.1)

6.3 'Swings in society' (Carillion – see Figure 5.2)

6.4 'Like eating an elephant' (Carillion – see Figure 5.2)

6.5 'I've got targets to hit' (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3)

6.6 Screening complexities (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3)

6.7 'Undercurrents' (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

6.8 Reaching the edges (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

6.9 Mixed messages (Sainsbury's – see Figure 5.5)

6.10 TNS UK-related constraints (Pathfinder Company member perspectives on TNS' frameworkand TNS UK – see Box 1.1 and Figure 1.1)

6.10.1 Putting TNS' framework into perspective

6.10.1.1 Applying TNS' principles day in, day out (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

6.10.1.2 The whereabouts of hard numbers (Carillion – see Figure 5.2)

6.10.1.3 A robust theory of social sustainability? (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3)

6.10.1.4 Worth the effort? (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

6.10.2 TNS UK's organisational capacity beyond TNS' framework

6.10.2.1 TNS advocates as generalists? (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3)

6.10.2.2 Meagre benefits? (An aviation fuel company – see Figure 5.1)

6.10.2.3 Now what are we going to do? (Interface – see Figure 5.4)


6.1 Introduction

The narrative accounts in this chapter concern constraints to the evolution of conversational lineages in TNS

UK's Pathfinder Companies. Those individuals with whom I engaged in the five companies outlined at the

beginning of Chapter 5 experienced these constraints in relation to their own organisation, their organisation's

environment, and to the organisation of TNS UK. I present their perspectives of constraint in relation to TNS

UK in a dedicated section towards the end of the chapter, in section 6.101.

1 The accounts of possibility for OLSD implicitly included the organisation, TNS UK; hence, the organisation did notfeature so explicitly as it does in this chapter.

- 182 -

For perhaps obvious reasons, I do not analyse these narrative accounts of constraints to OLSD to the same

degree as I did for the accounts of possibilities in Chapter 5. This is partly because these narrative accounts

largely speak for themselves. In addition, all the constraints are situation specific, and many are contextual to

a Pathfinder Company, that is to say, beyond their immediate sphere of influence. Moreover, I believe the

degree to which I analyse these accounts is appropriate to the nature of the research. The organisational

members whom I encountered were already members of companies that belonged to TNS UK's Pathfinder

Company Network. Whatever frustrations were aired were in the context of something that their companies

assumed could have a future – that is to say, a trajectory of sustainable development. Otherwise, arguably,

their companies would not have joined TNS UK's Pathfinder Company Network. Even for those companies

who went no further than the 'awareness raising' possibility type discussed in the previous chapter, they

would probably agree with those at Schal who saw that sustainable development is 'a longish-term thing'.

They saw this trajectory as having a future regardless of whether their company would take their future

forward with TNS UK.

Having said that, these constraints were significant for Pathfinder Company members, and appeared to be

substantial, as the following narrative accounts convey. Some of them, particularly those in section 6.10,

point to threats to the likely renewal of contracts with TNS UK.

I begin again with an account that arose from 'an aviation fuel company'.

6.2 'Living in a commercial world' (An aviation fuel company – see Figure 5.1)

As introduced in section 5.2, Tom worked as the 'environment leader' for a multinational

company that specialised in buying, selling and distributing aviation fuels, with a daily turnover

of more than £10million. He described his sector as 'a very cut-throat and price-sensitive

market [in which] buyers are very intelligent' (CFE 9).

Tom's remit, based at the UK headquarters, was to develop and encourage the uptake of a

sustainable development policy across the company's six business units around the world.

Before Tom took up his role, sustainability had been a voluntary 'add-on' strategy advocated by

the previous chief executive (PNM 1). After deliberating with representative managers from the

company business units around the world, they included a statement on the company's 'ultimate

vision' in their sustainable development strategy. 'Our ultimate vision is to play a leading part in

an aviation industry that is in harmony with the natural world and a sustainable society' (CFE

9).

- 183 -

One of the contextual factors that inhibited the company from realising its vision related to the

lack of an international regulatory regime. Tom emphasised that the sector did not enjoy tax

breaks for producing cleaner products, which was unfortunate, given that the waste from the use

of the products had a significant environmental impact, particularly on global warming.

International standards for aviation fuel permitted three thousand parts per million of sulphur

dioxide. The research and development department of Tom's company was able to reduce the

level of sulphur dioxide significantly. 'Technically, there is no reason why this could not be

reduced to fifty parts per million, or lower, subject to the possible addition of additives'

(PNM 1). According to Tom, 'the lack of international regulatory regimes, together with the

co-mingling of supplier's products', meant it was not economically viable at that time to offer

this potentially more environmentally benign product to the market (ibid.).

Tom reflected his company's pragmatism in his statement that, 'My colleagues and I are

definitely on the lookout for opportunities [to reduce ecological impacts] in the future. If

they were already commercially available, we would already be at the cutting edge of the

market. We have to live in a commercial world' (PNM 1).

The constraints to OLSD that this account reflects are:

• Technological, financial and material limits;

• Cut-throat market; and,

• A lack of international institutions and regulatory regimes.

The organisational level at which these constraints to OLSD appeared is:

• Contextual.

Despite commitment to sustainable development, and in-house research and development to reduce

ecological impact, addressing the situation of Tom's company goes far beyond the confines of his

organisation. It also goes beyond the geographical boundaries under the responsibility of the UK

Government. The aviation industry has historically operated in an ecological domain over which specific

nation states have had no clear sense of ownership. Selling aviation fuel that is more environmentally benign

would require new and legitimate international institutions that would be able to introduce and enforce tax

regimes for the industry. Alternatively, existing governments would need to introduce national legislation.

However, without international collaboration and agreement between the majority of governments worldwide

- 184 -

to introduce and enforce such regulatory regimes, this was unlikely at the time of writing. The International

Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), with around one hundred and eight signatories, has been exploring

technological developments and 'analysing the possible use of market-based measures' to address global

atmospheric problems (International Civil Aviation Organisation 2002). However, the ICAO stated that

'policy-making on environmental issues is complex. States’ views differ on the extent to which they are

prepared to impose environment-related measures on aviation activities. As a consequence, identifying

solutions that will be acceptable to all States can sometimes be difficult, requiring a great deal of

patient and determined effort by those involved, as well as a willingness to compromise. ICAO has

succeeded in the past in delivering solutions that are acceptable on a worldwide basis, and will

continue to work hard to do so in the future' (ibid. p.2).

The case of Tom's company reflected deeply rooted contextual constraints, moreso than organisational, to his

work. Having said that, such constraints also signify possibilities. The most obvious way for overcoming

these kind of constraints would be through the company building political connections and influencing

national and international diplomacy as far as possible. Tom has since moved from his role as environment

leader to work on secondment as an advisor to a UK government commission. In many ways, the approach of

Tom and others in his company reflected the virtues of 'quiet leadership', which, according to Badaracco,

involves realism and not inflating

'the importance of […] efforts or [the] likelihood of success. [… Quiet leaders] are genuinely modest

about how much they know and their role in the scheme of things. […] Most leaders […] know that

their will, ideals, and ability are only a few of the many forces that shape what may or may not

happen.' (Badaracco Jr. 2002, pp.174-6)

6.3 'Swings in society' (Carillion – see Figure 5.2)

As was made clear in section 5.3, Carillion's Swindon hospital project enabled innovation partly

resulting from the nature of the PFI contract. In the eyes of Carillion members, PFI projects

ultimately represented public sector contracts, and those were perhaps more attuned to

sustainability than those from the private sector. Carillion members noted that market demands

were changing. For example, the plc level director of engineering and environment experienced

'[sustainability in conversations] in the market place [more and more] and it’s something

that’s becoming important. And obviously [for] the Environment Agency, who’ve just set

up this framework agreement with several contractors or are about to set up, sustainability

and environmental credentials and performance were a very strong part for the bids of

those projects, we didn’t get into the last seven unfortunately; but it’s coming round and

- 185 -

people are recognising things' (PC 3.2). He expressed the view that he would like to see more

companies in the construction industry committing to sustainable development. He thought this

would encourage the sharing of learning, as has happened on safety issues. Moreover, because

Carillion were, in his eyes, 'ahead of the game' he did not see Carillion threatened if this

happened. From his perspective Carillion would be able to do things at half the cost because of

their experience, reputation and record of accomplishment, thus allowing continued market

differentiation.

Those putting projects out to tender might request information on environmental and

sustainability policies that they would not have done 'two years ago' (PC 3.3). For one of the

directors at Schal – see section 5.4 and Figure 5.2 – 'it’s pretty obvious when you look at the

building market and […] all the government is doing […that sustainability] is this word

that kept coming out. It became apparent to me and a lot of other people that we really

ought to be up to speed with all of this or otherwise we could miss a trick basically in

selling our services' (ibid.).

Moreover, he perceived that changes in social expectations would increase pressure on

companies to improve their 'ethical performance'. 'On the social side there seems to be a

much greater swing in society for openness and demanding better ethical performance

from companies. You can look anywhere and see evidence of that demand and I think that

it’s slowly but surely accelerating, forming itself into a shape that will demand things from

businesses in the future' (ibid.). This perception led him to initiating the development of a

corporate social responsibility strategy for Schal – see section 5.4.

Despite these perceptions of changing expectations in the public-sector marketplace, there was

doubt about the extent to which private clients made demands, or would make demands in the

future, for sustainability-oriented projects. According to John, a commercial manager at Schal,

'there are clients out there, […] and there’s no doubt, who are not environmentalists by

even a short measure. So [those in the commercial department] see [sustainability] being

certainly in the short term of – I wouldn’t say of no use – but of restricted use… it’s very

much obviously up to us to try and educate clients over time' (PC 3.3).

John had been involved in training those who coordinated the company's contracts and

commercial relationships. John described 'commercial people' as '[tending] to be more

influential within the sphere of the project team rather than out there in the project itself,

even though that’s still quite important' (ibid.). As such, he wondered whether, concerning

their perceived sphere of influence, 'they felt their own contribution might not be that great'

- 186 -

(ibid.). However, John confirmed his belief that 'everybody has a contribution to make', and

he explained how he structured and facilitated the in-house sustainability training with

'commercial people'. Their response, in his eyes, was that they saw sustainability 'as being of

limited use in the short term and over longer term of more use' (ibid.). They were concerned

that their mentioning 'sustainability' would put off potential clients.

While John acknowledged that more people in the marketplace were talking about sustainability,

he did not 'think it’s going to become the norm for a long time. That’s […] the impression

you get, or what I got from feed back from the individuals on my [sustainability training]

group [from the commercial department]. Maybe that’s a perception they need to have

changed in some other way, maybe follow up courses or something like that, we discussed

this as another option but it’s… The amount of time that I had with that group wasn’t

sufficient to convince them that this is actually gonna happen or convince them that they

could make it happen. […] They’ve got the tools now and open it up and do it if they’re

asked to do it' (ibid.).

The constraint to OLSD that this account reflects is:

• Private sector clients less obviously interested in sustainability.

The organisational levels at which these constraints to OLSD appeared are:

• Inter-organisational; and,

• Contextual.

It is of course difficult to predict how market expectations will change. Certainly, expectations seemed to

have changed relatively quickly in the public sector, perhaps noticeably inasmuch as two years (PC 3.3).

Doubts within the company about the timescales involved before private clients begin to expect sustainability

criteria in their project specifications, however, may slow the process in which change via proactive means,

from within the company, takes place. Such doubts perhaps affect the extent to which senior managers would

endorse further sustainability training, making it more difficult for Carillion employees to educate clients

around sustainable development-related issues.

Similarly, it is difficult to know what strategies, whether operational, marketing, building partnerships,

training, for example, are the best to pursue in terms of alignment with sustainable development. According

to contemporary strategic wisdom, just because a company develops good corporate citizenship practices, it

- 187 -

does not mean that the company would perform better financially, and prosper in the long-term. Zadek (2001)

outlines possible consequences of good corporate citizenship practices:

'[Good corporate citizens] can create citizenship micro-climates where one or more of a small number

of businesses can survive and indeed prosper. They can be squeezed out of the market through the

ability of other businesses to take advantage of, for example, any cost disadvantages created for those

companies seeking to 'do good'. Finally, they can lead to shifts in the underlying conditions of the

market that extend the take-up of the particular good practices.' (ibid. p.34)

Certainly, Carillion is beginning to align itself explicitly with improving 'quality of life', and introduces itself

on its website homepage in sustainable development terms.

'Improving the quality of life means helping people live healthier, safer lives, enriched with

opportunity and choice. It means travelling, working and relaxing in greater comfort and security.

Creating innovative human environments while protecting our natural environment and making sure

that the actions we take today, make tomorrow a better place.' (Carillion plc 2003b)

Judging by the upbeat mood of the Chairman of Carillion's management board, the company's strategy has

not damaged their financial performance, or their reputation, so far (Carillion plc 2003a). Whether the

company's strategy leads the company into holding a specialist market niche – a 'micro-climate' – or whether

it can transform its leadership position into a 'Mecca', bringing others in its sector with it (Zadek 2001),

remains to be seen.

6.4 'Like eating an elephant' (Carillion – see Figure 5.2)

Both the director of engineering and environment at Carillion plc, and a director and two

managers at Schal, spoke of the difficulties involved in design and decision-making regarding

sustainable construction.

Environmental and social issues associated with sustainable development make choices between

alternatives complex if not confusing. 'I can see that one of the things that we’re sadly

missing in the construction industry at the moment is a sort of mugs guide to material use,

you know, do I pick concrete or do I pick steel? Do I go with PVC or do I go with

something else? And there are conflicting arguments and what I think the designer needs

and the people doing the concept at the front end is to have something where you can

quickly balance up these things' (PC 3.2). The decision-making process also involves, of

course, taking into account the availability of the material, for example steel or 'precast'

- 188 -

concrete, from their manufacturers in line with such things as the time parameters of the project

in question.

Including environmental criteria 'is one thing, [but when] you start adding the social

dimension to it, it actually gets very, very much more complicated. Something

environmentally might be quite clear [but then] you say "well if you do that there’s four

thousand people in New Guinea who don’t have jobs anymore" and that means that you

wreck a complete community, or something of the sort. So life is going to get very, very

complicated for us. We have since [initiated] some work on sustainability indicators or

sustainability cost accounting' (ibid.).

Accounting for both social and environmental issues together in decision-making may require

information that is not currently available. 'I don’t think the information’s out there in the

market place. We have enough trouble trying to find out if it’s better [for us to] put

concrete or steel up' (ibid.).

One of the managers at Schal acknowledged that involving the whole supply-chain in the

sustainability decision-making process was important, but he described it in terms of it being an

immense task. In order to 'get something to work you have to address this entire spectrum of

things and it just hits you in the face to start with and you think, "where do you actually

start on this?"' (PC 3.3). It is 'like eating an elephant' (ibid.).

However, the plc director of engineering and environment was hopeful that, with time, the

information would become available. 'You know it might be twenty years down the line; it

might be thirty years down the line. I think you have to start; we’ve got to start from

where we are and try and move forward' (PC 2.2). Although in the future there might not be

hard evidence to support one choice over another, he mused that it might be possible to have a

rationale of some kind. 'At least you’d have some reasons for following that particular

route. Whether you’d ever get audited on it, I don’t know' (ibid.).

Because Carillion were 'constantly making things that are different shapes and sizes' the

design choices they could make, potentially, were very large (PC 3.2). The director of

engineering and environment did not regard there to be sufficient information in the market

place, regarding relative sustainability in materials selection (ibid.). While he did not perceive

TNS advocates as 'having all the knowledge', he regarded TNS UK's Pathfinder Company

Network as having sufficient collective expertise (ibid.). Moreover, he saw a need for business

people to be empowered to eke out what the problems and potential solutions might be, possibly

- 189 -

in collaboration with research organisations and universities (ibid. & PC 3.2). 'What I’ve

suggested to [TNS UK's then-director of science about what] we should do [is] to actually

get together […] sitting round a table with some universities and suggesting as to how…

what were the issues first of all, and what do we need to know as a business? What can the

universities help us deliver together with TNS because a university can open up EPSRC

[Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council] and other funding and we can try

and get something underway to find out some of the data that we might need for this. I

mean there might be other people in the company […who] feel that, you know, some of this

data is available, but it isn’t… but it’s not widely available. I think there is work that needs

to be done in that area and certainly [TNS UK's then-director of science] felt that we

needed to accelerate information that is available particularly for the designers; ‘cause I

think, you know, getting in at the front end is where you can have the biggest influence, so

that you’ve actually got to get at the people that’s the architects, the engineers who design

areas at the very front end of the job' (PC 3.2). The view that there was little 'sustainability

information' available in the market, was shared by the business development manager, who

thought that if there was any, it was not particularly challenging (PC 3.1).


• The complexity of analysing design choices; and,

• Insufficient sustainability information available.

The organisational level at which these constraints to OLSD appeared is:

• Organisational; and

• Contextual.

That the above respondents did not necessarily feel equipped enough to tackle the complexities they outlined

became clear. This may have reflected limitations in TNS' framework, or the extent to which TNS UK's

facilitation had enabled these Pathfinder Company members to understand and use TNS' framework in as

effective way as they could. Alternatively, it may have reflected the lack of information available regarding

the relative sustainability of given materials, as the Carillion plc director of engineering and environment

said.

- 190 -

The question of sustainability information is one about which members of TNS UK were aware. As the ex-

director of learning noted the issue of whether 'to use wood, aluminium, [or] steel window-frames' was one

that had cropped up in his facilitation work. His response however – one that I think was shared by other TNS

UK members – was interesting. He reflected that a choice between these materials was

'not really the critical question in a way. Because each of those might be right in a certain way, right

under the circumstances of when you ask that question. But equally all of them could be wrong some

other time under some other spatial dimension' (TNS UK 4).

From his perspective, TNS' framework provided 'a consistent vehicle' to approach such questions of, and to

hold exploratory conversations around, life-cycle impacts. In addition, according to the-then director of

science, there were a number of risks associated with priority lists regarding, for example, the toxicity of

chemicals or the relative sustainability of a range of materials. These included the risks of overlooking

'material stewardship' and 'the critical factor of how materials are used', and the possible discouragement of

thinking that is more strategic (CFE 17).

The extent to which TNS' theorised model of sustainability and ABCD action-learning processes enabled

Pathfinder Company members to represent and manage the perceived complexity of such issues is a subject

to which I return in Chapter 7.

The account also could be said to be an organisational level constraint because, as will become clear in

section 6.6, it might be possible for organisational leaders to invest in capacity building to enable decision

making in the face of perceived complexity. Those in Schal had not decided to make this kind of investment.

6.5 'I've got targets to hit' (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3)

Chris had worked in accounting, analysis and investment roles at The Co-operative Bank for

twenty-two years, before he moved to the Asset Finance department – which 'is not mainstream

banking' (PC 2.3). Although he had been in the role for five years, he regarded himself to be

'still learning' (ibid.).

Asset Finance is a specialist branch of finance that entails providing loans for purchasing

'boring tangible assets', such as a helicopter or a wind turbine (ibid.). It included 'discounting

for receivables', namely accounting for secure income streams over the life of an asset. For

example, the UK Government's 'non-fossil fuel obligation' would provide a secure income

stream to a wind turbine operator, which would thus make the loan more attractive in the eyes of

a lender. The Asset Finance department had the lowest cost-income ratio in the bank, so was the

most profitable per departmental employee.

- 191 -

With time, Chris learnt about the demands of both Asset Finance and 'environmental deals'. He

has progressed some way since the time when he and colleagues turned down a loan for a wind-

generated electricity project because of their concern that the wind might not blow!

The lending process involved a broker or a referrer in the bank, possibly in the same department

or from the Ecology Unit (see section 5.5), introducing a potential client. Chris would then

'structure' a deal that underwriters would then sign off.

Others in his department knew that Chris had a penchant for environmental deals. So 'if there's

something environmentally related – for example, [investments related to more

environmentally benign] plant and equipment – they'll know it's best to send it to me' (PC

2.3). He also liased with those in the Ecology Unit of the bank when preparing investment

arrangements, learning about the relevant ecological dimensions, as well as providing his

expertise to the Unit on 'structuring deals'. From his perspective, those in the Ecology Unit were

'the fount of all knowledge' (ibid.). In addition, there was one broker principally interested in

environmental deals – for example, combined heat and power plants – with whom he dealt.

An example of a deal concerned landfill-site gas emissions. He described how most landfill site

gas-to-electricity operations have their generators set to receive minimum gas-emission levels,

to ensure continual electricity generation. A certain amount of gas therefore escapes. Someone

had the idea to capture all the gas and direct it into the gas mains. Chris talked with the head of

Ecology Unit about the ecological validity of the idea, who in turn suggested the bank buy all the

gas – the head of the Ecology Unit's input gave the project credibility. Moreover, Chris received

the backing of the landfill-site inspector from the UK Government Department for Trade and

Industry, who approved the gas reclamation technology that Chris envisaged as part of the deal.

The underwriters involved, however, did not 'know many of the issues', so stipulated particular

conditions (PC 2.3). They would say something like, 'the company doesn't have enough track

record', not taking into account the innovation involved and, for example, the 'renew-ability' of

renewable energies (ibid.). Chris mused that 'it would be nice to get someone from the

Ecology Unit and just sit them down, but there's not enough hours in the day' (ibid.). He

described how their lack of specialist environmental knowledge inhibited the lending process,

and led him to seeking the help of senior colleagues. He had liased with 'the Ecology Unit to

lobby through […] my head of section, who [talked to the underwriters]. The underwriters

do look at things from an environmental perspective – there's no doubt about that – but

they don't have sufficient knowledge. […] They can't be expected to know everything.

Some will be specialists in building, some in airline finance or something like that.

- 192 -

Alongside those specialists, there should perhaps be someone with an environmental

specialism. […] The bank is making good profits, the underwriters are working extremely

hard, so what spare capacity do they have to be looking at things like this? So it's actually a

policy decision to create the capacity to take on these different things. It is a mindset, but

don't get me wrong. I think the underwriters do a great job, they're approachable and

have a lot of plus points. But I think at a policy level more money could be put in to what

the bank believes in' (ibid.).

This 'knowledge gap' in the underwriting department was not the only obstacle Chris had

experienced.

Each year, Chris had an annual budget – at the time of interview, it was £17.5million – for him

to lend in line with the ethical principles of the bank. However, he described the market for

environmental deals to be scarce – 'you've got to go out there and look for the stuff' (PC 2.3).

Meeting his budget wholly via environmentally more benign deals, therefore, was limited – 'I've

got targets to hit' (ibid.). He wondered whether a dedicated member of the Asset Finance

department promoting environmental deals, possibly a bespoke team, would help attract more

people seeking loans to come the bank's way. Both the heads of the Corporate and Commercial

department, and the Ecology Unit, supported this idea. However, it would require 'someone in

Advances having the time to grapple with these kinds of issues', and someone eventually

making a policy decision (ibid.).

Another obstacle Chris mentioned related to the UK Government sending mixed messages

regarding the electricity sector. On the one hand, they were 'trying to deregulate the market'

introducing 'new electricity arrangements' that made electricity cheaper for customers (PC

2.3). On the other, 'they have been saying we want ten percent renewable sources by 2010',

but the new electricity arrangements 'penalise renewables, especially wind turbines' (ibid.).

He also described how there were distinctly longer periods involved with environmentally

related deals. 'Someone who comes in wanting [juggernauts, for example] or a helicopter

will have a lead time of a few months or twelve weeks – the deal is on the table there and

then. With environmental technology stuff there seems to be an inordinate length of time

between getting something sanctioned and bringing it to fruition. When you're working to

a budget, nobody wants to know that, and yet the bank needs to make a decision on it

because it's part of its mission' (ibid.). In other words, Chris wanted more support from the

bank when it came to environmental deals. He perceived senior colleagues in the Asset Finance

- 193 -

department to be disinterested in a small loan for an environmental deal in relation to a

£17.5million budget.

Moreover, he found the mindsets of accountants outside the bank prejudiced against

environmental deals. For example, a company site-manager might approve of an environmental

technology that would last twenty years and make significant annual savings, but when he would

approach the finance department, the accountant would turn the opportunity down. This would

be because the up-front cost might be higher than less benign alternatives, the budget had

already been set, and more often than not, there would be a cap to potential capital expenditure.

'I've found I've wasted a lot of time on the environmental sector because of the way

accountants think. […] It's hard work on the environmental side, because of the length of

time it takes to get a deal to fruition and the mindset of people out in the sticks. [This is]

even if the deal at hand concerns something like water treatment where there is very quick

payback. It's frustrating. The bank needs to say that it is encouraging the use of

environmental technologies, and we do, but the market out there is very, very difficult' (PC

2.3). Chris gave the example of a district heating deal, a market he had been trying to break into

for eighteen months to two years. The deal would have meant housing association residents

sharing a boiler, there would have been fewer emissions, and the cost of heating for the

residents would have been cheaper. For those who spent ten percent of their income on heating

and electricity, the difference of three or four pounds per week would be significant. For an

asset finance manager, the deal was robust. Despite being twice as expensive up-front at its

alternatives, the more environmentally benign heating technology would last up to three times

longer. 'A banker would think, yeah, I can provide a loan on a basis where everyone's

going to be happy!' (ibid.). The accountant, however, turned it down because he did not want to

spend so much up-front.

The constraints to OLSD that this narrative account reflects are:

• Potentially insufficient departmental capacity;

• Assumptions in extra-organisational accountancy practices;

• Limited knowledge amongst intra-organisational underwriters; and,

• Contradictory governmental tax regimes.


- 194 -

• Departmental;


• Contextual.

In terms of in-house organisational capacity, Chris experienced himself in need of further support to shore

and scale up the department's 'green' lending. He appreciated the work of those in the Ecology Unit, and with

their help occasionally levered influence through more senior managers. However, he felt he would be in

better company were there a dedicated member of staff, or team, in his department 'promoting' environmental

deals. He also felt the underwriting department was lacking in environmentally literate specialists, a

substantial need that a few hours' chat with those in the Ecology Unit would not provide. This was a factor in

slowing the delivery of environmental deals.

In addition to these in-house issues, the prejudices of accountants in other companies, and the mixed

messages of the UK Government, were significant factors 'beyond the boundaries' of the bank that

contributed to his frustration. He acknowledged that the head of his section, and the bank's Chief Executive,

were lobbying in the wider world for such things as tackling fuel poverty. However, he experienced, from his

perspective in his role, that there was insufficient departmental and organisational capacity to consolidate

lending that was more ethical.

The issues highlighted above by Chris were the kinds of systemic constraints that involve a whole host of

factors not easily amenable to adaptation. These constraints also imply possibilities for change, following

Ceruti's (1994) thesis. Tackling the assumptions in accounting procedures that inhibit more long-term

investments may be a significant task, but with persistence, surely, modest ambitions could begin to have a

positive influence on the accountancy profession.

6.6 Screening complexities (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3)

As mentioned in section 5.5, the small team in the Ecology Unit at The Co-operative Bank took

responsibility for researching into products and processes, and screening them based on the

Ecological Mission Statement of the bank. They would then recommend whether or not a

particular investment decision should go ahead, for example, or a particular supplier

contracted.

From the perspective of Liz, an ecological analyst in the Ecology Unit and one of the main

compilers of the Partnership Report of the bank, those in the Purchasing and Facilities

department made most of the requests for screenings. She said they worked increasingly closely

- 195 -

with the Purchasing department, who would 'approach us when they've got major tenders,

which are going out […and] ask us for our input' (PC 2.2).

Beyond the fixed policies of the bank, for example on PVC, it could be hard to know what

criteria to use to make such recommendations. For example, a supplier might be pushing a new

replacement product, such as carpets. Those undertaking the screening would want to know

what material inputs and processes contributed to the production of the carpet.

Gathering the appropriate information on respective environmental impacts was not always

straightforward. 'It's so diverse. You develop certain areas of expertise – paper and energy

I'm not too bad on. But again, it's like where do I even begin? Who do I approach? So I'm

constantly trying to build connections, for example with WWF [World Wide Fund for

Nature] on issues about climate change or toxics. So it's quite good to bounce off other

people to make sure what I'm saying is similar' (PC 2.2). One of those she talked with was the

head of the Ecology Unit who 'has an extensive [scientific] knowledge […], but even so there

are chemicals that he's unfamiliar with' (ibid.). She said she would also often 'pick NCBS'

[National Council for Business and Sustainability] brains' (ibid.). In addition, there was a

point when she consulted the then Director of Science at TNS UK about 'this or that particular

chemical or compound' (ibid.). However, what she really needed was 'someone who's a guru

or an expert' (ibid.).

When it came to reports provided by manufacturers and suppliers, Liz had learnt to be quite

sceptical of claims 'not backed up by independent analysis from a credible authority. If

they've got to that level they'll usually provide that information up front. Normally if

[information] comes through piecemeal, it's not really there' (PC 2.2).

In circumstances where the information was not provided or unclear, Liz demanded detailed

information to make 'an informed decision' (ibid.). She wondered whether the level of detail

she demanded exceeded the level demanded by other screening organisations. Respondents

might answer her requests with, '"We've never been asked that before." So I can't envisage

or believe that there are others out there who are asking the same questions and going to

the same level of detail we would do. On the other hand, I see it in-house when we get

invitations from other companies where we're tendering, and normally it will be general

information [other companies ask for] like, "do you produce an environmental report? Do

you have an environmental management system?" And that's just it' (ibid.).

- 196 -

Most of her time spent screening products focused on toxicity, rather than other dimensions such

as embodied energy, transport, waste, or resource availability. Concentrating on toxicity was

'time-consuming' enough (PC 2.2). They were 'of the opinion that if we were to go down the

route of doing a full-LCA [Life Cycle Analysis] they would never get to the stage of passing

anything through it would be so labour-intensive and time-consuming' (ibid.). This was

understandable given the existence of over one hundred thousand synthetic chemicals in

production2.

Liz gave a concrete example of the potential demands involved. 'In Property Services [there is]

this lovely concept of having a green branch. […] We've looked at electricity sources,

carpets, paints, and various things within the branch. Whenever we're doing a

refurbishment [there are] enough products for me to analyse to keep me busy, for example

cleaning products or partitioning. With something like air conditioning, we have a policy

so it's already covered. [But screening for all those other products and services] I could be

doing [the screening] twenty-four hours a day and there'd still not be enough time to turn

the answers round for [the person requesting the screenings]' (ibid.).

Toxicity screening entailed checking substances against various priority toxicity lists, such as

the OSPAR3 and WWF's lists for chemicals, those developed by the National Toxicology

Programme and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, and Greenpeace's list on

plastics. They decided to create a template as a means of 'pulling' the information together,

which Liz described as 'by no means [being] cast in tablets of stone. [It] is still evolving, and

will evolve as other data comes on board, and we'll move with it' (ibid.).

With the relevant information from manufacturers and suppliers, she would 'run through' each

of the checklists for substances she was unfamiliar or unsure about (ibid.). She would then put in

their code ('cast') numbers into the computer and see what information emerged. Normally she

could tell that if she reached far down the list without 'hitting anything' then nothing serious

would emerge (ibid.). If something was highlighted from the OSPAR list, for example, she would

know 'straight away that we wouldn't want to use it because we are looking to screen out

against that' (PC 2.2). If she did not understand something, she would consult the head of the

Ecology Unit. Finally, she would write up her comments 'whether or not something was

2 Cf. John Adams (1995).

3 For information about the OSPAR Commission and their list of dangerous chemicals, see www.ospar.org/eng/html

- 197 -

highlighted [as a toxic risk] and then [make] a brief recommendation' on the acceptability of

the product (ibid.). She would then send that information back to the relevant person or

department who made the request.

Liz kept files on all the screenings that the Ecology Unit had undertaken.

On occasion, Liz encountered issues that were beyond her scope to address. One such was when

the head of the Ecology Unit asked her to research 'bulk printing'. She realised quickly that

there were so many issues to take into account and in-depth that she could not do the work

'because I didn't have the knowledge to do it' (PC 2.2). She said it would have needed

someone with the relevant knowledge and expertise to research it properly, full-time4. When

looking at the various technologies and printing methods with their own specific set of issues

that go with each of them 'it was not going to be a simple task' (ibid.).

Liz pointed out that while the screening is not done as it is in TNS' framework, by ranking items

according to system conditions breaches, it was possible to see how each of the criteria she and

the head of the Ecology Unit selected related to the system conditions. 'It is almost inherent in

many ways' (PC 2.2). She said that as she undertook the screenings she thought to herself that

one 'should always be using natural products and natural fibres, even with carpeting, or

the wallpaper as well' (ibid.). If it were not possible to use recycled content, with paper for

example, she would look to see whether the virgin fibre is FSC [Forest Stewardship Council]

certified. TNS' principles are 'always there, and sometimes when you're thinking, "is this

better than that?" and they are both equally as bad, or both equally as good, if they're

both breaching, for example, system condition two, it's really not a case of is this one better

than that. From our Ecological Mission Statement they are both as bad as each other. So in

that sense it can stop you perhaps going down another level of detail, because it's so easy to

get bogged down in doing this and going to the nth degree. Sometimes you need to take a

step back and say, "this doesn't really matter if this is slightly worse than this", and

looking at the environmental impacts of A against B, when I know that both breach this

condition and that condition' (PC 2.2).

Liz emphasised that screenings were 'tailor-made depending on what we're looking at' (PC

2.2). Other than the toxicity lists, there was no overall standardised framework for screening

product types, for example, wall coverings, furniture or office printers. She might request

4 The Ecology Unit have since collaborated with TNS UK to produce a report on bulk printing (Everard 2002a).

- 198 -

information 'on issues that we think are key areas' based on her and the head of the Ecology

Unit's experience and knowledge (ibid.). In the Ecology Unit, they did not have guidelines, for

example in the form of a process map, to decide which criteria to ask questions about in the

screening process. Liz reiterated that on a 'case-by-case' basis they would try 'to build up and

define our own criteria because there isn't one place where you can go that we've found. It

would be nice to hit a button and say, 'carpets', and a mysterious template appears that

tells you all the things you should be looking for. But it's really a case of [us] reading up

and thinking between us, "if it's carpet and wall-papers we should have a question in there

on whether there are brominated fire retardants", for example' (ibid.).In another example,

for print management she checked manufacturers of printers for recycled content, toner

recycling, ink constituents, and ozone and dust emissions. If manufacturers failed to provide

information, this would count against them when Liz made her recommendations. Moreover,

sometimes her recommended manufacturer or supplier involved products or processes might not

fully comply with the principles of the bank. In such circumstances, part of her recommendation

would include something like 'it is recommended that discussions are progressed' on such issues

as environmental reporting, toxic content and product take-back facilities.


• A lack of extra-organisational consensus, and accessible data on which to build consensus, on priority lists

for products and their ingredients; and,

• Tacit decision making in screening which potentially could inhibit the intra-organisational inheritance, and

development, of screening expertise.


• Departmental; and,

• Contextual.

At the time of interviewing, Liz described the procedure she carried out. The decision-making process

involved both reified forms of knowledge (Wenger 1998), in the guise of toxicity priority lists, and tacit

forms (Nonaka et al. 2001), for which she claimed TNS' framework was 'inherent'. Both led to Liz making a

recommendation about which manufacturer or supplier to engage. Her knowledge, particularly regarding

paper and energy she was 'not too bad on', and her tacit expertise in undertaking the screening process had

developed since she joined the Ecology Unit in 1998 (PC 2.2). She had become familiar with the various

- 199 -

toxicity lists and was able to navigate their detailed scientific information, coming to know which lists were

good for what, that the lists were non-commensurable, and how they 'behaved' in the process. She had

developed working relationships with others, including the head of the Ecology Unit, contacts at WWF,

Greenpeace, TNS UK and the NCBS, to 'pick [their] brains' (ibid.). Moreover, she knew her limits, knowing

when a job was beyond the scope of her resources, as with the issue of bulk printing.

Apart from consulting the toxicity lists, and the expertise she had built up in doing so, she also revealed what

could be a significant gap in the screening process. This was the lack of a procedure for deciding what

indicators to use when screening types of product. The Ecology Unit had not failed where others have

succeeded in this regard; in her experience, there were no common frameworks or criteria available. 'There

isn't one place where you can go that we've found' (PC 2.2). Therefore, based on their own experience,

expertise, and perspectives, those in the Ecology Unit set the criteria themselves. In this they showed

similarities to a 'community of practice', whose members 'ultimately […] decide what they need to learn,

what it takes to be a full participant, and how newcomers will be introduced into the community' (Wenger

1998, p.234). This emergent process of members in a community of practice setting their own standards

accords with the expectation that practitioners will set their own pace and scope for implementing TNS'

framework, as discussed in Chapter 2.2. However, the tacit aspect to screening in the Ecology Unit could

hamper explanations of screening processes to the Unit's 'newcomers'.

From my perspective, I was impressed with the level of detail the screening process reached. Others from

whom Liz requested information had sometimes not 'been asked that before' (PC 2.2). However, making

screening criteria more explicit would enable others to inherit and develop the expertise building in the

Ecology Unit. According to Liz, screening templates 'were evolving' as more data became available.

Measures did not exist to ensure the screening work would continue with efficient and minimal induction

when newcomers join the 'community of screeners', or those currently involved moved on for one reason or

another.

The Ecology Unit at The Co-operative Bank was remarkably small for an in-house consultancy with so much

power – see section 5.5. It had five or so members at the time of interviewing, with two at most having been

involved in screening – and the requests for screening were increasing. According to the head of the Ecology

Unit, they had 'so many requests from line managers asking for resources to support greening initiatives' (PC

2.1). He expressed the desire to expand his team because the demands to analyse all requests were so high.

Were the bank to boost the organisation's capacity for in-house screening, then clarifying screening

procedures would be important for the inheritance and development of the Ecology Unit's growing expertise.

Of course, at the time of interviewing, relying on both tacit and explicit knowledge seemed to be yielding

'results'. Deciding on screening criteria for the range of products and services in the way they did enabled

- 200 -

their 'screening conversations' to carry on, both amongst themselves and with internal and external

stakeholders in the screening process. Moreover, others in the bank trusted their recommendations – as Dave,

the protagonist in the Green Genie story said, 'it's very rare to get an unbiased view externally' (PC 2.4). Dave

said he found the scientific expertise of the head of the Ecology Unit to have been vital in analysing, for

example the constituent elements and legal status of air conditioning refrigerant chemicals.

6.7 'Undercurrents' (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

As implied in section 5.6.5, production staff and research and development staff at Interface's

factory in Shelf experienced tensions between each other concerning innovation and the Quest

initiative. Both parties were aware of such tensions.

Those in research and development were reluctant to endorse production staff's idea to test 'wet-

on-wet' low-viscosity paste for the 'I-bond' process. The idea eventually turned out to be

successful, leading to an enhanced product and reduced resource use, to the glee of the

production supervisor with whom I talked (PC 1.6).

In addition, the research and development manager was aware of the negative messages those in

his department may have been giving when screening ideas from those in the Quest initiative.

They were wary of squashing ideas. 'At one stage we were inundated with good ideas, and

felt really rotten to say, "sounds alright, but if you do that it upsets something else so that

it's not an improvement overall". We felt really mean and negative having to do that, but

we did. I think a good number of them did feel we were being negative, and said so at

times, but then after that it improved a bit. There are undercurrents in any organisation,

and some can bear grudges earmarking particular people for not letting them try their

ideas out' (PC 1.3). There may have been a prevalent perception that those in production were

'not too concerned environmentally; their business is to make carpet and that's it. [For

them, those people who want to substitute materials with more environmentally benign

alternatives are] just a nuisance' (ibid.).

The learning manager, the human services executive in the United States, and the director of

sustainability and marketing each held this view of production staff (PC 1.1, 1.2 & 1.5). The

learning manager, for example, expressed his belief that members of staff in production would

not be the ones to design sustainable products. The people 'on the shop-floor are not going to

develop a sustainable product for us. They're going to make it, and they're going to have to

implement (rather than develop) the sustainable work practices. So [their response to

sustainability training is] very much, "thank you for telling me that, now let me get on with

- 201 -

my job". That's more the mentality the further down the organisation you go' (PC 1.5). His

perspective was that it was the responsibility of those in the research and development

department, and those in executive management, to rectify the company's contributions to non-

sustainability. Having said that, he believed that, were the company to provide further space and

permission, those in production could participate and contribute more extensively to the

company's sustainable development strategy. He said he would like 'to give people the

opportunity to spend some money solving the problem that is in front of them, without

having to go and seek a whole series of authorisation signatures. Saying to them, "you're

empowered to solve this problem. Come and tell us what you're going to do before you do

it, just in case it has an implication somewhere else, but we're not going to get in your

way". We've talked about empowerment, but… […] Give people the space and permission,

and then they'll change more' (PC 1.5).

The research and development manager accepted there could be a 'basic tension' between his

department and those in manufacturing (ibid.). He was aware that people in manufacturing are

under lots of pressure, and are 'measured in almost every possible way – on scrap levels,

yields, completion times relative to customer orders, quality, stock levels. For someone

from here to come and help them with something environmental must sometimes upset

them. Sometimes I'm surprised how they actually try and co-operate to a fair extent'

(ibid.).

Issues relating to knowledge, expertise and language affected the in-house TNS staff training.

The production supervisor with whom I spoke referred to both the nature of the workshop and

the technical nature of his workshop leader, as constraints that inhibited his learning. '[The

workshop] was technical at the time, and crammed into a short space of time […]. You

come out of them wondering what they were on about; 'what did he say?' and you can't

remember […]. The Natural Step was one of those things. [A member of staff from the

research and development department] was our tutor for the day, and he's a very technical

man. You can lose him in a conversation quite easily' (PC 1.6). He did say, however, that

with time and through conversations with colleagues, he came to understand better some of the

things he learnt in the workshop.

Poor inter-departmental communication probably compounded such issues above, relating to

legitimacy-differentials in the knowledge-creation process, which played out during the Quest

initiative.

- 202 -

The production supervisor noted a dearth of communication with those at managerial levels

generally. When I asked him if he was in ongoing conversations with the sustainability team, his

reply not only conveyed his astuteness about the implications of who the stakeholders of

sustainability might be. It also highlighted what might be longstanding inter-departmental

divides. 'I suppose that's everybody, isn't it? […The sustainability director] comes down

into the department on a regular basis. Everybody knows him now. In fact, I think he is

one of the only ones that does come down there that we do know! Sometimes people come

round – management – and they don't introduce themselves; we haven't a clue who they

are' (PC 1.6).

Concerning relations with the research and development department, the production supervisor

said 'we can go with weeks on end without being in contact with [them]' (ibid.). Their

contact was limited to when conducting trials and tests on the machines, and much less frequent

than with line managers, engineers and electricians.

Historical roots perhaps contributed to this apparent split between management and production

staff at Shelf. The sustainability director mentioned that Interface had traditionally been strongly

unionised. That financial considerations were paramount for human resource managers was

evident in the tussle with production staff over maintaining the night shift, which paid a little

extra per week. 'Over the years we have fought hard to keep the night shift. We've had

some management that have wanted to get rid of it' (PC 1.6). There were benefits to keeping

it. The machinery, which was old, stayed warm, avoiding 'cold-spots' when the 'grease stiffens

up [and] the bearings shrink to their original sizes', and cutting down on scrap when the

machines are switched on again (ibid.).

Having said that, it would be a mistake to think conversations between members of other

departments were free of discord. Indeed, disagreements could exist between members of the

research and development department and general managerial levels in the company. 'In the

department we've made a lot of changes to the product, removing things that were

perceived to be possible toxic problems, such as the heat stabilisers in PVC. […] We did

and continue to do that at whatever rate we can. But within the company, we recently

decided not to use bromine-based flame-retardants. There are a variety of views as to what

is toxic and what isn't; there's no hard and fast rule, but having decided that, we were then

faced with what to use in its place' (PC 1.3.). The research and development manager

distinguished between those decisions made within his department, and that made within the

company as a whole. He did not think the wider company decision about phasing out bromine-

- 203 -

based flame retardants had been properly thought through, and was one that 'kept some of my

people pretty busy trying to find the best way round it' (ibid.).


• Poor inter-departmental communication;

• Legitimacy differentials for departmental sustainability knowledge-creation.


• Inter-departmental.

At the Shelf site of Interface, there have been inherited divisions between departments, particularly between

management levels and production staff. There seemed to be classic design-practitioner, and manager-

producer divides at Interface (Ison 1995). These divisions have been manifest through an absence of

communication, the established expertise of the research and development department, and concomitant

shared expectations that those in production merely make the products to set designs and specifications.

Underlying the struggles experienced by various interviewees at Interface, there was a common tenacity and

a well-held vision that was stronger than particularly well defined obstacles that inhibited enthusiasm, as

conveyed in 5.6. This is born out by the learning manager's perspective that people's commitment to the

company's sustainability drive had persisted and deepened (PC 1.5).

In many ways, Interface Inc (see Figure 5.4) had a traditional hierarchical structure as far as I could discern

from my researching conversations. Certainly, the organisation chart drawn by one of the Pathfinder Network

representatives at my invitation in preparation for the more in-depth researching phase with Interface (PC

1.1) conveyed clear, function-dependent departmental boundaries.

There were indications that those at managerial levels were aware of how the traditional arrangements in their

organisation perhaps inhibited communication and further collaborative learning. For example, the senior

executive in the United States spoke of a relatively recent initiative at the time of every division of Interface

having a global 'circle of excellence' (PC 1.2). The human services global circle, for example, met once a

quarter, often via video-conferencing. Through its meetings they had become aware of both similarities and

'great differences too' between Interface members internationally, for example in terms of social dynamics

with those in the US being 'a little more demonstrative, outgoing, more boisterous maybe' (ibid.). She also

- 204 -

spoke of the distinction between training and learning, revealing an understanding of learning that was akin to

the kind of social and interactive learning that I discussed earlier in the thesis. To institute learning, she said,

'first of all you have to commit to language and dialogue and presence with one another to permit those

conversations to happen, so someone can be free to disagree and work through that. Those are the

things I mean when I say learning, as opposed to "training". Training is a completely different subject,

when you transfer skill-sets, where it's not a dialogue, it's not a "learning-together" process' (ibid.).

Compared with the bulk of the experiences, perspectives and stories that my interviewees related, there were

signs of better communication with members of staff, for example through its social auditing that it reported

on the website (Interface Inc. 2003b). However, such information gathering processes are limited in the

extent to which they enable opportunities for conversation between departmental members and stakeholders

that, when appropriate, is more ongoing. In addition, the timescales over which such feedback-loops

eventually affect the overall structure of the organisation remains open to question.

6.8 Reaching the edges (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

Staff contributing to Interface's Quest programme at Shelf may have reached the material limits

of a waste reduction initiative. The perception of the learning manager at the time of interview

was that the 'Quest co-ordinator approach has pretty much died, I think, as a process. I'm

not aware of these co-ordinators having any meetings or doing any work [now]. That might

be a total misrepresentation, but I'm not aware of it. There's always more that can be

done, so it's not that they've come to a dead end in terms of possibilities. However, right

now I'd expect people to say they can't spend any money, and it's tough if they can't fix it

for free' (PC 1.5).

The research and development manager held a more complex point of view regarding future

possibilities for sustainable development trajectories. He saw the nature of emphasis to have

changed over the past few years, having begun in 'a fairly straightforward manner trying to

reduce waste', directly relating this view to the Quest programme (PC 1.3). As such, it was a

case of slightly altering specifications, for example trimming the product. This constituted both

environmental as well as commercial gains, and proceeded unhindered for a couple of years.

However, he wondered whether they would be able to sustain the progress they have made

regarding environmental improvements in the future when the decisions and trade-offs get more

difficult.

- 205 -

'We've got to a point now where everything that is very easy has been done, and there are

more savings to be made, but the cost of doing them is possibly going to outweigh the

benefits. We've reached a minimum cost situation in a lot of areas. We've gone down with

the total weight of product on the grounds that the extra weight is of no benefit to the

customer, so they may as well have improved cost-effectiveness, paying for something they

don't need… That's proceeding quite well. We've now got on to areas where if we reduce

any more it is possibly detrimental, so it begins to get into a difficult commercial decision'

(PC 1.3). He believed that ultimately someone wants to buy their product; if the customer does

not appreciate the environmental dimensions, the pressure of costs will become paramount –

'there's always that worry' (ibid.). He saw the rate of progress to depend, probably, on the

demands of the public or those specifying the carpet – 'a commercial company can't go it

alone; their products either sell or they don't. […] I'm reasonably confident about the

future, but I just wonder how it's going to work out' (ibid.).

At the time of my interview, one such decision where the trade-offs had become more difficult

concerned the phase-out of PVC and its substitution with alternatives. Even though one 'can get

used to arguing as to its impacts', PVC has toxic implications in its manufacture, including the

production of chlorine and chlorine leaks in polymerisation (PC 1.3). Because it had come

under 'some suspicion environmentally, it's probably best to be out of it' (ibid.).

As far as alternatives were concerned, the research had boiled down to the two possibilities –

bitumen, or a plastic rubber, namely, an oliphin polymer. They systematically listed the relative

benefits of each. There were environmental benefits (for example, cost, toxicity, availability,

energy content, ease of recycling) for one, and commercial benefits for the other. 'We came

down on the side of the environmentally better one [oliphin polymer] because we didn't

think the commercial gain was the right way' (PC 1.3). With the process for using oliphin, the

'hot-melt' mix starts to oxidise when kept hot over a particular time period, but this can be

counteracted by adding potentially toxic chemicals, or sealing it with nitrogen in a closed tank.

Alternatively, it would have been possible to make the mix with a 'screw-extruder' that can be

switched on with demand, rather than prepare the mix three hours in advance and avoid

potential waste. Either way, one can direct the hot-melt straight onto the back of the carpet. 'It's

nice, clean, quick technology' that cuts energy use as well (PC 1.3). Moreover, it would be

possible to retrieve some of the backing from used carpets, mix it with new hot-melt and produce

a carpet 'as good as new' (ibid.). Such recycling was not possible with PVC-backed carpet – the

chlorine in PVC reacts with nylon to make recycling impossible.

- 206 -

They had piloted the oliphin hot-melt backing process with some other companies, the outcomes

of which revealed that they would have to purchase a lot of new machinery 'just to maintain

the current product [without] using PVC' (PC 1.3). The research and development manager

said he and others were convinced by the technology. However, it required 'someone to put

their neck on the line and agree that they'll do it', that is to say, invest in the new machinery

(ibid.). The decision would involve weighing up such factors as 'payback time, return on

capital – everything' (ibid.). The equipment would need installing, while the accountant had

specified a defined payback period. This was an 'ongoing' conversation for the research and

development manager (ibid.). 'It's gone from UK accountants to UK senior managers to

American accountants to American senior managers – back and forth. It's hopefully

moving in the right direction, but it's not easy times' (ibid.). He believed they were 'moving

forward', but that then they worry because 'to install the equipment costs a lot, which does

not bode well with the state of the economy and office carpet market a bit depressed'

(ibid.).

The edges of possibility may have been reached in making the carpet tiles. Those in production

juggled the blend of ingredients, including yarn, glues and backing, to optimise the quality of the

product. The production supervisor told me as an example that recently they had been putting

more ingredients into the carpet than was reflected in the price paid for by the customer. They

therefore 'reduced the cog sizes to suit, which gives us an extra half a pleat' (PC 1.6). They

aimed for 12.9mm in each pleat, and had a minimum of 12.7mm, 'so we do have scope to

twiddle them and get that thickness right' (ibid.). If they put too much yarn in for each section

of carpet, they did not get as efficient a yield.

Parameters for making carpet were set both by those determining and enforcing standards, for

example, concerning flammability, and the expectations of customers. Carpets needed to be of

particular quality. For example, the production supervisor described how they had to produce

carpet within a certain weight-tolerance as standardised by the British Standards Institute. One

can reduce weight by reducing either yarn or paste. To take paste off makes it lighter, which is

cheaper. However, sometimes there might be a problem with a roll of carpet they are making,

which they could address by putting more paste or yarn on. He said, 'I'd rather not put more

paste on if I can help it. […] It's a lot more expensive [and] anyway, it's harder to get rid of

– not quite as biodegradable – so obviously I can put a bit more yarn in' (PC 1.6). However,

the quality of the yarn could itself sometimes be variable, and therefore not always a reliable

means of shoring up the quality of a carpet. The decision-making processes in production

therefore involved striking a balance between quality, cost, and environmental impact.

- 207 -


• Material limits to reducing waste;

• Risky decisions related to capital expenditure;

• Technological capabilities;

• Depressed market; and,

• Externally-set product performance standards.


• Organisational;


• Contextual.

Where the account in 6.7 conveyed organisational constraints regarding the pattern of conversational

relationships, the account in 6.8 conveys structural factors that possibly constrained sustainability

conversations5. They concern the material products that Interface members researched, designed and

produced.

Any initiative will surely encounter such material, technological, and financial limits. For an initiative as

complex and far-reaching as sustainable development, it should be of no surprise that the kinds of constraint

people experience in commercial organisational contexts require determination and ingenuity to manage and

possibly improve on them. The interviewees with whom I spoke at Interface certainly did not give the

impression they were going to give up easily.

Perhaps the most significant factor for addressing the limits highlighted in the narrative account, one that

perhaps led to a change in strategy, and that could, potentially, lead to a change in the pattern of organisation,

came from outside. Customers were becoming more discerning and demanding of more information.

Customers often asked about the recycled content of the carpet, and might ask about whether or not global

warming is 'manmade' (PC 1.1). Sales managers, who had been reluctant to allow their staff to take time off

for training, were now more receptive. Rather than merely 'push the Interface brand', the senior managers

5 See Chapter 2.5 for a discussion of the distinction between organisation and its structures.

- 208 -

whom I met saw the role of sales staff more in terms of educating customers about the wider context to

Interface's sustainability drive. In addition, it was important for sales staff to describe Interface's actual

achievements as opposed to making spurious claims or relying on an inspiring vision.

The attention paid to the customer-facing aspects of the organisation perhaps indicated a step-change in

organisational strategy. They were now marketing the 'sustainability credentials' of the organisation moreso

than they had previously. The strategists at Interface may have decided to pursue increased net profits from

customers to plough back into the kinds of capital investment suggested by the research and development

manager regarding PVC substitution. As such, this would have been in line with the logic of TNS' ABCD

process and the strategic notion of shoring up flexible platforms for future decision-making (Robèrt 2002).

At the time of interviewing, contextual factors beyond the control of Interface staff may have contributed to

what I called a 'spectre of despondency'. The organisational situation of those represented in this narrative

account reflected people's perspectives as they stood from the latter end of 2000 to 2001. At the time, the

furnishing sector had had trouble in the stock market – the market was a 'bit depressed' (PC 1.3). In addition,

my interviewee in Georgia in the United States was in a particularly reflective mood post-September 11th and

during the US anthrax scares. From her perspective, Interface had been through 'some fairly major trauma

[…] given the downturn in the economy', before and since the 2000 Annual Report (PC 1.2). Much of her

work at the time of interview involved helping people through this transition. Because of the September 11th

2001 events, America was 'in wait and see mode', so capital expenditures were put off. 'Right now is probably

the most trying times that I've ever seen… the sadness is combined with the current business conditions… to

stay focused on all those fronts is quite a balancing act' (ibid.).

6.9 Mixed messages (Sainsbury's – see Figure 5.5)

Jay described her approach in Sainsbury's as 'sustainability by stealth' – see section 5.7. She

contrasted her approach with a top-down approach involving 'reinventing your organisation,

which is the traditional view of [corporate] sustainable development' (PNM 8). The top

down approach was one she perceived members of TNS UK to hold. She regarded herself as

'embedding TNS in our steps to the future' (ibid.). Clearly, having introduced TNS into

training curricula and the supplier's brochure, and it having become institutionalised via those

in the personnel department, gave Jay satisfaction.

Having said that, mixed messages from two parts of the company constrained the work of the

environmental management department. On the one hand, the Sainsbury's Group's Management

Board Trading Director would ask those in the environmental management department 'to

reduce their budget' (ibid.). On the other, the chairman of the Group Board Environment

- 209 -

Committee would say to Jay's boss that he wanted 'more done', so Jay's boss 'works seven

days a week' (ibid.).

Jay was wary that not everyone in her company, especially those at senior levels, would be so

appreciative of TNS' framework. She recounted an initial meeting, regarding the company's

possible partnership with TNS UK, with some of her colleagues and senior managers at the

group level. She said, 'at that stage – they’re bright people – they said, "how does system

condition four equal sustainable development?" A weakness there! They’re bright people,

but they’ve got a hard business to run' (ibid.). While she tried to keep people informed, she

also experienced others to be looking for quick results, which she saw as incompatible with TNS'

framework. Her experience inside her company sounded fraught. 'You get so battered down in

business that it’s good to come to the [TNS UK] Pathfinder Network meetings to recharge

the batteries [and] you [almost] forget that you’ve been there to benefit the environment'

(PNM 8).

Her conclusion was that they had not 'lost TNS' in Sainsbury's but were trying to do it well in

those bits they could, realistically (PNM 8). She referred to how 'the interest waxes and wanes.

That’s why I wanted to get [TNS' framework] into some business processes that are

already happening, because then it might have a life of its own or it might evolve, it’s

without being "this academic thing called The Natural Step"!' (ibid.).

The constraints this narrative account conveyed are:

• Limited departmental capacities;

• Conflicting signals emanating from board level executives; and,

• A lack, potentially, of a clear sustainable development strategy and committed leadership.


• Departmental; and,

• Organisational.

Jay portrayed herself as a subversive sustainable development advocate, in that she kept the flame of TNS

alive (see section 5.7). She described TNS UK's Pathfinder Network as providing her with a much-needed

- 210 -

support network, in contrast to her experience of her employing organisation, which, it seemed, she did not

regard as being explicitly committed to sustainable development.

Mixed messages, and the demands on those in the environmental management department, may point to

issues of organisational and departmental capacity. Certainly, Jay was busy. She not only directed teams of

people concerning the environmental management of all Sainsbury's supermarkets. She developed

environmental management targets and managed the data collection for their monitoring, a process that she

described as 'a bit fraught' (PNM 8). She also managed a handful of consultants. In addition, regarding her

role as co-ordinator of environmental communications, she worked with the corporate communications

department.

Mixed messages may also correlate with Jay's perspective on the company's lack of a coherent stance on, or

support for those pursuing, a sustainable development trajectory. For those on the management board, the

situation may have been 'a case of surviving' a day at a time, as Jay said, without plans for a radical

transformation based on a vision of a sustainable company (PNM 8). The changing nature of the supermarket

sector probably explains a less radical approach. As Zadek noted, 'Wal-Mart's entry into the UK market

through its purchase of Asda […] will intensify price-based competition between food retailers in what has to

date been a relatively lifestyle conscious, food retail market' (Zadek 2001, p.33).

Jay has since left Sainsbury's. It is difficult to predict what effects her legacy will have in the future in the

organisation, that is to say, what in-house conversational lineages will develop. Having said that, she has left

her mark. Without her enthusiasm, TNS' framework would probably not have influenced the training of

buyers, new product developers, and the guidelines for suppliers so explicitly as it had when we met.

6.10 TNS UK-related constraints (Pathfinder Company member perspectives on TNS'

framework and TNS UK – see Chapter 1.2)

As highlighted in this and the previous chapter, Pathfinder Company members sometimes spoke of the role of

TNS' framework in awareness-raising, and less so in decision-making. Occasionally, they perceived the

organisation TNS UK, TNS US, and possibly TNSI, as lacking the capacity, disposition and associated skills

to enable Pathfinder Company members to enrich and deepen their company's sustainable development

trajectory. Beyond their understanding TNS' framework, many spoke of how TNS' framework and TNS

advocates did not enable them to manage their everyday decision-making as effectively as they would have

liked. As discussed in Chapter 2.3, Upham (1999a) predicted this lack of sharpness in using TNS' framework

as a decision-making guide. Nattrass (1999) discussed the point, too, regarding his four case study

- 211 -

companies6. However, those working with members of TNS UK whom I encountered shared many of the

TNS-related issues to which Nattrass alluded:

'Although [TNS' framework is] generally viewed as providing the best structure for framing and

thinking about sustainable development, and an excellent source of basic education about the

relationship between human activities and the natural world, The Natural Step organization has not

provided the implementation strategy, tactics or many tools to corporations after the companies

received general education in the framework. This has been a cause of some frustration to corporations

as they must design their own environmental management system and implementation strategy.

Although this causes corporations to genuinely and seriously engage with the issues themselves, they

frequently express a desire for implementation expertise that is only now being developed and

provided with The Natural Step network. […] Complaints that the framework and The Natural Step as

an organization do not provide sufficient access to information to make decisions is being addressed as

The Natural Step organizations are developing networks of scientists and other technical experts who

understand the framework and can work with companies on specific issues [from Nattrass' perspective

at the time of his writing].' (Nattrass 1999, pp.81-3)

Here I present a variety of Pathfinder member perspectives that allude to their sense of how things could be

better. These accounts concern the implementation of TNS' framework in section 6.10.1, and working

relationships with TNS UK (and TNS International) in section 6.10.2. I do not add any further reflections to

these accounts in order to avoid repetition of the above points expressed by Nattrass. In many ways, they are

self-explanatory. In addition, I will refer to these accounts when I discuss the implications of this research for

TNS UK in Chapter 7.

6.10.1 Putting TNS' framework into perspective

6.10.1.1 Applying the principles day in, day out (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

As mentioned in section 5.6, the ex-managing director of the Interface subsidiary in the UK

agreed that, because of its high-level principle and whole-earth system perspective, the

application of TNS' framework sat more appropriately with higher management and strategy

levels. He agreed that 'not much happens' with using TNS' framework on an everyday level

(PNM 6), especially with those on the factory floor. From his perspective, top level strategic

decisions unquestionably had impacts that were more far-reaching, but conflict could result

6 His four case study companies had not worked with TNS UK, except Interface. TNS UK does not feature in his casestudy.

- 212 -

from an overall organisational strategy being at odds with the person on the shop floor 'pulling'

in a different direction. He saw this as justification for the company-wide training. 'In terms of

helping people understand the issues I think [TNS' framework is] just as valid to the guy

who sweeps the floor just as much as the Chief Executive. The application I believe sits

most happily with the senior people who decide the strategy of the business, and can

challenge the strategic decisions they are making in the light of the four system conditions'

(ibid.). He also thought they could use TNS' framework in product development – 'it has a

massive application in product development' (ibid.) – although the views expressed in section

5.6.4 by the research and development manager seemed to qualify this perspective. Having said

that, he said that the big downside to TNS' framework was 'how […] joe bloggs working on the

shop-floor [could] apply [TNS'] principles day in and day out. Now if you stop and work

with them and take time out to think about it, between you, you work it out. But to do it

naturally is extremely difficult and very rare' (PNM 6).

The perspective on TNS' framework of the senior executive in the United States, in human

services, was similar. 'The way we – a few other people and myself – perceive [TNS'

framework] here [in the US] is that it gives you a wonderful framework of how things in

the end should be. It gives you a great place to work towards. We have within Interface our

own seven steps to sustainability, which [foster] the day-in day-out conversations and

work. It's not that [TNS' system conditions] are not important – they gave us the

framework, which is very valuable for how in the end it all should look. So we definitely

believe in their principles, that that's the endgame and the place where we're going to, but

the map everyday has to be the place that's trying to get you there. [For us] that's the seven

steps road. That's the vision' (PC 1.2).

6.10.1.2 The whereabouts of the hard numbers (Carillion – see Figure 5.2)

The director of engineering and environment for Carillion plc described himself as first 'exposed

to TNS' in October 2000, and then in January 2001, when he attended his first TNS UK

Pathfinder Network meeting (CFE 9). He had joined a TNS UK organised trip to Sweden in

January 2001 to meet with members of TNS Sweden and some of its corporate partners (PNM

2). He remembered asking a senior manager from IKEA how they used TNS' framework, who

replied that they had the TNS' system conditions at the back of their mind and used intuition and

personal judgement (ibid.). For this Carillion director of civil engineering, the question

remained as to the whereabouts of the 'hard numbers' to make decisions related to cost,

- 213 -

pollution, and alternatives for substitution amongst other dimensions (ibid.). He came away

quite sceptical regarding the scientific element of TNS' framework (ibid.). He had not had TNS'

framework explained to him at the point when I met him in March 2001, although he had

understood TNS' metaphor of the funnel (ibid.).

6.10.1.3 A robust theory of social sustainability? (The Co-operative Bank – see

Figure 5.3)

The head of the Ecology Unit at The Co-operative Bank (see section 5.5.2) questioned the

investment of TNS UK especially in trying to develop system condition four regarding social

sustainability (PNM 3). He perceived the value of TNS' framework to be in its definition of the

ecological conditions for sustainability, rather than sustainability per se. While he found TNS'

system condition two regarding persistent substances particularly helpful in his work, he

doubted whether some of the theoretical underpinnings for TNS UK's proposed changes to

system condition four were appropriate and robust.

6.10.1.4 Worth the effort? (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

The director of sustainability based at Interface's Shelf site also expressed his concern over TNS

UK's investment in developing system condition four. He saw TNS' framework to have influenced

his thinking concerning environmental sustainability, but not on social dimensions of

sustainability (PNM 5). His favourite concept was that of quality of life. For him, 'people

dimensions' provided more motivation than the ‘environment’ most of the time, and he

questioned whether endangered species should be saved when so many people are in poverty.

He said that so much work had already been done in the area of social sustainability. As such,

members of TNS UK would have to do a lot of work to make a name for themselves in

developing system condition four.

- 214 -

6.10.2 TNS UK's organisational capacity 'beyond TNS' framework'

6.10.2.1 TNS advocates as generalists? (The Co-operative Bank – see Figure 5.3)

The head of the Ecology Unit at the Co-operative Bank spoke of how he thought TNS' framework

was good for raising awareness, and for telling a story that was reliable and 'told many times.

[…] Without it I'd have made many wrong decisions which would have shown up over

time; it's enabled me to do my job' (PC 2.1). However, he regarded TNS' framework, and

possibly TNS UK, as less good from that point onward. He asked, 'if people can download

information from the world-wide-web, why would they need to go to Pathfinder Network

meetings?' (ibid.). He regarded members of TNS UK as 'generalists, and businesses want

specific answers; it's a problem with so many environmental consultancys' (ibid.). He

perceived TNS UK to have been ineffective at enabling members of other Pathfinder Companies

to 'make ecology profitable' (ibid.). He regarded members of TNS UK as always wanting to

talk with the managing director of an organisation, while neglecting to 'empower' the

environmental and sustainability managers to deliver on the managing director's expectations.

He himself related an episode in which he had felt let down by members of TNS UK. Having

asked them to develop sustainability indicators for printing processes, members of TNS UK were

unable to deliver on expectations; this failure was reported in the bank's 2000 Partnership

Report (Co-operative Bank 2001, p.64). Moreover, in 2001, after a seminar on printing

eventually co-organised with TNS UK, the 2001 Partnership Report stated that

'a number of indicators were drawn up by The Natural Step [UK]. The bank considers

that the proposed indicators need further refinement, being both large in number and

arguably, not constituting indicators in the truest sense of the word.' (Co-operative Bank

2002, p.68)

In conversation with me, the head of the Ecology Unit asked rhetorically, 'are you telling me

that I can ask my suppliers what the life cycles of their papers are?' (PC 2.1). That was one

of forty-five indicators proposed by TNS UK. The bank therefore 'devised its own list of practical

yet challenging indicators, which it considers to be both SMART and consistent with The

Natural Step [framework]' (Co-operative Bank 2002, p.68).

In response to The Co-operative Bank's decision to develop their own indicators for bulk

printing, the TNS UK director of science wrote that

- 215 -

'TNS [UK] respects the Bank's decision to use a simplified set of indicators. From the

perspective of this […] study, it is important to ensure that all such indicators do

represent steps toward sustainability, rather than merely good practice today. Some such

good practice measures – say vegetable based inks that also include dangerous

preservatives – do not have a place in a sustainable future, conflicting both with TNS

System Conditions and the key sustainability challenges outlined in this report' (Everard

2002a, p.29).

Although the head of the Ecology Unit emphasised that he found TNS' framework to be valuable,

distinctive, and good for 'bringing people on board' (PC 2.1), from his perspective the system

conditions, when applied to real contexts, were not always 'precise enough' (PC 2.1). He said

that not even TNS in Sweden were able to give the answers to some of his sometimes quite

technical and specific questions. He doubted whether members of TNS UK would generate a

priority list of toxic chemicals and harmful compounds – something asked of them by a number

of members of TNS UK's Pathfinder Network.

Indeed, in a TNS UK Pathfinder Network research paper on priority lists, the then-TNS UK

director of science critiqued priority lists on the basis that they could engender the avoidance of

deep thinking and attention to life cycles (Everard 2002b). For the head of the Ecology Unit,

such critique was, in itself, more an avoidance strategy than a thorough engagement with the

issues. He asked whether members of 'TNS have the moral courage to admit [their, and those

of TNS' framework] contextual limitations as well as the possibilities [they and their

framework] generates?' (PC 2.1).

6.10.2.2 Meagre benefits? (An aviation fuel company – see Figure 5.1)

Tom shared his reflections on the organisation, TNS UK. This was in addition to his perspective

on TNS' framework and his interactions with the TNS UK facilitator whom he found 'sincere',

'honest', 'non-threatening', an effective communicator, and someone with 'integrity' (PNM 1;

see section 5.2). He appreciated the ability to share experiences, reflect on respective business

strategies, and get to know people in other companies through TNS UK's Pathfinder Network.

However, he doubted whether there was much to the partnership with TNS UK beyond people

'getting it' (PNM 1), and understanding TNS' framework (ibid.). He questioned the perspective

on both TNS' framework and the organisation TNS UK as being able to turn around an

organisation's corporate strategy and identity. Tom, the company's primary Pathfinder Network

- 216 -

representative, expressed disappointment with the benefit he discerned his company to have

accrued from working with TNS UK, relative to its cost (PNM 1). For example, he wished his

company could have benefited more from the in-house expertise of TNS UK, and he expressed

discomfort that the costs of Pathfinder Network membership did not include TNS UK-facilitated

training. Despite his positive reflections, Tom perceived the future of his company's involvement

with TNS UK, beyond the three year Pathfinder contract, to be in doubt.

6.10.2.3 'Now, what are we going to do?' (Interface – see Figure 5.4)

The senior executive of Interface in the United States spoke of how the company has

'collaborated with TNS [NB. i.e. TNS US7] mainly in terms of training skill-sets, and a little

in terms of learning' but has 'little to no other interaction with them. That really would be

the relationship, I would say. They do help other people in the map construction exercise

[that is to say, clarifying the map that will enable people to journey between the present

and the sustainable future], but with Interface America they don’t have that level of

engagement. Having given companies their piece on the four system conditions, and people

believe them and can see how they are breaching them, I think it's really for people in

those companies to do the work themselves, and ask "now, what are we going to do?" TNS

can certainly act as advisors, but my feeling is that almost every company, once they knew

the principles would know the rest, at least would be able to fumble through the rest. It's

dirty housework you've got to do yourself. TNS should just concentrate on teaching their

framework well, so that once companies hear and understand it they can't just go back'

(PC 1.2).

'[…] Frankly, I don't think [the designers of TNS' framework have] given us enough,

enough tools for people to develop their own maps. I think people must have the

responsibility to develop their own maps, and TNS helps you say why you really need to go

there' (ibid.).

7 Although her comments were in reference to TNS US, I believe they are significant in terms of my exploration into theimplications of my research for TNS UK in Chapter 7, and possibly for TNS International (TNSI).

- 217 -


As with Chapter 5.9, I keep my reflections in this section to a minimum. In this chapter, I outlined

eight Pathfinder Company-related scenarios experienced by members of TNS UK Pathfinder

Companies as constraining (6.2-9). These situations disrupted their TNS-related sustainability

conversations with others inside their organisations and beyond. I present a summary of the

constraints to OLSD with TNS UK in Table 6.1, along with the organisational levels at which these

constraints occurred. I then depict each of these constraints in a systems map of a hypothetical,

generic Pathfinder organisation in Figure 6.1. A systems map helps to clarify whether these

constraints lie within a Pathfinder organisation, across its boundary, or in its environment.

Writing the narrative accounts in both Chapters 5 and 6 gave me a sense of hope. The accounts of

possibility as a whole hinted at possibilities for the future. The accounts of collaborative emergent

learning in particular suggested substantive 'seeds' for future development and progress in each of

their respective company's trajectory of sustainable development. I constructed them around stories

that appeared to have special significance for Pathfinder Company members. Writing the narrative

accounts of constraint also gave hope because they enabled me to get a handle on and picture

Pathfinder Company member' situations. I agree with colleagues in the OU's Centre for Complexity

and Change that representing perceived complexity is the first step to managing it (Armson et al.

2000; Lane et al. 2002a; Lane et al. 2002b). For example, the constraint experienced by Tom and his

colleagues in 'Living in a commercial world' (6.2) helps to clarify a means of addressing the situation,

namely, to build political connections in order to transform international regulatory regimes.

- 218 -

Table 6.1 Summary of narrative accounts (6.2-10) of constraints to OLSD

Narrative account andsection number

Respective constraintsOrganisational

levels

6.2 'Living in a commercialworld' (An aviation fuel

company – see Figure 5.1)

• Technological, financial and material limits

• Cut-throat market• Lack of international institutions and regulatory regimes

• Contextual

• "• "

6.3 'Swings in society'(Carillion – see Figure 5.2)

• Private sector clients less obviously interested insustainability

• Inter-organ'l and

contextual

6.4 'Like eating an elephant'(Carillion – see Figure 5.2)

• Complexity of analysing design choices

• Investment in capacity building• Insufficient sustainability information available

• Organisational

• "• Contextual

6.5 'I've got targets to hit' (TheCo-operative Bank – see Figure

5.3)

• Potentially insufficient departmental capacity

• Limited knowledge amongst organisational underwriters

• Assumptions in extra-organisational accountancy practices• Contradictory governmental tax regimes

• Departmental

• "

• Inter-organ'l• Contextual

6.6 Screening complexities(The Co-operative Bank – see

Figure 5.3)

• Lack of extra-organisational consensus on priority lists forproducts and their ingredients

• Tacit decision making in screening potentially inhibiting thedevelopment of screening expertise

• Departmental

• Contextual

6.7 'Undercurrents' (Interface –see Figure 5.4)

• Poor inter-departmental communication• Legitimacy differentials for departmental sustainability

knowledge-creation

• Inter-depart'l• "

6.8 Reaching the edges(Interface – see Figure 5.4)

• Difficult capital expenditure decisions• Technological capabilities

• Depressed market

• Externally-set product performance standards• Material limits for reducing waste

• Organisational• Inter-organ'l

• Contextual

• "• "

6.9 Mixed messages(Sainsbury's – see Figure 5.5)

• Limited departmental capacities• Conflicting signals emanating from board level executives

• A lack, potentially, of a clear sustainable developmentstrategy and committed leadership

• Departmental• Organisational

• "

1.1 Applying TNS'principleseveryday

• TNS' framework more suited to strategising rather than dailydecision making

1.2 The whereaboutsof the hardnumbers

• Lack of hard numbers to back up TNS' framework

1.3 A robust theory ofsocialsustainability?

1.4 Worth the effort?

• TNS UK possibly wasting time on developing systemcondition four

2.1 TNS advocates asgeneralists?

• TNS UK possibly lacking in organisational capacity to meetexpectations of Pathfinder Company members

2.2 Meagre benefits

6.10

2.3 'Now, what are wegoing to do?'

• TNS organisations do not provide enough support 'beyondTNS' framework'

• Inter-organ'l

- 219 -

Figure 6.1 Systems map of constraints to OLSD with TNS UK for a generic Pathfinderorganisation

ContextualMoods in society

(6.8)

ContextualMarket

expectations (6.2,6.3, 6.8)

ContextualRegulatory and taxregimes (6.2, 6.5)

ContextualAvailability ofsustainabilityinformation

(6.4, 6.6)

A genericorganisation

OrganisationalLeadership and clarity of

strategy (6.9)

Inter-organisationalTechnological,financial and

material limits(6.2, 6.8)


Accountancypractices and

assumptions (6.5)

DepartmentalCapacities(6.5, 6.9)

Tacit decisionmaking in analysisand screening (6.6)

Inter-departmentalCommunication (6.7,

6.9)

Inter-organisationalTNS UK-relatedconstraints (6.10)

TNS' framework toohigh level, imprecise

or ineffectual(6.10.1.1-4)

TNS UK'sorganisational

capacities (6.10.2.1-3)


Clientexpectations (6.3)

OrganisationalInvestment in capacity

building (6.4)

- 220 -

Through my research, I even encountered doubts and questions asked by Pathfinder Company

members that related to the core competencies of their organisations, occasionally, which surprised

me. While I had similar thoughts, I did not think they would express them so openly. For example, in

relation to 'A landmark building' (5.3), project team members had spoken of how the new hospital

was built on a 'green-field' site8. 'Living in a commercial world' (6.2) concerned a company that

bought, sold and distributed aviation fuel, thus enabling the most polluting form of mass transport

known (see Box 2.1). Tom once spoke of how he looked forward to the day when he could stand up at

a conference and say how he sincerely wished to sell less aviation fuel. These signals conveyed how

Pathfinder Company members were beginning to put their core business practices into perspective, in

relation to the view of the world espoused by TNS advocates. They were beginning to ask serious

questions about how they could transform their company's core competencies in order to contribute

to sustainable human societies.

I now turn to the second meta-analysis in Chapter 7 that speculates on the potentially influential

organisational and structural factors on the development of TNS-related conversational lineages,

which I am able to undertake in the light of having presented all the narrative accounts. This second

meta-analysis provides the basis to exploring the implications of the research for TNS UK, in which I

comment on organisational and strategic issues specific to TNS UK that could enable more concerted

OLSD, in particular, the kind of collaborative emergent learning highlighted in Chapter 5. I suggest

there are issues within TNS UK's 'sphere of influence' (TNS UK 4) for which members of TNS UK could

take responsibility, and, therefore, potentially enable richer sustainability conversational lineages to

emerge. The suggestions I make may also be pertinent to those in TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies

trying to scale up their OLSD activities.

8 The UK Government distinguishes between 'brown' and 'green-field' sites marked for potential development. Theformer is a site that has been previously developed. A green-field site is one that has not been developed with buildingsor roads; it could be farmland or woodland. Developing a green-field site can therefore diminish the productive capacityof photosynthesising organisms, an activity that therefore relates to TNS' system condition three.

- 221 -

Chapter 7 Reviewing TNS UK's facilitation of OLSD in the light of

the research

7.1 Introduction

7.2 Meta-analysis 2: discerning 'potentially influential factors' for OLSD

7.3 Defining potentials for improvement for TNS UK

7.4 Reviewing TNS UK's modus operandi

7.5 Reviewing TNS UK's facilitation of collaborative emergent learning

7.5.1 Reviewing accreditation of TNS UK's facilitators

7.5.2 Revamping TNS UK's Facilitator Network

7.5.2.1 A 'black hole'?

7.5.2.2 Participation in knowledge creation

7.5.2.3 Being kept in the loop

7.5.3 Exploring purpose and possibilities in the Pathfinder Network


7.1 Introduction

This penultimate chapter explores what implications the research might have for TNS UK, and thus

contributes to fulfilling my agreement to 'stimulate further cycles of learning' (see Appendix 4). In other

words, it consummates the formative evaluation aspect of the thesis discussed in Chapter 2.2.2.1. It addresses

how TNS UK might facilitate (corporate) sustainable development better based on my investigation into the

experiences of those implementing TNS' framework in TNS UK Pathfinder Companies. It is the third original

outcome of the research, a contribution to the praxis of facilitating OLSD.

Having presented all the narrative accounts of Pathfinder Company members' possibilities for and constraints

to OLSD with TNS UK, I am able to undertake the second meta-analysis in section 7.2. This final stage in my

analytical strategy investigates the potentially influential organisational and structural factors in the

development of collaborative emergent learning (see Chapter 4.6.4). It helps me to define potential for

improvement in TNS UK's facilitation activities in section 7.3.

I then invite TNS UK members to review the 'systemicity' espoused in their modus operandi, in section 7.4,

and go on to consider aspects of TNS UK's organisation that I think could benefit from attention, in section

7.5. Both sections 7.4 and 7.5 constitute my suggestions. My research does not legitimise me to make

- 222 -

definitive statements about the appropriateness of TNS' approach for all sustainable development

practitioners, but it has made me question it. I believe my suggestions will enable further OLSD in practice.

7.2 Meta-analysis 2: discerning 'potentially influential factors' for OLSD

This section explains how I discerned potentially influential organisational and structural factors that enabled

collaborative emergent learning along the lines discussed in Chapter 4.6.4. That is to say, I discern the factors

that enabled TNS-related conversational lineages to emerge and evolve between a variety of actors, operating

at and across different organisational levels, and involving references to TNS-related activities. As I

suggested in Chapter 2.6.3, it was unlikely that TNS-related conversational lineages would persist over time

if their participants did not view TNS' framework and the organisation TNS UK as providing some benefit.

The constraints featured in 'Living in a commercial world' (6.2) and 'Meagre benefits' (6.10.2.2) could explain

why Tom's company went little further than awareness raising and systemic thinking with TNS (5.3).

There could have been constraining factors for the development from awareness raising at Schal (5.4) into the

kind of collaborative emergent learning discernible in 'A landmark building' (5.3). These included the lack of

clear market signals (6.3) and the enormity and complexity of the issues relating to sustainable development

(6.4), as experienced by Carillion members. The lack of 'hard numbers' (6.10.1.2) may also have been a

factor.

The constraints featured in 'I've got targets to hit' (6.5), 'Screening complexities' (6.6) and 'TNS advocates as

generalists?' (6.10.2.1) could explain why a more explicit awareness of TNS' framework did not develop in

The Co-operative Bank, when compared to Carillion or Interface.

'Questing to become a restorative enterprise' (5.6) concerned collaborative emergent learning associated with

a company-wide culture-change programme and waste reduction initiative at Interface. It led to significant

financial savings and resource efficiencies. However, the company-wide learning process seemed stalled at

the time of my interviews (6.8). Factors that perhaps influenced this situation included poor inter-

departmental communication (6.7), explicit limitations of financial, material and technological resources and

a depressed market (6.8), the global nature of TNS' framework (6.10.1.1) and the extent to which TNS

organisations could offer guidance in developing maps for negotiating sustainable development (6.10.2.3).

Factors that perhaps constrained the evolution of role/project focused training at Sainsbury's (5.7) into fully

fledged collaborative emergent learning perhaps included the lack of a clear company sustainable

development strategy and commitment at the management board level (6.9). Having said that, Jay's emergent,

in-house awareness raising strategy may develop into something more fully fledged with time.

- 223 -

I presented seven briefer TNS UK-related accounts in the chapter that reflect room for improvement in TNS

UK's relationships with its Pathfinder Companies (6.10). These are particularly relevant for when I come to

consider TNS UK's modus operandi in section 7.4. The commitment of TNS UK members to using TNS'

framework as it stands, that is to say, at its global theoretical level (6.10.1), may correlate with some of the

Pathfinder Company-related constraint accounts (6.2-9). The high level of TNS' framework may reinforce the

extent to which Pathfinder Company members feel ill equipped by TNS organisations to manage the

perceived possibilities and constraints of their situations (6.10.2.1-3). Concerns about TNS UK's pursuit of

reforming system condition four (6.10.1.2-3) arguably may reflect frustration with TNS UK's ability to

provide guidance 'beyond TNS' framework'.

I discern the potentially influential organisational and structural factors by comparing, contrasting and content

analysing all the narrative accounts (Patton 2002). In conjunction with my readings of the literature discussed

in Chapter 2, I speculated on the factors that enabled collaborative emergent learning to emerge and evolve in

one situation, and not in another. Speculating on possible rather than definite 'material', 'efficient' and

'necessary' causes from my narrative accounts appeared appropriate, as discussed in Chapter 4.6.4.

I discerned nine potentially influential organisational and/or structural factors1:

1. People coming together

This entailed invitational processes to contribute and participate, which confirmed the theory of

autonomy-respecting conversations discussed in Chapter 2.5.3. Dave at The Co-operative Bank (5.5)

invited those who 'were keen on green issues' to get involved. I believe the invitation Dave extended to

his colleagues to get involved was a significant factor in the development of the Green Genie initiative.

Resulting from his invitation, representatives from throughout the Salford office came together,

generated ideas, and enacted behaviours that corresponded with activities espoused in TNS' framework.

A similar pattern occurred in the accounts in 5.3 and 5.6. Senior managers in Interface (5.6), for example,

invited all staff to contribute ideas. This factor related to the extent of participation of organisational

members, and the extent of engagement with external stakeholders. The participation of organisational

members is a recognised influencing factor for the relative depth of an organisation's commitment to

sustainable development (for example, Nattrass 1999). These authors, along with many developmental

theorists (e.g. Blackmore et al. 2000), emphasised the importance of authentic engagement, in which the

views of stakeholders have a significant effect on decision making, in contrast to consultative

1 See Chapter 2.5.2 for a discussion of this distinction.

- 224 -

participation. In other words, their perspectives would be expressed and understood, and they would

participate in an authentic conversation (see Appendix 2).

With reference to the distinction between organisation and structure, I regard this factor as both

organisation and structure-oriented. It concerns patterns of interaction between people and material and

structural elements, such as computer networks, public transport, and organisational policies, which

mediate these patterns of interaction.

2. Enthusiasm

I use this word in the sense of a 'predisposition to act', as discussed in Chapter 2.6. Dave at The Co-

operative Bank (5.5), for example, was full of enthusiasm, as were many of the members of Carillion

(5.3) and Interface (5.6) with whom I spoke. Jay (5.8) was enthusiastic about TNS' framework, and it

was her conviction about it that contributed to the persistence of a TNS-related conversational lineage.

Ison and Russell (2000) define enthusiasm in three ways: as a metaphor (enthusiasm comes from the

Greek 'en theos', which can be translated as the god within), a biological driving force, and an

investigative methodology that aims to appreciate where someone else's enthusiasm lies. They raise the

point that consensus-seeking initiatives can actually inhibit enthusiasm. While this may not have been the

case for Robèrt in spearheading the consensus-seeking inquiry into principles of sustainability (Robèrt

2002), the process did not necessarily release and activate others' enthusiasms (Bradbury 1998).

I regard this factor as primarily organisation-oriented rather than structural. The latter can certainly both

enable and constrain expressions of enthusiasm. For example, the production supervisor at Interface's

Shelf site spoke of his interest in reading Forum for the Future's publication, 'Green Futures', but also

spoke of the off-putting technical language used by a member of the research and development

department in his training (cf. Chapter 5.6.3). I argue neither of these 'structural' elements, however,

determined the production supervisor's enthusiasm or frustration. This factor is therefore more

organisation-oriented because it was the distinct patterns of relationship between the production

supervisor and Green Futures on the one hand, and his trainer on the other, which brought forth his

enthusiasm or frustration. For this perspective, I refer to Maturana and Varela's (1987) theory of

structural coupling between an organism and its environment.

3. Opportunities for exploratory, appreciative conversations

These were opportunities whereby different perspectives and ideas are acknowledged, understood, and

harnessed, depending on their perceived relevance and practicality. These were conversations that have

- 225 -

enough 'breathing space' to develop, meander and explore possibilities. This factor was obviously crucial

in both the development of the Sustainability Action Plans for the Swindon hospital (5.3) and the

opportunities for staff to suggest ideas in and critique current practices relative to TNS' system

conditions at Interface's Shelf site (5.6). In discerning this factor, I was influenced by second-order

systems theories, mentioned in Chapter 2.5.4, for example, the notion of a systemic action learning cycle

(Bell et al. 2000). I view this factor as both organisation and structure-oriented. Like factor 1, 'people

coming together', both organisational and structural factors surely enable or constrain opportunities for

conversation.

4. Relevant expertise and information

A lack of familiarity or information makes screening and decision making difficult (6.4 and 6.7). In these

accounts, the scope and complexity of the issues, and a lack of consensus about screening templates,

impeded design and decision making. Similar issues may have led the head of the Ecology Unit to regard

TNS advocates as 'generalists' (6.10.2.1). Relevant expertise and information were necessary for the

systematisation of a TNS-defined process of sustainable development and enacting of TNS' ABCD

action-learning process. Appropriate knowledge and familiarity are important for engaging with,

analysing, and managing in situations (Armson et al. 2000), as was the case in Chapter 5.3, 5.5, 5.6 and

5.7 in the light of TNS' system conditions. I regard this factor as primarily organisation but also

structure-oriented. Engaging with situations so as to represent, analyse, and then manage in them is

organisation-oriented because these activities consist of dynamic patterns of relating. The factor is also

structure-oriented because elements such as toxic chemical priority lists, as used by Liz in Chapter 6.6,

can enable or constrain decision making and the development of expertise.

5. Conversation-fostering organisation and structures

The poor inter-departmental communication between production and managerial levels at Interface's

Shelf site (6.7) could prevent further innovation in the future. Good inter-departmental communication

was particularly evident in The Co-operative Bank (5.5) and Carillion Building (5.3). As discussed in

Chapter 2.5.4, enabling factors for and barriers to organisational learning relate to the extent to which

interactive communication and networking could occur throughout an organisation. This factor is both

organisation and structure-oriented.

6. Adequate invested resources

- 226 -

Those companies that had enabled collaborative emergent learning (5.3, 5.5 and 5.6) had invested

significantly in their organisation's trajectory of sustainable development. In addition, a question of

investment in departmental capacity building appeared to inhibit more effective and concerted

collaborative emergent learning to emerge for the Asset Finance manager at The Co-operative Bank

(6.5), and perhaps in Schal (6.4) regarding its design and decision-making capacity. This factor struck me

as common sense, and I regard it as primarily structural. Having said that, organisation-oriented aspects,

such as organisational purposes, will affect the extent to which and how resources are invested.

7. Leadership

For Interface (5.3) and The Co-operative Bank (5.5), leaders played significant roles in their company's

sustainable development trajectory, and in which members of staff respected their leaders. The

conflicting signals of those at management board levels in Sainsbury's (6.9) may have inhibited the speed

with which TNS-related conversational lineages developed. This factor related to a conventional notion

of organisational leadership, rather than Badarracco's (2002) 'quiet leadership', and entailed the

involvement of a chief executive and his or her management board. Company leaders already committed

to sustainable development or interested in and open-minded to the outcomes from a TNS Pathfinder

project were significant to the possibility for collaborative emergent learning. The commitment of those

in powerful positions is often cited as an influential factor in the relative depth of an organisation's

commitment to sustainable development (for example, Bradbury 1998; Nattrass 1999; Rooke and Torbert

1999). Notably, however, 'power' and leadership is not necessarily a reflection of force, being instead an

attribute defined via a two-way relationship. It is not something that people 'have' (Krippendorff 1995).

While this is predominantly an organisation-oriented factor, I suggest that structural aspects, such as

recruitment policies and procedures, come into play as well.

8. Sustainable development strategy and vision

Two of the three collaborative emergent learning accounts in particular conveyed very marked

sustainable development strategies. These were The Co-operative Bank's ethical and ecological mission

statements (5.5), and Interface's seven-stepped strategy (5.6). Carillion was committed to inviting its

different business units to contribute to developing 'sustainability targets' (5.3). The lack of a clear policy

in Sainsbury's may have hindered the extent to which collaborative emergent learning developed (6.9).

TNS advocates amongst others have emphasised this factor (Nattrass 1999; Robèrt 2002). The notion of

a destination was also important for Pathfinder Company members themselves, for example, Interface's

US senior executive in Chapter 6.10.1.1. I take my lead from the model of OLSD in Chapter 2.7 in

positing that this factor consists of both patterns of interaction (organisation) that frame the choice and

- 227 -

use of structural elements, such as company policy, and monitoring and evaluation procedures. For

example, The Co-operative Bank's Partnership Report acted as an 'internal lever' (5.5).

9. Market signals

The values of customers were obviously central to The Co-operative Bank strengthening its ethical

standing (5.5). Positive stock market results for Interface after the company began pursuing its

sustainable development trajectory were an indirect confirmation that the company was heading in the

right direction (5.6). The role of market signals was explicit for some Carillion members (6.4). The

demands of customers for more environmentally benign aviation fuel were not strong enough to make its

sale viable for the aviation fuel company (6.2). Finally, demand for PVC-free carpet was not so

outstanding to make capital expenditure for new technologies an easy and quick decision for Interface

managers (6.8). Again, taking the model of OLSD as my lead, this factor is primarily structure-oriented.

Companies need to be responsive to their stakeholders, and therefore require structural elements that both

facilitate that responsiveness as well as help maximise opportunities to operationalise a trajectory of

sustainable development. They might need to invest, for example, in forms of inter-organisational action

learning with non-governmental organisations such as TNS UK, or in the development of in-house

decision-making expertise (5.5).

Having discerned these nine 'potentially influential organisational and structural factors', I revisited each of

the narrative accounts to assess informally the extent of their influence on the accounts of possibility for

OLSD. I presented these 'loose' assessments in the analytic tables at the end of each of the accounts of

possibilities in Chapter 5, and compile them in a summary table in Table 7.1, which conveys all the

potentially influential factors as relatively important for the development of collaborative emergent learning.

A question that these potentially influential factors lead me to is, how can TNS UK create the conditions and

exploit opportunities for collaborative emergent learning to occur? To answer this, I now turn to the

implications of the research for TNS UK.

7.3 Defining potentials for improvement for TNS UK

This section briefly reviews all the narrative accounts to hone what might be a potential for improvement in

TNS UK's organisation and its structures.

- 228 -

Table 7.1 Summary table of potentially influential organisational and structural factors on possibility narrative accounts

Stars – H – depict the extent of potential influence of a factor in the development of collaborative emergent learning. One star – H – conveys a qualified affirmation ofinfluence; two stars – HH – conveys a definite affirmation; and three stars – HHH – conveys a resounding affirmation. A hollow circle – m – conveys no discernibleinfluence.

Potentially influential factors (discerned from all narrative accounts) on possibility narrative accountsNarrative accountof possibility for

OLSD (& companyname)

Peoplecomingtogether

Enthusiasm

Opportunitiesfor

exploratory,appreciative

conversations

Relevantexpertise for

systematisationand ABCD

process

Conversation-fostering

organisationand

structures

Investment ofadequateresources

Leadership ofCEO and

ManagementBoard

Sustainabledevelopmentstrategy and

vision

Marketsignals

Attribution ofpossibilitytype for thepossibilitynarrativeaccounts

5.2 'Making us think' (Anaviation fuel company)

HH

H

(more like'dedication')

H

To some extentHH

H

Yes, withinclearly

boundednetworks

H

ApparentlyHH

H

Nascent

m

Barelyrecognisable

(cf. 6.2)

Awarenessraising andsystemicthinking

5.3 'A landmarkbuilding' ('Carillion

Building')HHH HHH HH HH

HH

Intra-companylearningnetworks

HHH

HH

(Open-minded)

HH

Emergent viaCarillion plc

H

Mixed (cf. 6.3)

Collaborativeemergentlearning

5.4 'A longish termthing (Carillion 'Schal')

HH

H

(more like'interested')

HH HH

HH

In evidence ininterview

H

Apparently

H

(Open-minded)

H

via Carillionplc

H

Mixed (cf. 6.3)

Awarenessraising

5.5 Uncorking the GreenGenie (The Co-operative

Bank)HHH HHH HH

HH

(cf. 6.6)HHH

HH

(cf. 6.5)HHH HHH HHH


5.6 Questing to becomea restorative enterprise

(Interface)

HH

(cf. 6.7)HHH

HH

(cf. 6.7)

HH

(cf. 6.8)

H

(cf. 6.7)HHH HHH HHH

HH

Positiveresponse by

stock market)


5.7 'Word getting about'(Sainsbury's)

H

(related toroles and

departments)

HH

(of Jay)

H

(cf. 6.9)HH

H

(cf. 6.9)

H

(for trainingpurposes)

m

(unclear; cf.6.9)

m

(unclear; cf.6.9)

H

Mixed; growthof organics isa niche market

Role/project-focused training

- 229 -

All the narrative accounts of possibilities for OLSD in Chapter 5 convey an apparent success with which TNS

advocates engaged others for raising awareness. People appeared to understand the implications of TNS'

theory of sustainability more often than not, even if they were not aware of its detail. TNS' framework played

a significant role in the design of a new hospital (5.3). It guided the formation of a company's strategic

mission, framed its screening activities, and influenced its staff in their backcasting (5.5). In addition, it

helped to structure a company-wide training and culture-change programme and framed overall directions in

research and development (5.6). However, the accounts in Chapter 6 conveyed constraints that Pathfinder

Company members experienced where TNS' framework was not so helpful. The 'whole-earth system' level of

TNS' model of the sustainable society may explain why members of TNS UK could not provide one

Pathfinder Company member with an appropriate level of detailed research on request. TNS UK's response

time may have led him to wonder whether TNS advocates were 'generalists' (6.10.2.1). He questioned

whether there was any point in him attending Pathfinder Company Network meetings because it was possible

to download TNS' framework from the world-wide-web.

While TNS' model of sustainability can help decision-makers structure information (The Johnson Foundation

Inc. 1997; Robèrt 2002), it did not explicitly help those in Schal and Carillion to tackle the complexity they

perceived regarding design choices (6.4). The extent to which Liz and others at The Co-operative Bank used

TNS' principles explicitly to determine screening was minimal (6.6). TNS' principles did help Liz to gain a

sense of perspective in the screening process, using the system conditions instead to avoid wasting time by

going into too much detail, but she did not follow TNS' action learning process as espoused. The research and

development manager at Interface's Shelf site perceived TNS' framework to be a good, 'correct' tool, but one

that he and his colleagues did not use explicitly to grade design choices (5.6), using their own matrix instead.

Moreover, while TNS' framework was helpful for raising awareness for Tom's company (5.3), it did not

necessarily help in managing their situated macro-level constraints (6.3).

My conclusion from my research with respect to TNS' model of sustainability was that if people were in a

position to design, or redesign, their policy, strategy, operations, supply relationships, services, and products,

then TNS' model provided them with high-level 'design parameters'. These parameters, some have said, could

'stay in the back of the mind' (5.6.3). However, the extent to which people felt in a position to redesign such

things varied. I perceived people in a project-based business such as Carillion Building to have had more

opportunity to redesign its operations than a manufacturer such as Interface, whose product specification

changes to different, slower time rhythms. This issue of opportunity to design things afresh may explain why

many of The Co-operative Bank's suppliers were not so enamoured with their TNS workshop (5.5). Their

business consisted of ongoing service contracts, and did not have the same project focus as there was for

Carillion's Swindon hospital. Having said that, few in Carillion perceived the majority of their market to be

shouting out for sustainable construction (6.3). Moreover, they perceived the availability of 'sustainability

- 230 -

information' for them to be low in relation to the perceived complexity of design and decision-making

processes (6.4). The question of whether one should use wood, aluminium, steel or concrete, given the

choice, cropped up as an example of such a complex choice.

How could TNS UK's organisation and TNS' action learning framework enable Pathfinder Company

members to optimise possibilities for collaborative emergent learning and manage constraints better?

Practitioners could carry on as they are in relation to possibilities, and could reconcile themselves to the

inevitability of there always being constraints, such that no revision to TNS UK's organisation, or to TNS'

framework, would be necessary.

Whilst I agree that there will always be constraints, I think that the potential for improving TNS UK's design

and practice of facilitating OLSD is worthy of exploration. Members of TNS UK appeared to me to be keen

to optimise and improve on what they saw themselves to be doing; hence their sponsorship of the research

studentship. I suggest that they regard their purpose in making improvements as one that aims to facilitate

collaborative emergent learning, which entails but transcends awareness raising, systemic thinking, and role

or project focused training, as conveyed in Figure 5.6. Collaborative emergent learning is similar to

Bradbury's notion of co-operative ecological inquiry (see Chapter 2.4.1 and Appendix 1), although with an

organisational focus. I suggest TNS UK's facilitation of collaborative emergent learning requires enabling

factors, as discussed in the second meta-analysis in 7.2.

I propose that members of TNS UK can improve their practice of 'bringing people together' (factor 1 in

section 7.2) and 'creating opportunities for exploratory conversations' (factor 3) by reviewing their modus

operandi (see Chapter 3.5.1), a structure-oriented component. Attending to their process design should enable

the exploitation of others' situated competencies and the organisation of 'relevant information' better (factor

4). I suggest this should set the conditions for TNS UK to consolidate and clarify their own 'strategy and

vision' (factor 8). It could also be a mark of 'leadership' (factor 7); reviewing their modus operandi, which is

well aligned with TNS' framework, might appear to challenge assumptions in TNSI's organisation, given the

specifications in TNSI license agreement (TNS International 2000). However, I think the suggestions I make

support rather than undermine TNS UK's obligations to TNSI.

Members of TNS UK could engender further 'enthusiasm' (factor 2), which in itself might take pressure off

their search for the investment of 'adequate resources' (factor 6), by reviewing their facilitator's accreditation

procedures in the light of clarifying their own strategy and vision (factor 8). This would therefore both be an

organisation and structure-oriented component to improving their facilitation of OLSD. The expression of

enthusiasm makes TNS UK an attractive initiative to potential funding bodies and clients.

- 231 -

In addition, members of TNS UK could foster 'conversational organisation and structures' (factor 5) by

reviewing the purposes and arrangements of their Facilitator and Pathfinder Networks, two organisation-

oriented components. As such, they would be responding to 'market signals' (factor 9) that I have discerned

through this research.

7.4 Reviewing TNS UK's modus operandi

In this section, I review TNS UK's modus operandi, which I introduced and conceptualised in Chapter 3.5.1,

and conveyed its connection to TNS' framework.

TNS' model of sustainability addressed sustainability at a global level, while its ABCD process related to

high-level strategy and design. Its designers may have achieved 'simplicity without reduction'. However,

TNS' ABCD process did not enable people systematically to represent better, and thus get a better handle on,

their situations. The design of TNS' ABCD decision-making process may not enable practitioners to optimise

their situational possibilities and manage their constraints better, from my perspective. TNS' predominantly

physics-based model of sustainability that focused on rate differentials may especially appeal to those

engaged in engineering and design activities (5.3), and to those in a position to design and redesign activities.

Nevertheless, the model may not be so appropriate for those managing political, inter-departmental and intra-

organisational realities (6.2, 6.7 and 6.9). Sustainable development involves managing the tension, surely,

between the sense of direction enabled by something like TNS' model of sustainability, and an appreciation of

the multiplicity of different experiences and perspectives that constitute societal-cum-corporate activities.

Specifically, potential issues implementing TNS' ABCD process may concern the 'C' stage of TNS' ABCD

process. It may be that those envisaging a sustainable future compliant with TNS' system conditions

implicitly assume the vision to entail a static picture. This static picture could be difficult to envisage because

TNS' system conditions and their strategic corollaries are about processes, and rates of processes, through

time. I suspect that these two aspects, of static vision in the ABCD strategy, and processes in TNS' system

conditions, do not sit easily with each other. Indeed, some TNS Sweden facilitators said their clients had

difficulty implementing their vision based on TNS' principles (SP 1 in Table 3.7).

The suggestions I make in this section are geared to developing TNS' approach such that it is more likely to

lead to the ease of action learning and the manageability of situations2, that is to say, the smooth flow of

OLSD. I suggest that if situations become more manageable, then this would make the potential renewal of a

Pathfinder Company's contract with TNS UK more likely, if that is what TNS UK members wish. I suggest

2 I would like to thank my supervisor, Chris Blackmore, for discerning this point in an earlier chapter draft.

- 232 -

that an important part of improving TNS UK's design and practice of facilitation is to make more room for

people to structure and represent their experiences of possibilities and constraints on ongoing bases.

Situations change, such that encouraging practitioners to develop 'flexible learning systems' might be more

appropriate than a static vision (Hernes 1999). This would entail the design of adaptive action learning

systems that might address concerns about the extent to which TNS' framework is applicable 'day in, day out'

(6.10.1.1) and TNS organisations guide the construction of maps for sustainable development (6.10.2.3).

Flexible learning systems are more akin to second-order systems management theories discussed in Chapter

2.5.2 (e.g. Checkland 1994; Checkland and Holwell 1998; Bell et al. 2000).

During my research, I experienced TNS UK's facilitation and enacting of TNS' espoused ABCD process to

tend more towards a systematic first-order facilitation approach rather than a second-order, systemic

approach. Systemic thinking and action tend toward the contextual rather than analytical3, and complement a

second-order research tradition discussed in Chapter 3. My suggested improvement to TNS UK's modus

operandi is to introduce a stage of 'structuring perceptions and experiences of possibility and constraint'.

From my perspective, this entails engaging more concertedly with practitioners' own situations than has been

done to date. I suggest TNS UK's modus operandi would become more systemic if adapted in this way,

accounting for and enabling the better management of situated relationships, participation in networks, and

contributions to sustainable development activities. In section 7.3, I suggested it would be a mark of

leadership to review their modus operandi along lines I set out, because TNSI's license agreement is oriented

within a first-order tradition (TNS International 2000), as discussed in Chapter 3.2.2:

'The Natural Step Activities means to distribute, share and disseminate the principles, teachings,

understandings, knowledge, and scientific basis of The Natural Step International and, in particular, the

System Conditions. This shall include, but not be limited to, operating projects, carrying out The

Natural Step Program, distributing The Natural Step Products and education tools […].' (ibid. p.1,

emphasis added)

I believe such language is unhelpful to conceptualising the task of facilitating another's action learning. This

is especially the case for a process like sustainable development that entails managing the systemicity, and

perceived complexity of situations (Armson et al. 2000).

3 Systematic thinking, for example, believes a situation can be understood objectively in 'a step-by-step analysisfollowed by evaluation and repetition of the original analysis' (Armson et al. 2000, p.96), which is the logic in TNS'ABCD process. First-order, systematic thinking would view systems as concrete entities for which there is acorrespondence between the description and the described phenomena. Systemic thinking, on the other hand, focuses onthe interaction of the system (in this case, a TNS UK-facilitated decision-making system) with its context (in this case,the situations of Pathfinder Company members). Boundaries of systems are determined by the perspectives of those whoparticipate in formulating them, the result of which is a 'system of interest'.

- 233 -

I offer a suggested revision to TNS UK's modus operandi in a new conceptual model in Figure 7.1. I make

this suggestion because I believe members of TNS UK and its Pathfinder Companies would benefit from a

more concerted focus by TNS UK to facilitate OLSD (see Chapter 2.7), rather than to espouse TNS' ABCD

process systematically and repetitively. Revisioning their process-design along these lines would address

issues related to the situated contexts in which they promote TNS' framework, and in which practitioners aim

to learn with TNS UK. Importantly, Figure 7.1 does not dispense with the promotion of TNS' framework! In

it, TNS UK's modus operandi at the time of my research, as illustrated in Figure 3.3, is implicit in activities 1,

2 and 7. In other words, I have merely added to Figure 3.3 rather than changed it for my suggested improved

version. In addition, my suggestion that TNS UK concentrate more on facilitating OLSD is not to say that my

model of OLSD is necessarily correct. I would like to emphasise that I developed my model of OLSD to

enable my evaluative inquiry, and not to impose a description of how OLSD actually happens regardless of

context. Others will probably have different conceptualisations of OLSD. If, of course, that model is helpful,

then I suggest it should be used to trigger conversation and inquiry. Undertaking activities that I suggest in

Figure 7.1 should enable, from my perspective, OLSD as I have conceptualised it in Chapter 2. I envisage this

expectation being applicable for both TNS' advocates and for practitioners in companies learning with TNS

UK.

The rest of this section explains the choices I made, the influences on me, and my thinking in the design and

construction of activities 4-6 in Figure 7.1.

Structuring practitioners' own perceptions of possibilities and constraint, represented in activity 3, is not a

process that has been instituted systematically in TNS' espoused ABCD action learning process. I suggest that

such structuring activities should be approached as ongoing practices for grappling with the situations of

practitioners, for implementing TNS' framework, and therefore for facilitating OLSD with TNS UK, and not

only as one-off exercises for understanding.

I derive activity 4 in Figure 7.1 from Zimmer's pattern of autonomy-respecting conversations discussed in

Chapter 2.5.3 and Appendix 2. One prominent member of TNSI brought a difficulty of facilitating the

implementation of TNS' framework to my attention. This difficulty concerned the ability of TNS advocates to

'put TNS' framework into our own language' (S 2 in Table 3.6). This is an important difficulty to address. I

interpreted this as a difficulty in speaking from one's own experience and perspective when engaging others

in conversation.

- 234 -

Figure 7.1 Conceptual model of suggested improvement to facilitate OLSD via the corework of TNS UK's members and facilitators

One-way arrows denote 'contribute to'. The two-way arrow denotes interrelationshipsbetween activities; one could translate it loosely as 'in conjunction with'. The letters 'A-D' represent activities associated with TNS' espoused ABCD action learning process.

3. Facilitate structuring ofpractitioners' own perceptionsand experiences of possibility

and constraint

7. Enact activities 6-10 representedin the conceptual model in Figure

3.3 in Chapter 3.5.1

2. Facilitate use of TNS'framework for decision

making and strategising, withreference to contexts and

practices

1. Facilitateunderstanding of

TNS' principles ofsustainability

6. Appreciate the systemiccontexts and networks of

relationship and interaction inwhich practitioners are

embedded, and to whichpractitioners contribute

5. Inquire into, express, understand, and collaborateand negotiate over the representation of situations

via, for example:i) histories of organisations and their structuresii) appreciative inquiryiii) experiences, stories, and conversational lineagesiv) rich pictures, systems diagramming, boundary

critique, and soft systems methodology

4. Notice and extendinvitations for exploratory,

open-ended and appreciativeconversations

B, C & D

A

- 235 -

If presenters and facilitators have difficulty speaking from their own experience and perspective, they are

more likely to appear inauthentic advocates. In an indirect way, this language issue relates to the issue

concerning the representation of situations. It may be possible to address via more conscious attention to

process-design. TNS' model of sustainability represents what a variety of scientists agreed were core

dynamics of non-sustainability. Indeed, while some spoke of its value in terms of providing a common

language, I observed that this related more to initiating conversations, and providing 'background

conversational parameters', around sustainable development rather than deepening and enriching them. I

expect that facilitating the understanding and use of TNS' framework in the light of Zimmer's pattern will

make the 'embodiment' of TNS' framework in languaging and practice easier, and will energise the advocacy

of TNS. My expectation arises from my experience that I touched on in Chapter 2.8.

I give a few suggestions of ways to represent possibilities and constraints in activity 5 in Figure 7.1.

The first suggestion to investigate organisational histories and structures stems from the view that our

histories shape our presents and our futures. As Fear wrote, learning requires an evaluation and perhaps

reconsideration of the past,

'to alter the present and confront the future. […The] craft of history specialises in showing the choices

people made to change their lives and how the past has shaped potential futures and the present.' (Fear

2001, pp.162-3)

My second suggestion, of 'appreciative inquiry', constitutes an established approach to asking 'affirmative'

rather than 'diagnostic' questions, and focusing on valuing competencies and 'the best in people's cultures and

traditions' (Kaczmarski and Cooperrider 1999, p.79). Appreciative inquiry could expand the horizons of

practitioners such that they not only focus on reducing contributions to non-sustainability (a potentially de-

motivating focus). It could also ask the question of what they are doing today that is a contribution to

sustainability. Although much more challenging than diagnosing activities in the light of TNS' system

conditions, answering this question would, I believe, give a very concrete basis to scaling up sustainable

development.

My third suggestion in activity 5 in Figure 7.1 is to explore 'experiences, stories, and conversational lineages

of possibility for and constraint to OLSD'. I derive this process from the inquiry that I have undertaken in this

research. I explore what TNS UK facilitators, other evaluators, and academic researchers might learn from

my experiences of undertaking this research in Chapter 8.

- 236 -

My fourth suggestion to use 'rich pictures, systems diagramming, boundary critique, and soft systems

methodology' stems from my acquaintance with 'systems approaches to managing complexity'4. TNS UK's

core team and facilitators have occasionally encouraged exercises to diagram life cycles of resources and

products. For example, participants were encouraged to diagram the life cycle of 'something we had had for

lunch' at one TNS-workshop (CFE 20). However, such perception-structuring exercises have not been

instituted in TNS' espoused ABCD action learning process as an important part of strategising, planning,

design, decision making and acting. If they were to be instituted in TNS UK's modus operandi, this might

require capacity building on TNS UK's part, capacity building for which they might not have the requisite

resources.

The suggested ways to represent perceptions of possibility and constraint could enable practitioners to

appreciate better their systemic contexts and the networks of relationship in which they are embedded and to

which they contribute, elements derived from the model of OLSD in Figure 2.1. This appreciative act

constitutes activity 6 in Figure 7.1; the act would provide a valuable resource for enacting the B, C and D

stages of TNS' ABCD action learning process, as represented in activity 7.

I argue that appreciating the situated and relational aspects of situations could enable:

• practitioners to explore connections and relationships between individuals, groups, purposes and activities

more systematically;

• the better management of inter-departmental, organisational, contextual and political realities;

• the process of sustainability innovation;

• facilitators and practitioners to engage more effectively with situations, and therefore the better facilitation

of implementing TNS' framework; and,

• the generation of further sustainability conversations that help in processes of clarification, design,

innovation, organisation, enacting, and evaluation of sustainable development activities.

Appreciating these situated and relational aspects will not necessarily lead to the easier implementation of

TNS' ABCD action learning process, but they could clarify possibilities and put constraints into perspective.

4 My own experience of these approaches, which tend toward second-order traditions, has been a good one as Idiscussed in Chapter 3.6. As noted, I have encountered systems approaches through the teaching of my department at theOU (Blackmore et al. 1998; Armson et al. 2000; Ison 2000b; Lane et al. 2002a; Lane et al. 2002b) and through itsexternal associates (Checkland and Scholes 1990; Checkland 1994; Checkland and Holwell 1998; Checkland 1999;Midgley 2000).

- 237 -

I now turn to an aspect of TNS UK's organising that I believe would benefit from attention, namely, its

facilitation of collaborative emergent learning via its Facilitator and Pathfinder Company Networks.

7.5 Reviewing TNS UK's facilitation of collaborative emergent learning

In this section, I suggest that increasing opportunities for networking and facilitation will also harness

experiences better. Increasing such opportunities, coupled with improving the design of TNS' ABCD process,

should improve communication within TNS UK, with facilitators, and with Pathfinder Companies. Ideally,

addressing both the design and process of TNS UK's facilitation should enable further emergent collaborative

learning, and build partnerships that are more satisfying to all parties concerned and are therefore more

effective.

During the course of my studentship, I experienced TNS UK members as confused about their organisational

purpose. What was their role or roles given that TNS' framework was already in the public domain? Had they

set up the Pathfinder Network to secure income for their survival? Or were they servicing the Pathfinder

Network to ensure the quality of implementing TNS' framework in Pathfinder Companies? If the latter, any

such quality control that occurred was not obvious to me. Another question related to their facilitators. What

role or roles did TNS UK members expect their facilitators to adopt? These questions raised the further

question for me as to whether TNS UK members could work out their business model, that is to say, how

they were going to realise their purposes on an ongoing basis.

In this section, I concentrate primarily on making suggestions for improving the organisation and structure to

TNS UK's facilitation activities. I regard all the questions just highlighted as important, but facilitating OLSD

has been the subject of this thesis; I leave TNS UK members to mull over the other questions.

My first suggestion for improvement is structural, and concerns the accreditation procedures of facilitators.

The second and third suggestions are organisational, and concern reviewing TNS UK's Facilitator and

Pathfinder Networks respectively.

7.5.1 Reviewing accreditation of TNS UK's facilitators

In facilitating the understanding and implementation of TNS' framework, TNS UK facilitators and advocates

necessarily engage in relationships, and are partially responsible for the quality of conversation that occurs.

However, from my research, I was unconvinced that members of TNS UK optimised their facilitators', and

their own, collaborative learning processes as effectively as they might. I suggest that reviewing its

accreditation procedures can partially address this.

- 238 -

As far as I was aware, there was no clear procedure for accrediting facilitators. Perhaps the most under-

utilised resource for TNS UK, from my perspective, was their stock of TNS-trained facilitators. TNS UK

members had trained a number. I myself had participated in one of these train-the-trainer events (CFE 8), and

was not clear what status I had as a TNS-facilitator consequently; this is a process issue of managing

expectations. During my research period, TNS UK contracted only a select few facilitators to carry out

awareness raising and training events with their Pathfinder Companies. TNS UK members could liberate

TNS-facilitators from the expectation of having to be contracted, if, as I expected, that is what they thought,

and could encourage facilitators to advocate and facilitate the implementation of TNS' framework wherever

they found their own appropriate opportunities. In Sweden, for example, TNS facilitators were empowered to

seek their own contracts (S 2), which could be the kind of arrangement that TNS UK members make explicit

for their facilitators. TNS' framework is, after all, already in the public domain. Rather than shy away from it,

TNS UK could harness this fact as an opportunity for collaborative emergent learning, as I now suggest in my

review of TNS UK's Facilitator Network.

7.5.2 Revamping TNS UK's Facilitator Network

There was a TNS UK Facilitator Network at the beginning of my research period, but the pithy accounts

below in sections 7.5.2.1-3 suggest this had lost its energy. TNS UK members could revamp and revitalise

the Facilitator Network, inviting TNS-facilitators to come together, explore and develop their practices on

this basis. This would be an emergent strategy that would complement the 'top-down' approach that TNS UK

have pursued to date.

The primary enabling factor for opening up such organisation, in my experience, relates to activity 4 in

Figure 7.1, and concerns the extension of invitations (factor 1 in section 7.2). I suggest that TNS UK

members need to be more invitational by concentrating on maintaining the relationships that they participate

in and that they come by regardless of the organisational level from which they come. Jay (6.9) and the head

of the Ecology Unit (6.10.2.1) spoke of their perception that TNS UK members pursue management board

level relationships. My suggested improvement to TNS UK's modus operandi in section 7.4 presents

possibilities for TNS UK members to become more invitational.

TNS UK's core team have tended to organise the 'distribution' and 'delivery' of TNS' framework in a company

having secured the support of senior members at this organisational level. While this is clearly important, I

suggest it is equally important to manage an emergent, 'self-organising' strategy with all organisational

members with whom they come into contact, in parallel to 'targeting' the 'key decision-makers'. A self-

organising strategy draws on

- 239 -

'the willingness of individuals to participate, (to respond to an invitation) and the creativity of all those

present. [Organisers] can create the possibilities for self-organisation or emergence by setting the initial

starting conditions.' (Ison et al. 2001, p.42)

I take the practice of conducting what Zimmer called 'autonomy-supporting conversations' (see Chapter

2.5.3) to be important in the first instance to facilitating this kind of self-organisation.

I present here a few perspectives of both TNS UK's contracted and trained facilitators (see Table 3.5) on the

organisation of TNS UK5. These accounts could reflect the extent to which members of TNS UK's core team

engendered collaborative emergent learning and were skilful in managing potentially pre-existing, and

catalysing potentially new, 'sustainability conversational lineages'. As with Chapters 5 and 6, my aim is to

offer partial perspectives and not to present an objective mirror image of the organisational reality of TNS

UK.

7.5.2.1 A 'black hole'?

One of TNS UK's contracted facilitators spoke of requesting information from the TNS UK

director of business networks about aspects of organisational management for sustainability. He

expected this information would inform his facilitation work with one of TNS UK's Pathfinder

Companies. He had envisaged them putting him in touch with one of the Pathfinder Company

Network representatives. However, he got no reply, and this contributed to his feeling of TNS

UK not servicing its facilitators well. He did not experience them to be creating a sense of

energy and activity around the network, through fielding and generating links. He lamented the

lack of a learning network for facilitators to share their learning and practice. He said he would

like to be brought more into the TNS fold, but thought TNS UK was sometimes like 'a black

hole' (F 3). He did not find members of TNS UK taking enough time to dialogue with him and

find out what he was doing.

At the Pathfinder Company he was working with, he tried to 'draw on TNS' framework to help

people who are trying to do things, and discover together whether TNS might be helpful.

It's a more emergent than planned approach' (ibid.). He saw a tension between viewing TNS

as 'the' framework, rather than 'one of' a number of approaches. He reflected on the history of

5 I choose not to include these accounts in Chapter 6 because they refer to perspectives of TNS UK facilitators, and notto TNS UK's Pathfinder Company members. They refer to constraints related to TNS UK's facilitation practices, and notto experiences of implementing TNS' framework in company contexts. I thus want to maintain a clear dividing linebetween what was significant for Pathfinder Company members, and what implications the research with them mighthave for TNS UK.

- 240 -

TNS saying that part of its fascination lay in its having emerged via a process based on

relationships between Karl-Henrik Robèrt, scientists and influential others. From the

perspective of this TNS UK accredited facilitator, such relationships were more valuable than

TNS' framework. However, he felt that the work of TNS organisations, especially TNS UK,

concentrated too much on TNS' framework as a product.

7.5.2.2 Participation in knowledge creation

Another facilitator regularly contracted by TNS UK spoke of his perspective that TNS UK had

an 'inner sanctum' of 'acolytes or high priests' (F 2). In his experience, members of TNS UK

often chose one or two favoured facilitators to carry out training. He spoke of this as a source of

disillusionment with TNS UK.

A trained facilitator who, at the time of my research, was beginning her PhD in participative

approaches to community eco-design talked of her experiences of TNS organisations, in both the

UK and the US. She reflected that there was a 'lack of mechanisms to get involved and throw

my energy and expertise' into using TNS' framework (TF 1).

In addition, a professor of management at a UK university echoed this sense of TNS UK's

exclusivity when she said that TNS was an 'elitist' organisation, in her experience6. By this, she

possibly meant the facilitation and use of TNS' framework was primarily geared for strategic

and design and decision-making specialists, something born out in Chapters 5.6 and 6.10.1.1.

Alternatively, she may have been commenting on the Pathfinder Network membership fee that

made the Network inaccessible for many.

7.5.2.3 Being kept in the loop

Having attended train the trainer events, one TNS UK trained facilitator reported his frustration

at 'not being kept in the loop'. He did not know what was happening regarding the organisation,

TNS UK. He felt unappreciated, despite professing himself to be 'enthusiastic for TNS' (T 5).

6 She gave this response to a presentation I gave on my work, in her capacity as group facilitator, at the 'EmergingApproaches to Inquiry 8' Conference at Hawkwood College, Stroud, Gloucestershire, in October 2000.

- 241 -

Following the facilitator's perspective in 7.5.2.1, members of TNS UK may have been focusing on espousing

TNS' framework too much at the expense of catalysing dialogue and building relationships. This is an issue

identified by Bradbury, who reported a possible over-emphasis amongst members of TNS Sweden, in its

initial stages, on the wording of TNS' model of sustainability and on addressing perceived misunderstandings

(Bradbury 1998). She postulated that TNS arose because of the resonances people had with TNS' vision in

conjunction with them engaging in 'attractive conversations' that were dialogic and open-ended (see Chapter

2.4.1 and Appendix 1). The unattractiveness of a conversation could hinder the spread of TNS, if participants

ever felt them to be so. Members of TNS UK may have been more concerned about distributing TNS'

framework as if it were a product. If this was the case, then, from my perspective it is unsurprising that in

some peoples' eyes TNS UK could be better at facilitating networking. Once someone has 'got it', that is to

say, once someone has understood TNS' framework and the urgency in undertaking sustainable development,

there might be less interest for a TNS advocate to sustain a relationship over the medium to long-term.

7.5.3 Exploring purpose and possibilities in TNS UK's Pathfinder Company Network

The other potential route for ensuring and optimising the potential for collaborative emergent learning is via

TNS UK's Pathfinder Network itself. From my perspective, there was little evidence that TNS UK and

Pathfinder Company Network members had systematically explored the potential of the Network. I observed

misunderstandings and unclear expectations over purposes in Pathfinder Network meetings during my

research period. There were occasionally conversations about the purpose of the Network in the substantive

sessions of Network meetings themselves, and papers written by 'authoritative' members7 to address its

purpose and devise development strategies (for example, CFE 17). However, I rarely observed these to

constitute a mutually satisfying collaborative inquiry for Network participants. Sometimes, Pathfinder

Network members expressed their dissatisfactions with what they perceived to be the continued 'monologues'

of TNS UK members. TNS UK possibly maintained its hegemony in the Network despite handing over its

chairing to Pathfinder Company Network members, as discussed in Chapter 3.5.2.

By enacting a collaborative inquiry amongst TNS UK and Pathfinder Company Network around purpose and

possibilities members would surely realise and optimise the potential for collaborative emergent learning,

'transcending the familiar', and going beyond established boundaries of the Pathfinder Network's

organisation. Such an inquiry could be oriented around the suggested modus operandi, as discussed in section

7.3, and as outlined in Figure 7.1. Such an inquiry would form the kind of second-order research that I would

expect to be crucial for a group's self-determination. I took collaborative inquiry to consist of the systematic

7 By which I mean Network members in positions of established power, for example, TNS UK core team members orthe Network chair.

- 242 -

collaboration and participation over both situation and problem definition, in the first instance. Neither of

these was particularly evident in the Pathfinder Network conversations around the Network's purposes and

strategies, although authors invited comments on their written strategy papers, and these did provoke some

discussion (CFE 17).

This chapter brings Part 2 and the evaluation of OLSD with TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies to an end. In

the next chapter, in Part 3, I conclude the thesis by reflecting on its academic quality and its contribution to

research.


In this chapter, I reflected on TNS' framework and TNS UK's modus operandi in the light of the thesis'

second meta-analysis. I suggested a revision of TNS UK's modus operandi because TNS' espoused

ABCD action learning process did not necessarily enable Pathfinder Company members to manage in

their situations better. Structuring perceptions and experiences of possibility and constraint was at the

heart of this revision. Such a revision could provide structure to TNS UK facilitating collaborative

emergent learning via a renewed Facilitator Network, and a reconsidered Pathfinder Company

Network. These suggestions could facilitate OLSD as I conceptualised it in Chapter 2.7.

I therefore wrote the chapter based on empirical data and my analysis. As such, the chapter 'moves' in

the opposite direction to the approach of TNS' founder, in his initiating the inquiry that gave rise to

TNS' approach to facilitating sustainable development. He opted to work from first principles. My

exploration in this chapter, on the other hand, has been inductive. I discerned TNS UK's potentials for

improvement in the light of my findings of Pathfinder Company members' experiences of OLSD with

TNS UK. TNS UK's own organisational and structural possibilities and constraints provided

background to my exploration. I have not discussed TNS UK's own organisational and structural

possibilities and constraints in depth in this thesis apart from in Chapter 3.5.1, and the hints in

Chapter 1, for example, of the relative importance, financially, of Pathfinder Company memberships. I

therefore invite members of TNS UK to consider what they regard as the implications of my research.

Following the suggestions I have made in this chapter should ease processes of clarifying expectations

and responsibilities. I hope that they will engender the further emergence and evolution of TNS-

related conversational lineages and stories, and enhance the abilities of TNS UK members in managing

attractive conversations. As my model of OLSD developed in Chapter 2 conveys, the role of

conversational lineages could be central to organisational transformation. Related to the extent to

which someone experiences a conversation to be dialogic is the relative 'open-ness' of an organisation.

If organisation is a dynamic process of organising, consisting of both coordination and mutually

responsive and exploratory interactions, as I discussed in Chapter 2.5, then, theoretically, someone

- 243 -

will experience an effective organisation as relatively dynamic and open. The perspectives above in

sections 7.5.2.1-3 convey that in some people's experiences the organisation of TNS UK could be more

open.

While writing this chapter, I was aware that I supported the invitations to members of TNS UK with

hypothetical possibilities as to what my suggestions could engender. I cannot guarantee that my

suggestions will lead to enhanced experiences and the meeting of expectations. However, I made my

suggestions based on my own experiences and reflections, in particular in relation to Zimmer's pattern

of 'autonomy-respecting conversations' and my experiences of second-order collaborative research

discussed in Chapter 3.6. I strongly believe that second-order approaches to research and

communication are more likely to facilitate the emergence of collaborative emergent learning than

first-order approaches.

This chapter elaborates a report on my research that I wrote for TNS UK's management board in June

2003, of which the feedback I received was positive, reinforcing in me the sense that I was 'onto

something'. I had perceived TNS UK members to be aiming to facilitate something like collaborative

emergent learning but I also experienced them to feel frustrations with their work. They felt frustrated

about the extent to which some of their relationships with Pathfinder Company members had

developed. This was perhaps because they did not have well-developed guidelines for the

implementation of TNS' framework, or clearly evolved expectations for those engaged in 'action

learning' with TNS UK. I also perceived TNS UK's predominant mode of facilitation to resemble first-

order approaches that I suspect inhibit the possibility for collaborative emergent learning.

I have certainly found the exploration of TNS UK's practice and organisation in terms of particular

distinctions very helpful. These distinctions were between first- and second-order traditions (Ison and

Russell 2000), on the one hand, and between systematic and systemic thinking and action (Blackmore

et al. 1998), on the other. Perceiving TNS UK's facilitation in terms of a first-order tradition that

emphasises systematic intervention helped me to see an opportunity for improvement. The

opportunity entailed introducing elements from a second-order, systemic tradition that emphasises

contextual understanding. This opportunity was to help make space for more contextually oriented

conversations, which fit in better with my model of OLSD because they would tend toward

conversations that include stakeholders.

- 244 -

Part III

Conclusions

- 245 -

Chapter 8 Evaluating the inquiry

8.1 Introduction

8.2 An audit trail of the inquiry

8.3 Reviewing the thesis' contribution to knowledge

8.3.1 Contribution to management theory

8.3.2 Contribution to evaluative methodology

8.3.3 Contribution to facilitation praxis

8.3.4 Plausibility and credibility

8.4 Limitations of the research

8.5 Recommendations for further research


8.1 Introduction

A question that confronts evaluators is, 'who will evaluate the evaluation?' (Patton 2002). I think it is the

responsibility of the evaluator in the first instance, at least to guide those unfamiliar with the research into its

strengths and weaknesses.

This chapter completes the thesis by assessing its academic merit in terms of its 'original contribution to

knowledge', which is the requirement for PhD research. The requirement is open to interpretation, with

potentially fifteen definitions (Phillips and Pugh 1994). As highlighted throughout the thesis, however, I think

there have been three significant outcomes of the research. These were, namely, the development of theory of

OLSD in Chapter 2; the formation of a second-order evaluative approach that culminated in an innovative

analytical strategy discussed in Chapter 4; and, the suggestions for improving the facilitation of TNS UK's

OLSD praxis in Chapter 7. As I argue in this chapter, these outcomes are germane beyond the domain of TNS

UK and its Pathfinder Companies. They may be (i) relevant to others interested in scaling up initiatives to

promote sustainable development; (ii) applicable for others merely interested in organisational learning; and

(iii) of interest to evaluation and systems thinkers and practitioners in general.

In order to assess my contribution to knowledge, I first conduct an 'audit trail' of the evaluative inquiry, in

section 8.2, to refresh for the reader the journey that I have negotiated in writing the thesis.

I then evaluate my research contribution in section 8.3, and discuss limitations of the research in section 8.4

and recommendations for further research in section 8.5.

- 246 -

8.2 An audit trail of the inquiry

Steps for ensuring rigour in qualitative research are 'closely connected with validity and reliability checks'

(Morse 1998, p.76), but the steps are different because the kind of knowledge is different. Qualitative

research deals with 'experiential knowledge', for example, in contrast to the 'measurement knowledge' in

quantitative research. One of the steps to ensure rigour in funded qualitative research is to present what

Morse called an 'audit trail' (ibid.). The trail that I outline here enables those unfamiliar with the research to

trace its development. It covers the 'conceptual development' for approaching the evaluative inquiry in

Chapter 2, the processes of data collection in Chapter 3, and the processes of data reduction, reconstruction,

analysis and synthesis in Chapter 4. The audit trail conveys in part what Strauss and Corbin (1998) described

as the 'systematic conceptualisation and linkages […] between concepts' and the research process (ibid.

p.270). I can demonstrate the systematic conceptualisation and linkages between concepts by revisiting the

research purpose and research questions in Chapter 1.4, and conveying how the developing argument in the

subsequent chapters answered these questions. The research questions were:

1. What is, or has been, TNS UK's influence on its Pathfinder Companies?

2. What would it mean to evaluate TNS UK's influence on its Pathfinder Companies?

3. How did members of TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies interpret and make use of TNS'

framework in their organisations?

4. What organisational and structural factors enabled or constrained Pathfinder Company

members to enact TNS' framework in the ways theorised by TNS advocates?

5. What organisational and structural factors could members of TNS UK consider to

improve their own practices?

I asked the second and third research questions in order to address the first.

I began in Chapter 2.2 by delineating my research strategy as one that combined elements of 'applied' and

'formative evaluation' research (Patton 2002); I argued that I was not in a position to conduct a 'summative

evaluation'. Moreover, I discussed how the formative evaluation combined elements of both 'implementation'

and 'goal-free' evaluation. In this audit trail, I concentrate on presenting how my account in the thesis fulfils

itself as this kind of formative evaluation. I examine the applied aspect of the research in the next section.

Evaluating TNS UK's influence was difficult without clear guidelines for the implementation of TNS' action

learning process, as discussed in Chapter 2.3. In addition, taking a second-order approach precluded

conclusions that pertained to uni-directional, deterministic influences in the social domain, as discussed in

- 247 -

Chapter 3. The second-order stance led me to a methodology that aimed to legitimise others with their

concomitant experiences and perspectives. However, developing a 'second-order' model of OLSD as I did

enabled me to retain the notion of influence, albeit in a co-evolutionary way. I developed the model around

the notion of the conversational lineage, which provided the ground to assess TNS UK's influence on its

Pathfinder Companies. The notion enabled me to develop the heuristic model of OLSD in which concepts of

interaction, conversation, and sensemaking were implicit, but it also gave me a rigorous means to approach

my data.

Tracing TNS-distinctions within my narrative accounts enabled an appreciation of organisational levels in

and across which TNS-related conversational lineages emerged and evolved, as I discussed in Chapter 4. This

act was coupled with the discernment of emotions in my data, which I theorised pointed to possibilities and

constraints. Evaluating TNS UK's influence therefore meant attending to the resonance TNS-related theories

and activities had for participants in conversations and the stories they told. I contended that these stories and

experiences reflected intra-organisational conversational lineages that will inevitably frame and influence

ongoing strategising and decision making.

The logic of abductive inference as discussed in Chapter 4.3 underscored both the discernment of patterns

and the construction of the narrative accounts themselves. I was able to distinguish a range of possibilities for

OLSD with TNS UK in the accounts in Chapter 5. All of the possibility accounts that I included in the thesis

attested to the use of TNS' framework for awareness raising, which happened directly via TNS UK-led

training, or indirectly via a company's mission statement. An awareness raising stage provided the

springboard to more sophisticated possibilities that ranged from thinking more systemically (5.2), to role and

project focused training (5.3 and 5.7), to company mission (5.5) and company-wide training and culture

change (5.3 and 5.6). I described the accounts in sections 5.3, 5.5 and 5.6 as ones that reflected what I called

collaborative emergent learning.

However, there were few instances of Pathfinder Company members following TNS' espoused ABCD action

learning process explicitly. Many spoke of having had TNS' framework more at the 'back of their minds'.

They found TNS' framework useful for initiating sustainability conversations, especially for high-level

strategic conversations, but it was less useful on a day to day level (6.10.1.1). Thus, TNS' framework was

good for innovation amongst the project team on the Swindon hospital (5.3) but less useful for screening that

involved alternatives at a greater level of detail (6.4 and 6.6). Whether the lack of explicit use of TNS'

framework in decision making is attributable to TNS' framework or to TNS UK's facilitation is difficult to

say. I suspect the former, and this conclusion supports that of Upham (1999a) in seeing TNS' framework as a

potentially effective 'boundary object'.

- 248 -

While it is not possible to measure influence in terms of material cause (Boje 2001), I believe there are

grounds to ask whether collaborative emergent learning would have occurred without TNS UK's facilitation.

As such, TNS UK's influence was evident and significant in the development of conversational lineages that

involved multiple actors coming together, crossing departmental and organisational boundaries, engaging in

appreciative conversations and enacting TNS' strategic corollaries. I speculated that the possibilities for

OLSD occurred in conjunction with a range of nine enabling factors, articulated in the second meta-analysis

in Chapter 7.2, without which TNS-related conversational lineages were less likely to develop. These factors

were either organisation or structure oriented, or both. These enabling factors were: the extension of

invitations to others to come together, participate and contribute; enthusiasm; opportunities for appreciative

conversations; relevant expertise and information; adequate investment of resources; leadership; clear

strategy and vision; clear market signals; and, the extent to which a company had conversational-fostering

organisation and structures. Constraining factors included poor intra-organisational and inter-departmental

communication (6.9 and 6.7), international regulatory regimes (6.2), or departmental capacities and

professional prejudices (6.5).

I focused on adapting TNS UK's modus operandi to include a stage of structuring experiences and

perceptions of possibility and constraint, in Chapter 7. I suggested this would be a basis on which to energise

TNS UK's Facilitator Network, and to explore purposes and possibilities in the context of TNS UK's

Pathfinder Company Network. My expectation is that these suggested improvements would engender

enthusiasm, the continuing emergence of rich TNS-related conversational lineages, and the development of

further collaborative emergent learning.

I feel I have established 'adequacy' in research practice, which, according to Morse (1998), refers to the point

at which 'sufficient data have been collected that saturation occurs and variation is both accounted for and

understood' (ibid. p.76). I believe the narrative accounts in Chapters 5 and 6 attest to the variation and

richness in peoples' experiences of learning with TNS UK. The researching process by which I collected the

data began with getting to know TNS UK and its work, attending its 'coal face' events, and inquiring into the

situations of Pathfinder Company members. As such, I built up comprehensive examples of Pathfinder

Companies learning with TNS UK. Moreover, I had so much data that I was able to discard two accounts of

awareness raising in Pathfinder Companies because they did not add much. I realise that only one other

account explicitly conveyed awareness raising in Chapter 5, namely that in section 5.4. However, the stage of

awareness raising was implicit in all the other accounts that I did include.

- 249 -

8.3 Reviewing the thesis' contribution to knowledge

This section refers back to Chapter 2.2 to discuss the extent to which the research constituted applied

research. I define the thesis' contribution to knowledge in terms of original theory, original analytical

strategy, and original praxis-design.

8.3.1 Contribution to management theory

My model of OLSD, presented in Figure 2.1, was an heuristic device to enable the evaluative inquiry. The

model is original both in terms of organisational learning theory and in the context of a formative evaluation

of TNS UK's facilitation.

I developed the model of OLSD in Chapter 2.7 partly in response1 to Nattrass' (1999) thesis but also in

response to, and building on, Bradbury's (1998) research that explained the dialogic process that gave rise to

TNS in Sweden. As discussed in section 2.4.1, I found her research insightful and helpful, and my model of

OLSD complements her dialogic model of co-operative ecological inquiry. However, the OLSD model

attends to an intra-organisational process; Bradbury's model was more generic.

I also developed the model in line with a number of well-defined theories. These related to second-order

cybernetic theories of organisation (Maturana and Varela 1987; Ison 2000a), discussed in section 2.5.1;

second-order systems and organisational learning theories (Checkland 1994; Wenger 1998; Bell et al. 2000),

discussed in section 2.5.2; the notion of 'autonomy-respecting' conversations (Zimmer and Chapman 2000),

in section 2.5.3; understandings of barriers to organisational change (Hernes 1999; Berthoin Antal et al.

2001), in section 2.5.4; and, the notion of the conversational lineage (Bunnell 2002), in section 2.6. As far as

I know, the notion of a conversational lineage has not yet been utilised to engage with organisational

learning2, nor been theoretically coupled with a second-order organisation theory, nor been coupled with the

distinction between constraints and possibilities.

As I discussed in Chapter 4.6.2, the notion of the conversational lineage helped me to make links between

individuals' relationships with organisational levels, the organisation and structures of their company, and

their contributions to their company's sustainable development. These links enabled me to carry out the

1 Hammersley argued that the plausibility of research concerns 'consistency with existing knowledge whose validity istaken to be beyond reasonable doubt' (quoted in Shaw 1999, p.65). Credibility entails 'the likelihood that the processwhich produced the claim is free of serious error' (ibid.). I believe I achieved plausibility along Hammersley's lines bydeveloping my research in relation to previous organisational and strategic research with TNS.

2 I heard indirectly that the person who introduced the notion to me was nearing writing her first article about it.

- 250 -

second meta-analysis in Chapter 7.2. I found the notion of the conversational lineage theoretically robust

because it tied in very well with the second-order theories of organisation that I discussed in Chapter 2.5; it

also helped to bridge a potentially problematic philosophical issue. The distinction between organisation and

structure could be problematic in terms of it being Platonic, that is to say, it could create a Platonic dualism

between a world of Ideas (patterns) and a world of Matter (organisational structures). I experienced a

conversational lineage as bridging this divide and connecting with experiences of organisational levels, as I

argued in Chapter 4.6.2. In addition, I argue that the notion connects with praxis on a theoretical level. This is

because I cannot envisage the emergence of a conversational lineage without the process of an autonomy-

respecting conversation (see Appendix 2). As I mentioned in Chapter 2.8, I find Zimmer's pattern very

meaningful in terms of its implications for my own practice.

Developing the second-order model of OLSD is novel in the context of management science literature. On

the one hand, I am not convinced that dedicated organisational learning theorists have integrated second-

order cybernetic and systemic theories of organisation, knowing and learning, as well as they might. They

appear to regress to first-order conceptions, however close they come (e.g. Senge 1990; Pedler et al. 1997;

Pawlowsky 2001).

On the other hand, there has been a significant gap in management theory between theories of organisation

and sustainable development (Hart 1995). Regarding organisational learning, some researchers have come

close to merging the two fields (e.g. Dierkes et al. 2001b; Kädtler 2001; von Rosenstiel and Koch 2001).

Others have explicitly tried to bring organisational learning and sustainable development together (e.g.

Winter and Steger 1997; McIntosh and Arora 2001; Courtice and Swift 2002). As with dedicated

organisational learning theorists, I argue they flounder when faced with second-order concerns. The bridge

that Nattrass (1999) conceived was decidedly within a first-order tradition:

'the missing piece […] has been a systems approach that fully maps the dynamic relationships between

organizations and their natural environment. […] we still have a perceptual blind spot based on the

system of thought through which societal reality is constantly created.' (ibid. p.34)

This is an extravagant claim. Whilst I agree there is a bridge to be built, I am not the only one who doubts

whether a systems approach can 'fully map' organisation–whole-system relations, as mentioned in Chapter

2.2. A second-order systems approach tends toward regarding the act of engagement with a situation in terms

of inquiry into that situation to improve it rather than fully map that situation for purposes of control, as

discussed in section 2.5.2. A second-order approach accepts the inevitability of interpretation and a

multiplicity of perspectives, as conveyed in Chapter 3.2 and 4.4, such that whole representation is practically

impossible. Crucially, however, the impossibility of objectivity does not stop a second-order approach from

engaging with a situation (Armson et al. 2000).

- 251 -

I suggest my model of OLSD bridged the gaps in the management literature satisfactorily, not only

theoretically, but also in terms of what it enabled me to do. I argued that Nattrass' (1999) implicit

conceptualisation of organisational learning, as discussed in Chapter 4.4, illustrates a first-order, unitarist

conception of organisation. When combined with his first-order conception of systems thinking, his

conception did little to help him discriminate between his case studies in terms of progress in corporate

sustainable development. He may have assumed that evidence of 'corporate learning with TNS' as sufficient

grounds to claim progress. Certainly, I perceived learning, in the sense of the transcendence of the familiar

(see Chapter 2.6), to have occurred in his four case study companies. However, I argue that what appear as

his unitarist conception of organisation and his first-order systems thinking provide an impoverished basis for

claiming progress. I expect that his thesis can give little insight into progress because he leaves little room for

multiple perspectives in his case studies. Precluding multiple perspectives reduces the extent to which others

can appreciate the situations he described. This potentially limits the extent to which others can engage with

his notions of corporate learning with sustainability, as I argued in Chapter 2.4.2, and the extent to which his

thesis can therefore contribute to ongoing practices of OLSD. Merely documenting evidence of corporate,

TNS-defined paths of sustainable development is insufficient for clarifying the varied benefits of learning

with TNS.

I addressed this issue through narrative accounts that included multiple perspectives. Discerning the

emergence and evolution of conversational lineages helped me to define a typology of possibilities for OLSD

in the first meta-analysis in Chapters 5.8. The typology provided a definition of progress and a discriminatory

framework for TNS UK evaluators, facilitators and practitioners. The typology helped me define an ideal

form of OLSD, which in turn provided me with a basis to make suggestions for TNS UK's further

organisational development in Chapter 7.

The notion of the conversational lineage is powerful because it allowed me to account for multiple

perspectives in a way that lent itself to investigation. Conversational lineages are phenomena that are

implicitly interactive but also explicitly discernible. A TNS-related conversational lineage is easily

discernible through the distinctions I clarified in Chapter 4.6.1.

My model of OLSD provided the basis to my analytical strategy.

8.3.2 Contribution to evaluative methodology

A difficulty associated with an evaluative inquiry into the influence of a TNS organisation was that TNS'

framework is open to interpretation (Upham 1999a). There have been no specific behaviours prescribed by

TNS advocates, and no clear guidelines as to how to make trade-off decisions between TNS' system

conditions when analysing a situation (the 'B' stage of the ABCD process). TNS UK's ladder of engagement

- 252 -

was considered 'party-games' by one Pathfinder Company member (see Chapter 2.3.2). These constraints

made a 'goal-free' evaluation all the more attractive. These constraints made an implementation evaluation, let

alone a summative evaluation (see section 2.2.1.1), difficult. However, given the designers of TNS'

framework defined strategic corollaries (see Box 1.1), these were guidelines to some extent, and made a

'semi-implementation evaluation' possible.

An innovative evaluation strategy was welcome in the light of these constraints and possibilities. I grounded

my researching practice in the distinction between first and second-order traditions (Ison and Russell 2000),

in particular living systems theory (Maturana and Varela 1987), with my data having been primarily second-

order data as discussed in Chapter 3.2-3. I traced and measured occurrences of TNS distinctions through the

accounts of possibility in Chapter 5, as I did in the first meta-analysis in section 5.8, with respect to the

OLSD model I had developed3. This was a first-order activity because it was based on the assumption that the

distinctions 'existed within the data'. That is to say, I carried out the activity as if the distinctions existed in an

independent world separate from me as the researcher. I follow Russell and Ison (2000a) in viewing this

assumption as a necessary heuristic in doing second-order research; reifying distinctions is an inevitable part

of communication. However, tracing the distinctions and the consequent discernment of patterns in the data

were second-order activities because they inevitably entailed interpretation on my part. As mentioned,

research linking conversational lineages and organisational change had not been undertaken before. This link

ratified a unique analytical strategy, which emerged in connection with my expectation that the research

should enable an evaluator and a practitioner to discriminate progress in facilitating OLSD with TNS UK.

If I was to undertake this research again, I would have a much keener ear as to the emotions I experienced

others expressing, and the extent to which they were alluding to possibilities and constraints. While I was

attentive from the beginning to the tone of voice and body language of others in my researching encounters, I

was not clear how important these would be. I encountered the notion of the conversational lineage late in the

research period. Even then, I was not prepared for the effectiveness of the conversational lineage for

investigating influence in executing my analytical strategy. In addition, even after the first thesis draft, my

supervisors were pushing hard for me to communicate what I had done clearly.

I can only suspect that the analytical strategy could be very pertinent, for example, to TNS UK Pathfinder

Company members wishing to scale up their company's trajectory of sustainable development, or

organisational learning in general (e.g. Denton 1998).

3 As discussed in Chapter 2.7, I employed an interaction grid and developed an interactivity diagram to convey myOLSD model. These are not established modelling devices (Lane et al. 2002a). While innovative, further elaboration onthe creation and use of the devices, apart from what I wrote, is beyond the scope of this thesis.

- 253 -

I can envisage other situations for which both the analytical steps that I devised and the theory in which I

grounded them might be applicable. Tracing conversational lineages associated with the theory and practice

of eco-psychology (Roszak 1993; Fisher 2002), for example, or travelling in Africa (Theroux 2002), or the

advocacy of mountain rural people in international development (Kaczmarski and Cooperrider 1999), are all

instances for which distinctions could be generated and traced in conversations. I was fortunate in discerning

TNS-distinctions because there was already a significant but fairly consistent literature by the designers of

TNS' framework. Clearly, there will be boundary issues for any act of discerning distinctions (Blackmore and

Ison 1998).

8.3.3 Contribution to facilitation praxis

For Patton (2002), the relevance of evaluation research is closely associated with its utility. A primary

intended audience of this thesis has been the members of TNS UK. I wrote Chapter 7 in particular with TNS

UK in mind. I believe the process of structuring experiences and perceptions of possibility and constraint is

highly appropriate to managing OLSD. If practitioners experienced TNS' framework to be limited in the

extent to which it enabled them to optimise their possibilities and to manage their constraints better, then the

relevance of highlighting this issue must be high.

In Chapter 7, I proposed suggested improvements to TNS UK's modus operandi. I based my suggestions on

my empirical findings. Having adopted a second-order research approach, I am able to offer this thesis not

only as a comment on OLSD with TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies but also a potential contribution to the

ongoing facilitation of OLSD, both with TNS UK's Pathfinder Companies and interested others. Upham's

(1999a) thesis, discussed in Chapter 2, concentrated on the theoretical basis to TNS' framework and only

touched on the experiences of those 'learning with TNS UK'. I experienced his approach and conclusions to

reside within a first-order tradition and hence, like Nattrass' (1999), I expected it to be of limited utility for

contributing to a TNS organisation's praxis.

This research has been the first explicit second-order inquiry with either TNS UK, or a TNS organisation,

which has been documented.

In conjunction with my suggestions, I suspect Zimmer's pattern of autonomy-respecting conversations will be

useful for TNS UK's practice of facilitating action learning with TNS' framework. This suspicion stems from

my own experience as discussed in Chapter 2.8, and Bradbury's (1998) emphasis on the importance of

conducting attractive conversations in TNS Sweden's own development. Whilst I encourage TNS UK

facilitators to acquaint themselves with Bradbury's model of co-operative ecological inquiry and concomitant

discussion in her thesis, I suspect Zimmer's pattern will be more pertinent to the art and skill of managing

such attractive conversations. I suspect his pattern will be a useful tool for the practice of engendering further

- 254 -

collaborative emergent learning, as I defined it in Chapter 5.8. I concentrated on addressing both TNS UK's

modus operandi and organisational avenues for facilitation (i.e. via its Facilitator and Pathfinder Networks),

partly in the light of Zimmer's distinctions of invitation, expression and understanding. I believe this is as

accurate a model of what goes on in conversations as any I have come across.

If TNS facilitators do not feel they can put TNS' framework into their own language (see Chapter 7.4), for

example, there is less chance others will be able to apply it to the 'languaging' of their own situations. The

same would be true for OLSD facilitators in other situations. I encourage TNS advocates to facilitate

conversations in which they share their own perspectives such that they reinforce a conversational dynamic in

which it is equally safe for practitioners to explore their own experiences, perspectives and situations. If there

are limited invitations for Pathfinder Company members to engage with perceived possibilities and

constraints, then it is little surprise if those practitioners are hesitant to renew their contracts with a TNS

organisation (see Chapter 6.10.2). The same would be true for OLSD practitioners in other companies.

If TNS workshop and training-event participants experience a 'slapped wrist' (see Chapter 3.5.1) when they

are attempting to make sense of TNS' framework in the light of their own experience, history and situations,

then they will not feel welcome into a TNS-conversation. This in turn will entail that they are less likely to

share their own perspectives, in which case, TNS UK's facilitators have significantly depleted resources with

which to work and possibilities to enable the emergence and evolution of further TNS-related conversational

lineages. This would restrict the possibility for collaborative emergent learning. The development of

conversational lineages is critical to optimise possibilities for enacting TNS' strategic corollaries,

practitioners' sense of possibilities for improvements in organisational practices, and the extent to which an

organisation's organisation and structures can transform, as I suggested via my OLSD model in Chapter 2.7. I

expect the same would be true for the participants of other advocacy and facilitation initiatives.

The recommendations to review TNS UK's modus operandi, and Facilitator and Pathfinder Networks,

constituted both organisation and structure-oriented components. I suggested that these recommendations

could exploit the nine 'potentially influential factors' discerned in the second meta-analysis in Chapter 7.2.

8.3.4 Plausibility and credibility

Here, I briefly mention established criteria for ensuring the trustworthiness of the above contributions.

Besides rigour (Morse 1998), other criteria for qualitative research include credibility and plausibility, which

complement the traditional criterion of internal validity. There have been differing definitions of credibility,

with Lincoln and Guba's definition, for example, having included 'prolonged engagement, persistent

observation, triangulation and member checks' (quoted in Shaw 1999, p.67). Plausibility is achieved through

'thick description' and 'narrative about the context' (ibid.), which I achieved in the narrative accounts in

- 255 -

Chapters 5, 6 and to a lesser degree 7. I undertook 'triangulation and member checks' by checking notes with

company reports and publications, and feeding back interview notes for editing by research participants, as

discussed in Chapter 3.4.4. In addition, I conveyed the credibility and plausibility of the research in these

terms through explicating the audit trail, above. Regarding Hammersley's definition of credibility (ibid.), it is

difficult to assess whether the research has been 'free of serious error' without there having been a prescribed

methodology and analytical strategy developed prior to this research against which to assess it. Having said

that, I believe the audit trail demonstrated a systematic and coherent thread in the development of the

research. I do not think that I made any seriously erroneous links in the argument, or that I neglected any

substantive gaps in its development.

8.4 Limitations of the research

In this section, I put the research into perspective.

First, I wish to point out that the research did not entail a social, environmental or sustainability audit. I

would not wish the analytical strategy developed in Chapter 4 to be used as such. My evaluative inquiry

focused on a process of organisational learning for sustainable development, and not on sustainable

development per se. An opportunity for further research would be to investigate a link between my OLSD

model and the audit of practices according to negotiated standards.

Second, I did not investigate interactions between Pathfinder Company members on the one hand, and

external stakeholders besides TNS UK on the other. If researchers interested in the model of OLSD were to

investigate its applicability in other situations, this would be my first port of call. There is a multitude of

potential stakeholders organisational members might discern including, for example, local communities,

those who experience themselves as marginalised, customers, suppliers, or rural workers in developing

countries. These kind of stakeholders have been important for The Co-operative Bank's partnership approach

(Co-operative Bank 1998-2003). My research did not investigate interactions between companies and these

kinds of stakeholder to any great degree, and thus I am not able to comment on the relative influence of TNS

UK. Having said that, my narrative accounts did allude to the very significant influence of protestors (5.3)

and customers (5.5). I suspect that a focus on the relative influence of different kinds of stakeholder would

focus more on values and perspectives than my research has done (Blackmore et al. 2000).

Third, I return to the question raised towards the end of Chapter 5, which asked whether the narratives of

collaborative emergent learning were so merely because they arose from more in-depth researching. The

question highlights the doubt that the narrative accounts of systemic thinking and role and project focused

training (5.2 and 5.7 respectively), for example, were so merely because they arose from the second phase of

the research. The second phase was where I only engaged Pathfinder Company Network representatives, and

- 256 -

not their colleagues in their wider organisation (see Chapter 3.5.2). The question implies that I discerned the

'more developed' possibilities for OLSD because I merely spent more time with more people in those

companies concerned. The question perhaps highlights a tension between the realist and constructivist

methodological stances that I adopted in the research (see Chapter 3.3). The realist stance claims the narrative

accounts in Chapters 5 and 6 reflect actual possibilities for and constraints to OLSD in the respective

Pathfinder Companies from which they arose. The constructivist stance claims the narrative accounts are my

constructions and have no referential validity. That is to say, did they reflect phenomena in the observed

world or in the observer's world? The question potentially strikes to the heart of the analytical approach as a

significant limitation, and I address it in two ways. The first is to refer to the narrative accounts themselves,

and the second relates to the issue of my rapport with Pathfinder Company members that gave rise to the

third, 'in-deeper' research phase.

I can address the doubt by examining the accounts themselves. The account in Chapter 5.4 reflected a

possibility for OLSD that did not appear to go far beyond awareness raising. This account, however, arose

from my third, in-deeper researching phase. The accounts of collaborative emergent learning therefore did

not necessarily stem from more engaged and in-depth researching.

It is conceivable that members of the three respective Pathfinder Companies that were involved in the third

'in-deeper' phase had more to offer my researching along the following lines. The stories and scenarios in

Chapters 5 and 6 were those that appeared to be of most significance for those I interviewed and encountered.

Their Pathfinder Network representatives were more open than others were to my engaging their colleagues

because they knew that they and their colleagues had a wealth of experiences of OLSD on which to draw for

conversations with me. It is possible to argue that their receptivity reflected their confidence in their

company's trajectories of sustainable development. Their openness may also reflect not only a better rapport

with me, but also their disposition to collaborative emergent learning, namely, an inclination towards

inquiring, appreciative conversations that give rise to boundary-crossing conversational lineages.

Another argument in favour of the view that collaborative emergent learning was more 'actual' than

'imagined' concerned the views of TNS UK's members. They spoke of the three companies involved in the

third, in-deeper phase as ones that were 'further down the road' than others. It is conceivable to envisage my

research as having progressed into its third phase because of phenomena in the three companies themselves,

of which others apart from me were aware.

Importantly, I offered the narrative accounts in Chapters 5 and 6 as heuristic devices for further dialogue and

reflection. I described the narrative accounts as examples of possibilities for and constraints to OLSD, rather

than as definitive descriptions. The question that I aimed to address was whether it is possible to learn

anything from them. I argue that it is, and I set out what I thought could be learnt from them in Chapter 7. I

- 257 -

did not intend the accounts to be read as representative of the whole organisations from which they arose, nor

as describing reality as it is apart from my conceptualisations. Rather, I hoped that the accounts would be

seen as my perspectives on the situated possibilities and constraints that the Pathfinder Company members,

whom I interviewed and encountered, appeared to have experienced. This point was explicit in Chapter 4.5.

I was also aware that my researching conversations only partially reflected pre-existing lineages, or could

themselves have contributed to new conversational lineages. I did not argue that it was possible for me to

come by organisational conversational lineages and stories in their 'natural state' (Gabriel 2000). In addition,

what might have appeared to be constraints to OLSD with TNS UK might merely have been bleak periods in

otherwise vibrant and developing conversational lineages. My researching conversations were snapshots of

events and activities in the respective organisations as they occurred at those moments in time. A

conversational lineage would stretch out indefinitely, certainly over longer periods than a research project of

this scope and size could grasp. I was therefore wary of making definitive conclusions; hence, my speculating

on potentially influential factors in the second meta-analysis in Chapter 7.

Perhaps the greatest limitation of this research has been its scope and size. The topic of evaluating what I

called OLSD has been one that I tried to reduce to a manageable size, but is one that still may have been too

large for a single PhD researcher to handle with his or her concomitant time, size and process constraints. My

second-order evaluative approach and analytical strategy may be ones that organisational members

themselves are better suited to undertake if they are keen to engender OLSD more systematically. If this was

an attractive proposition, theirs would ideally be a more participative, action-oriented research project

(Reason and Bradbury 2000b), involving practitioners themselves who could define its boundaries and

engender a more relevant inquiry. This was not a practical possibility for me, as I discussed in Chapter 3.3.4.

I thus now turn to exploring possibilities for further research in the next section.

8.5 Recommendations for further research

My recommendations for further research are inevitably action-oriented and focus on the organisation and

practices of TNS UK. As discussed previously, there are research possibilities that go beyond the domain of

this thesis. However, I keep my recommendations here brief and consistent with the suggestions I made in

Chapter 7. This is because the research has primarily resulted from a collaborative research studentship

sponsored by TNS UK with a focus on evaluating and suggesting improvements to its facilitation work. In

addition, I have an interest in the development of TNSI's work because I find TNS' model of sustainability to

be satisfying in terms of its simplicity for what I experience as a very complex subject. Contributing to TNS

UK's organisational development is worthwhile, from my perspective. These recommendations are therefore

action-oriented.

- 258 -

The first relates to exploring how to structure experiences and perceptions of possibility and constraint

effectively in relation to a TNS-defined process of sustainable development, such that the process contributes

to managing constraints and possibilities better. In Chapter 7.4, I gave some suggestions that I believed would

be effective. Concerted research in this matter should make TNS' ABCD action learning process more robust

and tangible for its practitioners.

The second focuses more closely on the process of managing conversations, such that conversational lineages

and collaborative emergent learning are more likely to arise. How these practices relate to the development of

TNS-related conversational lineages and collaborative emergent learning is a matter worthy of ongoing action

learning.

The third recommendation is to investigate how conversational lineages frame strategising and decision

making. This was my contention in the model of OLSD, and investigating it would require more intimate

contact with organisational members on a day to day level for an external researcher like myself. A perhaps-

better alternative would be for organisational members themselves to consider and inquire into how their

conversational lineages frame and affect the strategies they form and the decisions they make. They would be

able to negotiate and decide on what would be the relevant boundaries of inquiry for them, explore what

implications these boundaries had, and enact their inquiry in domains that were familiar for them. In addition,

they would be able to take responsibility for consequences and further learning. This third recommendation is

perhaps the one with the most applicability beyond the domain of TNS UK and its Pathfinder Companies.

The notion that conversational lineages could be indicators of influence could have relevance beyond the

promotion of sustainable development in the guise of advocating TNS' framework.


This chapter concludes Part 3, having evaluated its merits and limitations as a piece of academic

qualitative research. I add few reflections on top of what I have already written in the chapter, which

documents what I take to be very significant outcomes of the research.

Reflecting on the thesis as a whole, I have found the notion of the conversational lineage particularly

fruitful. It has enabled me to bring together aspects of the social and ecological sciences together in a

way that I found methodologically innovative. This is something that has been a concern defined

before the outset of my research (Scoones 1999). I believe the notion is promising for sustainable

development researchers and practitioners interested in organisational change, and, coupled with my

second-order evaluative approach, may be promising for TNSI members developing their theory of

social sustainability. It has helped me to address a question that I often heard asked by Pathfinder

Company members, namely, how are we going to influence the people that matter? My answer, as

- 259 -

discussed at the end of Chapter 2, focuses on the ways in which we manage the possibilities and

constraints that we encounter and generate with each other through our everyday conversations, both

in organisations and outside.

Managing conversational trajectories requires making boundary judgements (Blackmore et al. 2000), a

skill that, in the construction of their process-guide, the designers of TNS' ABCD action learning

process have neglected to nurture. In addition, I would contend, taking responsibility for their

trajectories requires strengthening our capacities to enter into relationships with beings in the other-

than-human, or what Abram (1996) called the 'more-than-human' world. These beings – whether they

be rocks, trees or wild animals – who coordinate their behaviours in different ways to ourselves,

arguably, are just as much stakeholders in humanity's future as local communities are in the futures

of sector-leading companies. Realising a sustainable future therefore requires nurturing aspects of

'pre-modern' empathies to complement the kind of scientific engagement with the world espoused by

TNS advocates.

Of course, only time will tell whether the research documented in this thesis is relevant and of use to

TNS UK members and their Pathfinder Companies. Having said that, there were signals that I picked

up that I was heading in the right direction with both my inquiry and my feedback; see Chapter 3.4.1.

Mark Cahill, for example, the originator of 'From Taiwan to Halifax: the story of a conversational

lineage' in Box 2.1, said my feedback about his company conveyed a familiarity with his organisation

that he himself did not have! I took this as a complement rather than a comment on my impertinence.

I wish Mark well in his new post as TNS UK's chief executive.

- 260 -

Post-script

To put the thesis in context, I want to return to the personal introduction in the final section of

Chapter 1. The reader may recall that my interest in the studentship stemmed from stories I was

hearing when I first went to university. At that time, I suffered a disorientating mental illness that

meant I needed to defer a year from my Theology degree. This proved to be the start of a ten-year

inquiry in which I asked three questions. What did I need to sustain myself? What do you and I need

to carry on together? And, what will ensure the survival of the human species into the long term? This

latter question was provoked by a controversial theologian (Fox 1983).

My personal search has culminated in this thesis. I have answered these questions to my satisfaction.

To the first, my answer is that it is good to breathe, develop self-assurance, and to take a holiday now

and again. To the second, my answer is that we need to respect the indivisibility of each other's

experiential worlds, as per the second-order research tradition discussed in Chapter 3. This may have

application for the quest by TNS advocates, mentioned in Chapter 1.2.2, for more vigourous principles

of social sustainability than they have refined so far in their system condition four.

Finally, I want to dwell a bit on the third question, because my answer connects with a significant

theme throughout this thesis, namely, the distinction between first and second order research

traditions. While finishing the thesis, a BBC news item caught my eye; the item reported an article in

the journal, Nature, whose authors claimed that the world's oceans are becoming more acidic owing to

global warming (Black 2003). A rise in carbon dioxide reacts with water to produce carbonic acid. If

trends in the production of carbonic acid in the world's oceans continue, this could threaten marine

life. The world's oceans, of course, have been the cradle to life on the planet. Such a scientific

prediction arises from within a first-order research tradition. A TNS enthusiast will recognise that the

rise in concentrations of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere relates to TNS' first principle of

sustainability, system condition one. What I argued in Chapter 3 was that I did not set out to hound

the epistemological basis on which this venerable tradition rests. I merely wished to put it into

perspective because it cannot dictate how best to respond to the kind of findings reported in Nature.

Importantly, I did not argue that a second-order tradition would determine optimal responses either. I

do think, however, that a second-order tradition is the more appropriate to structure inquiry into the

perceived complexities of such situations, inquiries that have the intention of improving these

situations. It is my hope that this thesis confirms this perspective. My answer to the third question is

therefore to nurture 'epistemological awareness' (Armson et al. 2000), such that we are better able to

take responsibility for the possibilities and constraints that we bring forth through our languaging. As

such, I contend that we need to attend to the trajectories of our conversations, and the stories that are

their ground (Okri 1996), because these become the soil in which our futures germinate. Sensing their

trajectories requires sympathy with both ethics and imagination, two dimensions of human experience

that, in its construction, the designers of TNS' framework have so far purposefully avoided.

- 261 -

Appendices

- 262 -

Appendix 1 Co-operative ecological inquiry

Figure A1. Bradbury's model of co-operative ecological inquiry (Bradbury 1998, p.254).

The sign graph diagram describes the process by which conversations enabled or constrainedthe interest in, and development of, TNS in Sweden. The plus '+' signs represent positivefeedback, by which an input reinforces the extent of an outcome, while the minus '–' signsrepresent negative feedback, by which an input limits the extent of an outcome (Lane et al.2002a).

Credibility andeffect of thought

leaders withineconomic andcultural realms

Activation of personalnetworks in cultural

and economic spheres

Attractivenessof conversation

Related vision evoked

Self-interest

Conduciveness ofsocial context

New economicand culturalstructures

Certainty andinsistence on a

single way

Repressiveconversation

Non-dialogicengagement

Engagingvision

+

+

+

+

+

++

+

++

+

++

+

–

–

- 263 -

Appendix 2 Autonomy-respecting conversations

Figure A2. An adapted version of Zimmer's 'natural language algorithm' (Zimmer and

Chapman 2000)

The conversation begins via one of the three entry-arrows and continues through the conversational

structure via the arrowheads. Each cell represents a relational disposition involved in a conversation. The

six central dispositions are the most fundamental, depicting behaviours and perceptions. The adjacent

cells represent purposes and choices for conducting respectful conversations. Two or more arrows exiting

a cell represent choices. I have adapted the language in Zimmer's original diagram slightly, replacing

'hear' with 'sense', and 'comprehension' and 'comprehend' with 'understanding' and 'understand'. I think

'sense' is a more all-encompassing notion of perception than 'hear', and 'understanding' more supportive

than 'comprehend'.

If I sense awelcome,

I will sharemy viewswith you

If I senseunder-

standing,

I willwelcome

you

If Isense yousharing

your views

I willunderstand

you

Ifinstead I

sensedogma,

so youcan share

your viewswith me.

I'llsay that I

need to senseyour ownviews…

…if I'm toshowunder-

standing,

so tellme what you

think, feeland want to

do…

rather thanjudge you

Ifinstead I

sensedemand,

I'll say thatI need to sense

under-standing…

…if I'm tobe

welcomingin return,

and thatI'd welcomeyour sense of

what I'msaying…

soyou canunder-

stand me.

rather thandogmatise

you

rather thandemand of

you

so you canwelcome

me.

If instead Isense

judgement

I'llsay that I need

to sense awelcome…

and that I'llwait until you

finish…

…if I'm toshare my

views withyou,

I willwait for

you.

If youinvite mein…

If youwait for

me…

…I willleave.

…I willleave.

…I will leave.

- 264 -

Zimmer defined the conversational structure as 'non-interruptive'. The conversation begins by a person

signalling an invitation to another to express his or her perspective. Having made sense of it, the person

who made the invitation then acknowledges the other's perspective and conveys understanding. The

person who made the invitation then discerns whether there is an opportunity to express his or her

perspective – at this point, the roles reverse. It represents both the necessary conditions for a

conversation, and the sufficient conditions for respecting autonomy between two people. Implicit in the

pattern are the following freedoms: the freedom of association to remain in the conversation; the freedom

of information, which facilitates the sensemaking of each other's perspectives; and, the freedom of speech

to express one's own perspectives.

The more skilfully participants can manage a conversation by articulating their needs then the more likely

the conversation will be mutually satisfying. Of course, interpretation is significant; what one

conversational participant intended as an invitation, the other might experience as a demand. Having said

that, the pattern is very pertinent heuristically for reflecting on conversational practice.

- 265 -

Appendix 3 Examples of contributions to and management

practices for sustainable development

Here I give examples of improvements in practices that sustainable development advocates have espoused. I

suggest improvements in practices include management practices for contributing to societal sustainability,

operational responses to biophysical and ecosystem constraints, and interactive practices that enable OLSD.

I suggest examples of contributions to societal sustainability will probably include forms of:

• stakeholder engagement (Blackmore et al. 2000; Zadek 2001);

• fair trade, and fairer free trade (Ekins 2001; Robins and Roberts 2001);

• full-cost accounting (Hawken et al. 1999; Elkington 2001; Gray et al. 2001a);

• accountability and reporting (Bennett and James 2001; Gray et al. 2001b); and,

• responsible investment (Ekins 2000; Mayo 2000; Tickell 2000; Doering et al. 2002).

I suggest the following operational practices to constitute appropriate responses to biophysical and ecosystem

constraints:

• 'closing' manufacturing loops and life cycles (Jackson 1996);

• leasing rather than selling manufactured goods (Anderson 1998; Hawken et al. 1999);

• eliminating bio-accumulative and toxic substances (Holmberg et al. 1996);

• eco-efficiency (DeSimone and Popoff 1997; Hawken et al. 1999);

• biodiversity restoration and conservation (Athanasiou 1996; Brown et al. 2000; Shiva 2000; Doering et al.

2002);

• introducing climate friendly technologies and renewable energies (Blair 2001; Doering et al. 2002);

• appropriate consumption (Murphy and Cohen 2001); and,

- 266 -

• localisation (Gorelick 1998).

Contributing to OLSD would probably entail such interactive practices as:

• backcasting (Holmberg et al. 1996; Robèrt 2002);

• adaptive management (Westley 2002);

• engaging, contextualising and managing systems approaches to complexity (Armson et al. 2000);

• conducting conversations that respect the autonomies of their participants by being inviting,

understanding, non-judgemental, and authentic (Zimmer and Chapman 2000);

• managing by means rather than targets (Johnson and Bröms 2000);

• collaborative inquiry, design and decision making (Reason 1998; Kaczmarski and Cooperrider 1999;

Reason and Bradbury 2000a; Armson et al. 2001); and,

• ongoing evaluation and improvement (Checkland and Scholes 1990; Checkland 1994).

- 267 -

Appendix 4 Relevant events connected with sustainable

development and organisational learning, which I

attended during the studentship (1999 - 2003)

Contributing to my understanding of Sustainable Development and Education for

Sustainability:

• Environmental Management Forum, Olympia (10.99);

• Schumacher Lectures, Bristol (10.99) – 'Rethinking Security';

• Forum for the Future Conference, London (11.99) – 'Learning for Life – Higher Education and

Sustainable Development';

• OU RTS Seminar, Milton Keynes (11.99) – 'The Earth Centre – a sustainable project?' with Glen

Strachan;

• OU Systems Society Annual Conference, London (11.99);

• Forum for the Future Guest Lecture, London (11.99) – Adair Turner, then Director General of CBI, on

'Competitiveness vs. the Environment';

• Goldsmiths College Conference, University of London (02.00) – 'Environmental Justice in a Divided

Society';

• Construction Industry Council Second Happold Medal Lecture, London (03.00) – Amory Lovins on

'Natural Capitalism';

• OU RTS Seminar, Milton Keynes (03.00) – 'Institutional Sustainability – academic research and building

partnerships in Zimbabwe' with Gordon Wilson and Hazel Johnson;

• South Bank University Conference, London (06.00) – 'Education for Sustainable Development';

- 268 -

• International Society for Ecology and Culture Conference, London (10.00) – 'Local Food, Global

Prosperity';

• OU RTS Seminar, Milton Keynes (10.00) – 'Creating the Future for Sustainable Waste Management' with

the OU Integrated Waste Systems Research Group;

• FERN Seminar, London (11.00) – 'Making Sense of Teaching and Learning through Environmental

Education Research';

• Design Museum Colloquium, London (12.00) – 'Is Sustainability Sustainable?'

• OU RTS Seminar, Milton Keynes (12.00) – 'Children's Participation in the Design of Interactive Media

for Environmental Education' with John Parry;

• Global Action Plan Conference, London (12.00) – 'Achieving a Better Quality of Life';

• Environmental Law Foundation, SOAS, University of London (05.01) – Lord Chief Justice Woolf on

'Environmental Risk – responsibility of the law and science';

• Construction Industry Council Third Happold Medal Lecture, London (06.01) – Tessa Tennant on

'Building Sustainable Britain plc';

• The Schumacher Society & UNED UK Lectures, London (06.01) – 'Governance, Business and

Sustainable Development';

• Elfrida Lecture, London (06.01) – Charlotte Flowers on 'Participatory Processes in the North';

• OU Seminar, Milton Keynes (11.01) – 'Ethical Consumption';

• International Institute for Environment and Development Conference, London (11.01) – 'Equity for a

Small Planet';

• EcoEdge Conference, London (11.01) – 'Bridging the Gap – An Environmental Corporate Social

Responsibility Conference';

• EuroEco International Conference, AGH University, Cracow (03.02) – 'Promoting Sustainable

Development on a Global Scale in the Context of the Forthcoming Earth Summit';

- 269 -

• Forum for the Future Conference, London (04.02) – 'Generation H – Towards a Sustainable Hydrogen

Future';

• AMED Sustainable Development Network Meeting, London (01.03);

• Ethical Corporation Conference, London (04.03);

• AMED Sustainable Development Network Meeting, London (04.03).

Contributing to my understanding of Organisational Management, Change and Learning:

• Solar Workshop, University College, Northampton (10.99) – 'Triggering Enthusiasm' with Ray Ison and

David Russell;

• OU Inaugural Lecture, Milton Keynes (01.00) – Geoff Peters on 'Failures in the Open';

• OU CASE seminar, London (06.00) – 'Participation in the Children's Society' with Marion Helme

• OU Seminar, Milton Keynes (04.00) – 'Systems Thinking and Practice' with Ray Ison;

• New Economics Foundation Workshop, London (06.00) – 'Organisational Development';

• OU Systems Summer School, York (07.00) – 'Experiencing Systems';

• Storytelling in Organisations Workshop, Emerson College, East Sussex (07.00) – 'The Gifts of the

Serpent';

• University of Hertfordshire Conference, Hertford (09.00) – 'Second International Workshop on

Institutional Economics';

• OU Systems Discipline Workshop, Milton Keynes (09.00) – 'Strategies for Systemic Development' with

Richard Bawden;

• Hawkwood College Conference, Stroud (09.00) – 'Emerging Approaches to Inquiry 8';

• Rapid Institutional Appraisal of the OU, Milton Keynes (10.00);

- 270 -

• OU RTS Seminar, Milton Keynes (02.01) – 'Journey to the Edge – Storytelling in Organisations' with Sue

Hollingsworth;

• Systems Practice for Managing Complexity Network Workshop, Milton Keynes (05.01);

• OU Systems Society Workshop, Leicestershire (06.01) – 'Celebrating Systems';

• OU International Conference, Milton Keynes (06.01) – 'Using New Science for Business Success: Ideas

and Practice from Nature's Toolbox';

• OU CASE seminar, London (10.01) – 'NGO organisational values, structures and management' with Mike

Aiken

• Complexity and Management Seminar, Hertford Business School (01.02) – Ralph Stacey on 'Complexity

and Emergence in Organisations';

• Antidote Conference, London (01.02) – 'Change is Possible';

• Systems Practice for Managing Complexity Network Workshop, Milton Keynes (04.02);

• OU Systems seminar, Milton Keynes (09.02) – 'Soft Systems Methodology Analysis on The Open

University's E-learning strategy' with Peter Checkland and Mike Haynes;

• Systems Practice for Managing Complexity Network Workshop, Milton Keynes (12.02) – 'Wisdom in

Management' with Pille Bunnell.

- 271 -

Appendix 5 Memorandum of researching agreed between TNS UK's

Chief Executive and myself (January 2000)

Purpose of research

To investigate the learning processes between TNS UK and its partner organisations with a view to

contributing toward TNS UK’s own learning and the development of its educational strategy; and to

investigate sustainability and the process of sustainable development as understood through the lens of the

TNS conceptual framework.

The parties involved

• The Natural Step (TNS) UK and its partner organisations / clients

• The Open University (OU)

• The supervisors – Professor Stephen Martin (TNS UK), Professor Ray Ison (OU), and Christine

Blackmore (OU);

• The student – Francis Meynell

• Funded jointly by TNS UK and ESRC (Economic and Social Research Council).

The research process

• The research will take no longer than three years unless agreement is reached, in writing, by TNS UK, the

OU, and the student

• TNS UK, the student, and the OU supervisors will meet on a tri-annual basis to monitor the progress of

the research

- 272 -

• The student is a sponsored collaborative researcher whose foremost aim is to complete a PhD and who

ultimately has independence of TNS UK; he is not an employee of TNS UK with its associated

responsibilities and obligations.

Research results

• There is no guarantee that the research will generate any particular information or be successful in

achieving a particular result

• Neither the OU nor the student shall accept any responsibility for any use made of or reliance placed upon

any information generated by the research

• Anything that the OU or the student wishes to publish will be sent to TNS UK for comment and

discussion within a specific time period after its receipt (14 days working days), the comments/discussion

of which will be given serious consideration before initiating any publication process

• The research results will be the property of the student, which he will be able to use to develop or publish

with due acknowledgement to the key participants in the research process, provided no confidential

information is disclosed

• The student will aim to stimulate further cycles of learning and action through critical reflection on the

educational strategies of TNS UK for its continued development of practice, through his thesis,

publications, workshops supplemented by reports, and by conference presentations.

Confidentiality and code of conduct

• The student will respect the experiences and views that others bring to the research, and will respect the

differences between them and his own experiences and views

• The methods used in the research, including the way things are written down and said, will aim to be

inclusive rather than selective, but where selection takes place reasons for doing so will be made

• Nobody will be involved in the research without her or his informed consent. This means that they can

choose not to participate; they can withdraw at any time; they know what is required of them in

- 273 -

participating with the research; and they are clear about what will happen to the information they give

while they are involved in the research

• Those participating in the research are asked to respect the confidentiality of the project boundaries, so

that information divulged for the purposes of the research will be respected as such

• Those participating in the research are expected to highlight that which they deem to be confidential

information (i.e. personal, commercial, technical or financial information which a ‘reasonable person’

would deem commercially sensitive, or likely to harm the reputation of any party), which:

– will be used only for the purposes of the research during the research period;

– will not be disclosed to any third party (assuming the supervisors and the student to count as one

party, and TNS UK to be the other)

– The student will inform an appropriate member of TNS UK should he obtain knowledge that he

believes might harm or may occur to any individual, or harm the reputation of TNS UK.

- 274 -

Bibliography

- 275 -

Adam, B. 1998. Timescapes of Modernity - the environment and invisible hazards. London: Routledge.

Adams, J. 1995. Risk. London: UCL Press.

Aliseda, A. 1988. "Abduction as epistemic change: Charles S. Peirce and epistemic theories in artificial

intelligence". Accessed: February 2003. http://www.rz.uni-frankfurt.de/~wirth/texte/tt.htm#N_1_.

Anderson, H. 1997. Conversation, Language and Possibilities - A Postmodern Approach to Therapy. New

York: Basic Books.

Anderson, R. C. 1998. Mid-Course Correction - Towards a Sustainable Enterprise: The Interface Model.

Atlanta: The Peregrinzilla Press.

Argyris, C. and D. A. Schon. 1978. Organizational Learning: Addison Wesley.

Armson, R. 2003. "Invitations in conversation." Meynell, F. phone conversation. Milton Keynes. 30 April.

Armson, R., J. Fortune, and R. Ison. 2000. "Block 1 - Juggling with complexity: searching for a system." in

T306 Managing complexity: a systems approach, T306. Milton Keynes: Open University.

Armson, R., R. L. Ison, L. Short, M. Ramage, and M. Reynolds. 2001. "Rapid Institutional Appraisal."

Systemic Practice and Action Research 14 (6) December: 763-777.

Athanasiou, T. 1996. Slow Reckoning: Secker & Warburg.

Badaracco Jr., J. L. 2002. Leading Quietly - An Unorthodox Guide to Doing the Right Thing. Boston: Harvard

Business School Press.

Bawden, R. 2000. "Strategies for the future: A Systemic Approach to Scenario Planning - Workbook."

Michigan State University and The Institute of Systemic Development.

Bell, S., J. Fortune, A. Lane, D. Morris, G. Paton, and T. Wright. 2000. TXR248 - Experiencing Systems:

Residential School Student Handbook. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

Bennett, M. and P. James. 2001. "The Green Bottom Line." Pp. 126-57 in Business and Sustainable

Development, edited by Starkey, R. and R. Welford. London: Earthscan.

Berthoin Antal, A., U. Lenhardt, and R. Rosenbrock. 2001. "Barriers to Organizational Learning." Pp. 864-

885 in Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge, edited by Dierkes, M., A. Berthoin

Antal, J. Child, and I. Nonaka. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bilson, A. 1997. "Guidelines for a Constructivist Approach: Steps Toward the Adaptation of Ideas from

Family Therapy for Use in Organizations." Systems Practice 10 (2) 153-177.

Black, R. 2003. "Oceans becoming more acidic". Accessed: 24.09 2003.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3136266.stm.

Blackmore, C., P. Furniss, S. Carr, D. Cooke, R. Ison, and D. Morris. 1998. "Block 2 - Exploring the context

of environmental issues and formulating problems and opportunities." in T860 - Environmental

decision making: a systems approach, Environmental Decision-Making. Milton Keynes: The Open

University.

- 276 -

Blackmore, C. and R. Ison. 1998. "Boundaries for thinking and action." Pp. 41-66 in Finding Out Fast, edited

by Thomas, A., J. Chataway, and M. Wuyts. Buckingham: The Open University & Sage.

Blackmore, C., R. Ison, and J. Chapman. 2000. "Block 4 - Managing Sustainable Development: Learning

with Other Stakeholders." in T306 Managing Complexity: a Systems Approach. Milton Keynes: The

Open University.

Blair, T. 2001. "Speech by the Prime Minister (06.03.2001): 'Environment: the next steps'". Accessed:

21.03.01 2001. http://www.pm.gov.uk/news.asp?NewsId=1872&SectionId=32.

Boje, D. M. 2001. Narrative Methods for Organizational & Communication Research, Edited by Thorpe, R.

and M. Easterby-Smith. London: Sage.

Bouchikhi, H. 1998. "Living with and Building on Complexity: A Constructivist Perspective on

Organizations." Organization 5 (2) 217-232.

Bouwen, R. and C. Steyaert. 1999. "From a Dominant Voice Toward Multivoiced Cooperation: Mediating

Metaphors for Global Change." Pp. 291-319 in Organizational Dimensions of Global Change - No

Limits to Cooperation, edited by Cooperrider, D. L. and J. E. Dutton. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Bowers, C. A. 1993. Education, cultural myths and the ecological crisis - towards deep changes: SUNY.

Boyd, G. M. 1998. "Reflections on the Conversation Theory of Gordon Pask". Accessed: 11.01 2003.

http://artsci-ccwin.concordia.ca/edtech/ETEC606/paskboyd.html.

Bradbury, H. 1998. "Learning with The Natural Step: Co-operative Ecological Inquiry through Cases, Theory

and Practice for Sustainable Development." PhD Thesis, The Caroll Graduate School of

Management, Department of Organization Studies, Boston College, Boston.

Bradbury, H. and J. A. Clair. 1999. "Promoting sustainable organizations with Sweden's Natural Step."

Academy of Management Executive 13 (4) November: 63-74.

British Standards Institute. 2003. "Project SIGMA - Sustainability in Practice". Accessed: 13.02 2003.

http://www.forumforthefuture.org.uk/aboutus/default.asp?pageid=132.

Brown, L. R., C. Flavin, H. French, S. Postel, and L. Starke. 2000. State of the World 2000. New York: W.

W. Norton & Company.

Bunnell, P. 2002. "Wisdom in Management." SPMC Network. Workshop. Milton Keynes. 13.12.

Burton-Jones, A. 1999. Knowledge Capitalism - Business, Work and Learning in the New Economy: Oxford

University Press.

Capra, F. 1996. The Web of Life: Harper Collins.

—. 2002. The Hidden Connections: Harper Collins Publishers.

Carillion Building Special Projects. 1999. "Summary of the Sustainability Action Plans for the Swindon

hospital project." Carillion plc. Wolverhampton.

Carillion plc. 2000a. "Annual Report." Carillion plc. Wolverhampton.

—. 2000b. "Environment, Community and Social Report 1999-2000." Carillion plc.

- 277 -

—. 2002. "Sustainability Report 2002 - Sustainable Solutions for the Way We Live". Accessed: 21.04 2003.

http://www.carillionplc.com/sustain-2002/A2.Opening%20Page.htm.

—. 2003a. "Carillion plc AGM statement". Accessed: 27/05 2003.

http://www.carillionplc.com/news/agm_statement.htm.

—. 2003b. "Carillion website homepage". Accessed: 27/05 2003. http://www.carillionplc.com/home.asp.

—. 2003c. "News - Carillion recognised for Sustainable Development". Accessed: 21.04 2003.

http://www.carillionplc.com/news/carillion_recognised_sustainable.htm.

Ceruti, M. 1994. Constraints and Possibilities - the Evolution of Knowledge and the Knowledge of Evolution:

Gordon & Breach.

Checkland, P. 1994. "Systems Theory and Management Thinking." American Behavioural Scientist 38 (1)

75-91.

—. 1999. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice - Includes a 30-year retrospective. Chichester: John Wiley.

Checkland, P. and S. Holwell. 1998. Information, Systems and Information Systems. Chichester: John Wiley.

Checkland, P. and J. Scholes. 1990. Soft Systems Methodology in Action. Chichester: John Wiley.

Clandinin, D. J. and F. M. Connelly. 1998. "Personal Experience Methods." Pp. 150-78 in Collecting and

Interpreting Qualitative Materials, edited by Denzin, N. K. and Y. S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Clarke, S. and N. Roome. 1999. "Sustainable Business: Learning-Action Networks as Organisational Assets."

Business Strategy & the Environment (8) 296-310.

Co-operative Bank, The. 1998. "the Parnership Report 1997 - Seven Partners, a balanced view." The Co-

operative Bank. Manchester.

—. 1998-2003. "The Partnership Reports." The Co-operative Bank. Manchester, UK.

—. 1999. "The Partnership Report 1998." The Co-operative Bank. Manchester.

—. 2001. "The Partnership Report 2000 - Making Our Mark." The Co-operative Bank. Manchester, UK.

—. 2002. "The Parnership Report 2001 - Our Impact." The Co-operative Bank. Manchester.

—. 2003. "Partnership Report 2002 - Sustainable Development." The Co-operative Bank. Manchester.

Courtice, P. and T. Swift. 2002. "Sustainability Literacy and Organisational Learning." New Academy Review

1 (1) 93-102.

Dawson, S. 1996. Analysing Organisations: Palgrave.

Denning, S. 2002. "How storytelling ignites action in knowledge-era organisations." 23 January. RSA.

London.

Denton, J. 1998. Organisational Learning and Effectiveness: Routledge.

Denzin, N. K. and Y. S. Lincoln. 1998. "Introduction - Entering the Field of Qualitative Research." Pp. 1-34

in Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, edited by Denzin, N. K. and Y. S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks:

Sage.

- 278 -

DeSimone, L. D. and F. Popoff. 1997. Eco-Efficiency - The Business Link to Sustainable Development.

Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

di Stefano, A. 2000. "Beyond the Rhetoric: A Grounded Perspective on Learning Company and Learning

Community Relationships." PhD Thesis, The Systems Discipline, The Open University, UK, Milton

Keynes.

Dierkes, M., A. Berthoin Antal, J. Child, and I. Nonaka. 2001a. Handbook of Organizational Learning and

Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dierkes, M., L. Marz, and C. Teele. 2001b. "Technological Visions, Technological Development, and

Organizational Learning." Pp. 282-301 in Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge,

edited by Dierkes, M., A. Berthoin Antal, J. Child, and I. Nonaka. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Doering, D. S., A. Cassara, C. Layke, J. Ranganathan, C. Revenga, D. Tunstall, and W. Vanasselt. 2002.

"Tomorrow's Markets - Global Trends and Their Implications for Business." WRI, UNEP, WBCSD.

Washington.

Easterby-Smith, M. 1997. "Disciplines of organisational learning: contributions and critiques." Human

Relations 50 (9) 1085-1113.

Ekins, P. 2000. "Can Business Make Money by Being Sustainable?" Triodos Bank UK Annual Meeting. The

National Exhibition Centre, 8 April.

—. 2001. "Business, Trade and the Environment: an Agenda for Stability in World Trade." Pp. 319-38 in

Business and Sustainable Development, edited by Starkey, R. and R. Welford. London: Earthscan.

Elkington, J. 2001. "The 'Triple Bottom Line for 21st-century Business." Pp. 20-43 in The Earthscan Reader

in Business & Sustainable Development, edited by Starkey, R. and R. Welford. London: Earthscan.

Espejo, R., W. Schumann, M. Schwaninger, and U. Bilello. 1996. Organisational Transformation and

Learning - a Cybernetic Approach to Management. Chichester: John Wiley.

Everard, M. 2002a. "2020 Vision - Bulk Printing: An Evaluation Using The Natural Step Framework."

August. TNS UK. Cheltenham.

—. 2002b. "Priority Chemicals and Sustainable Development: Strategic Planning Using The Natural Step

Framework - DRAFT." TNS UK Pathfinder Network. Cheltenham.

Everard, M., M. Monaghan, and D. Ray. 2000. "PVC - An Evaluation Using The Natural Step Framework."

The Environment Agency & The Natural Step.

Everard, M. and D. Ray. 1999. "Genetic modification and sustainability - working towards consensus." June.

The Natural Step & The Environment Agency.

Fear, J. R. 2001. "Thinking Historically about Organizational Learning." Pp. 162-191 in Handbook of

Orgnizational Learning & Knowledge, edited by Dierkes, M., A. Berthoin Antal, J. Child, and I.

Nonaka. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

- 279 -

Fell, L. and D. B. Russell. 2000. "The human quest for understanding and agreement." in Agricultural

Extension and Rural Development - Breaking out of Traditions: A second-order systems perspective,

edited by Ison, R. and D. Russell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fielding, N. 1993. "Ethnography." in Researching Social Life, edited by Gilbert, N. London: Sage.

Fisher, A. 2002. Radical Ecopsychology - Psychology in the Service of Life. New York: State University of

New York Press.

Flood, R. L. 2000. "The Relationship of 'Systems Thinking' to Action Research." in Handbook of Action

Research, edited by Reason, P. and H. Bradbury. London: Sage.

Forum for the Future. 1999. "Making Sense of Sustainability." The Natural Step Facilitator's Workshop 1-3

June 1999.

—. 2002. "Who we are". Accessed: 2002. http://www.forumforthefuture.org.uk/aboutus/default.asp.

—. 2003. "Transformation: Driving Change. Does our work make any difference?" Accessed: 13.02 2003.

http://www.forumforthefuture.org.uk/whatwedo/default.asp?pageid=333.

Fox, M. 1983. Original Blessing: Bear & Company.

Gabriel, Y. 2000. Storytelling in Organizations: Oxford University Press.

Gergen, K. J. 1999. "Global Organization and the Potential for Ethical Inspiration." Pp. 255-69 in

Organizational Dimensions of Global Change - No Limits to Cooperation, edited by Cooperrider, D.

L. and J. E. Dutton. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Gladwin, T., J. Kennelly, and T.-S. Krause. 1995. "Shifting paradigms for sustainable development:

implications for management theory and practice." Academy of Management Review 20 (4) 874-907.

Glanville, R. 1997. "Gordon Pask". Accessed: 11.01 2003. http://www.isss.org/lumPask.html.

Gorelick, S. 1998. "Small is Beautiful, Big is Subsidised - How our taxes contribute to social and

environmental breakdown." October. International Society for Ecology and Culture.

Gray, R., C. Dey, D. Owen, R. Evans, and S. Zadek. 2001a. "Struggling with the Praxis of Social

Accounting: Stakeholders, Accountability, Audits and Procedures." Pp. 158-84 in Business and

Sustainable Development, edited by Starkey, R. and R. Welford. London: Earthscan.

Gray, R., D. Owen, and C. Adams. 2001b. "What is Social Accounting?" Pp. 122-25 in Business and

Sustainable Development, edited by Starkey, R. and R. Welford. London: Earthscan.

Gummesson, E. 2000. Qualitative Methods in Management Research. London: Sage.

Harré, R., J. Brockmeier, and P. Mühlhäusler. 1999. Greenspeak - A Study of Environmental Discourse.

Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Hart, S. 1995. "A Natural-Resource-Based View of The Firm." Academy of Mangement Review 20 (4) 986-

1014.

–. 1999. "Corporations as agents of global sustainability." Pp. 346-361 in Organizational Dimensions of

Global Change, edited by Cooperrider, D. L. and J. E. Dutton. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

- 280 -

Hawken, P., A. Lovins, and L. H. Lovins. 1999. Natural Capitalism - The Next Industrial Revolution.

London: Earthscan.

Hernes, T. 1999. "Flexible learning systems and obsolete organization structures: steps towards bridging the

gap." Scandinavian Journal of Management (15) 89-110.

Heron, J. 1996. Co-operative Inquiry. London: Sage.

High, C. 2002. "Opening spaces for learning: A systems approach to sustainable development." PhD Thesis,

Systems Discipline, Centre for Complexity and Change, The Open University, Milton Keynes.

Holmberg, J., K.-H. Robèrt, and K.-E. Eriksson. 1996. "Socio-ecological principles for a sustainable society."

Pp. 17-48 in Getting down to earth - practical applications for ecological economics, edited by

Costanza, R. and others: Island Press.

Hutton, W. and A. Giddens. 2000. On The Edge - Living with Global Capitalism: Jonathon Cape.

Ingold, T. 1995. "'People Like Us': The Concept of the Anatomically Modern Human." Cultural Dynamics 7

(2) 187-214.

Interface Inc. 2003a. "Getting There - Learning and Development - Sustainability Training". Accessed: 03.05

2003. http://www.interfaceinc.com/getting_there/sustainability_training.html.

—. 2003b. "Interface Sustainability - Our Progress - Global Metrics". Accessed: 03.05 2003.

http://www.interfacesustainability.com/metrics.html.

Interface Research Corporation. 1997. "Interface Sustainability Report." Interface Inc. Atlanta, Georgia.

International Civil Aviation Organisation. 2002. "Statement by the International Civil Aviation Organization

(ICAO) to the World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002." World Summit on Sustainable

Development 2002. Johannesburg, South Africa,

Ison, R. 1995. "The OU from a Systems Perspective." Personal Reflections and Sensemaking. November.

—. 2000a. "Experience, tradition and service? Institutionalised R&D in the rangelands." Pp. 103-32 in

Agricultural Extension and Rural Development - Breaking out of Traditions, edited by Ison, R. and

D. Russell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

—. 2000b. "Systems Practice for Managing Complexity." in External Research Grant Application for

Interdisciplinary Research Network in Systems Theory, edited by Stowell, F. Open University.

—. 2000c. "Technology: transforming grazier experience." Pp. 52-75 in Agricultural Extension and Rural

Development: Breaking Out of Traditions - A second-order systems perspective, edited by Ison, R. L.

and D. B. Russell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ison, R., R. Armson, and F. Stowell. 2001. "The Submission Revisited: Systems Practice for Managing

Complexity." Systemist 23 (SE) Nov: 29-57.

Ison, R., C. High, C. Blackmore, and M. Cerf. 2000. "Theoretical frameworks for learning-based approaches

to change in industrialised country agricultures." in Cow up a tree - Knowing and Learning for

Change in Agriculture Case Studies from Industrialised Countries, edited by Cerf, M., D. Gibbon, B.

Hubert, R. Ison, J. Jiggins, M. Paine, J. Proost, and N. Roling: INRA Editions.

- 281 -

Ison, R. and D. Russell. 2000. Agricultural Extension and Rural Development: Breaking Out of Traditions -

A second-order systems perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jackson, T. 1996. Material concerns: pollution, profit and quality of life: Routledge.

Johnson, H. T. and A. Bröms. 2000. Profit Beyond Measure. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

Jones, D. and R. Welford. 1997. "Organizing for Sustainable Development: Structure, Culture and Social

Auditing." Pp. 157-175 in Hijacking Environmentalism - Corporate Responses to Sustainable

Development, edited by Welford, R.: Earthscan.

Jucker, R. 2002. Our Common Illiteracy - Education as if the Earth and People Mattered, vol. 10, Edited by

Filho, W. L. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Kaczmarski, K. M. and D. L. Cooperrider. 1999. "Constructionist Leadership in the Global Relational Age:

The Case ofthe Mountain Forum." Pp. 57-88 in Organizational Dimensions of Global Change - No

Limits to Cooperation, edited by Cooperrider, D. L. and J. E. Dutton. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Kädtler, J. 2001. "Social Movements and Interest Groups as Triggers for Organizational Learning." Pp. 221-

241 in Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge, edited by Dierkes, M., A. Berthoin, J.

Child, and I. Nonaka. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Korten, D. 1999. The Post-Corporate World: Kumarian Press, Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Krippendorff, K. 1993. "Major Metaphors of Communication and some Constructivist Reflections on their

Use." Cybernetics & Human Knowing 2 (1) 3-25.

—. 1995. "Undoing Power." Critical Studies in Mass Communication 12 (2) June: 101-32.

Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.

Lane, A., R. Armson, J. Chapman, E. Farmer, J. Hamwee, J. Martin, W. Fisher, J. Hudson, G. Paton, and P.

Roberts. 2002a. T552 - Systems thinking and practice: Diagramming. Milton Keynes: The Open

University.

Lane, A., R. Armson, J. Hamwee, J. Martin, and R. Paton. 2002b. T551 - Systems thinking and practice: a

primer. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

Locke, K. 2001. Grounded Theory in Management Research. London: Sage Publications.

Mander, J. and E. Goldsmith. 1996. The Case Against the Global Economy. San Francisco: Sierra Club

Books.

Maturana, H. and P. Bunnell. 1998. "The Wisdom of Nature." Patterns (January) 5-10.

Maturana, H. and F. Varela. 1987. The Tree of Knowledge - the Biological Roots of Human Understanding.

Boston: Shambhala Publications Inc.

Mayo, E. 2000. "The Brave New Economy." Triodos Bank UK Annual Meeting. The National Exhibition

Centre, 8 April.

McAndrew, F. 1993. Environmental Psychology. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

- 282 -

McClintock, D. 1996. "Metaphors that inspire 'researching with people': UK farming, countrysides and

diverse stakeholder contexts." PhD Thesis, Systems, The Open University, UK.

McIntosh, M. and B. Arora. 2001. "SIGMA Project - Sustainability & Innovation, Learning and Cultural

Change." February. Corporate Citizenship Unit, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick.

Warwick.

McNeil, J. 2000. Something New Under the Sun - an Environmental History of the Twentieth Century: Allen

Lane, The Penguin Press.

Midgley, G. 2000. Systemic Intervention - Philosophy, Methodology and Practice. New York: Kluwer

Academic / Plenum Publishers.

Morris, D. and J. Chapman. 2002. T553 - Systems thinking and practice: Modelling. Milton Keynes: The

Open University.

Morse, J. M. 1998. "Designing Funded Qualitative Research." Pp. 56-85 in Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry,

edited by Denzin, N. K. and Y. S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Moser, S. 2002. "Observing Differences, Embodying Knowledge: Radical Constructivism Meets Feminist

Epistemology." Cybernetics & Human Knowing 9 (3-4) 35-54.

Murphy, J. and M. Cohen. 2001. "Consumption, Environment and Public Policy." in Exploring Sustainable

Consumption: Environmental Policy and the Social Sciences, edited by Murphy, J. and M. Cohen:

Oxford: Elsevier (Pergamon).

Nattrass, B. 1999. "The Natural Step: Corporate Learning and Innovation for Sustainability." PhD Thesis,

California Institute of Integral Studies, San Francisco.

Nattrass, B. and M. Altomare. 1999. The Natural Step for Business - Wealth, Ecology and the Evolutionary

Corporation: New Society Publishers.

—. 2002. Dancing with the Tiger - Learning Sustainability Step by Natural Step: New Society Publishers.

Naughton, J. 1999. A Brief History of the Future - The Origins of the Internet. London: Weidenfeld and

Nicholson.

Nonaka, I., R. Toyama, and P. Byosière. 2001. "A Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation:

Understanding the Dynamic Process of Creating Knowledge." Pp. 491-517 in Handbook of

Organizational Learning and Knowledge, edited by Dierkes, M., A. Berthoin Antal, J. Child, and I.

Nonaka. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

O'Sullivan, E. 1999. Transformative Learning - Educational Vision for the 21st Century: Zed Books.

Okri, B. 1996. Birds of Heaven. London: Phoenix.

Orr, D. 1994. Earth In Mind - On Education, Environment & the Human Prospect: Island Press.

Oswick, C., P. Anthony, T. Keenoy, I. L. Mangham, and D. Grant. 2000. "A dialogic analysis of

organizational learning." Journal of Management Studies 37 (6) September: 887-901.

Patton, M. Q. 1990. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

- 283 -

—. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods - 3rd Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Pawlowsky, P. 2001. "The Treatment of Organizational Learning in Management Science." Pp. 61-88 in

Handbook of Organizational Learning & Knowledge, edited by Dierkes, M., A. Berthoin Antal, J.

Child, and I. Nonaka. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pedler, M., J. Burgoyne, and T. Boydell. 1997. The Learning Company. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill.

Phillips, E. and D. Pugh. 1994. How to get a PhD - a handbook for students and their supervisors.

Buckingham: Open University Press.

Poell, R. F., G. E. Chivers, F. J. Van der Krogt, and D. A. Wildemeersch. 2000. "Learning-network theory -

Organizing the Dynamic Relationships Between Learning and Work." Management Learning 31 (1)

25-49.

Pollock, A. 2001. "Private sector lured by £30bn public gold rush." The Observer, Business. London. 8 July.

Reason, P. 1998. Human Inquiry in Action. London: Sage.

Reason, P. and H. Bradbury. 2000a. Handbook of Action Research. London: Sage.

—. 2000b. "Introduction." in Handbook of Action Research, edited by Reason, P. and H. Bradbury. London:

Sage.

Reed, M. and M. Hughes. 1994. Rethinking Organization - New Directions in Organization Theory and

Analysis. London: Sage.

Reyes, A. and R. Zarama. 1998. "The Process of Embodying Distinctions - A Reconstruction of the Process

of Learning." Cybernetics & Human Knowing 5 (3) 19-33.

Robèrt, K.-H. 1997. "The Natural Step: a framework for achieving sustainability in our organisations."

Pegasus Communications Inc.

—. 2000. "Tools and concepts for sustainable development - how do they relate to a general framework for

sustainable development, and to each other?" Journal of Cleaner Production (8) 243-254.

—. 2002. the Natural Step story - Seeding a Quiet Revolution. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers.

Robèrt, K.-H., H. Daly, P. Hawken, and J. Holmberg. 1997. "A compass for sustainable development."

International Journal for Sustainable Development and World Ecology (4) 79-92.

Robèrt, K.-H., J. Holmberg, and U. Lundqvist. 2000. "LCA from a Sustainability Perspective - Comments on

"LCA and Post-hoc Application of Sustainability Critieria" by Paul Upham." TNS UK. Cheltenham.

June.

Robèrt, K.-H., B. Schmidt-Bleek, J. Aloisi de Larderel, G. Basile, J. L. Jansen, R. Kuehr, P. Price-Thomas,

M. Suzuki, P. Hawken, and M. Wackernagel. 2002. "Strategic Sustainable Development - Selection,

Design and Synergies of Applied Tools." Journal of Cleaner Production 10 (3) 197-214.

Robins, N. and S. Roberts. 2001. "Reaping the Benefits: Trade Opportunities for Developing-country

Producers from Sustainable Consumption and Production." Pp. 339-52 in Business and Sustainable

Development, edited by Starkey, R. and R. Welford. London: Earthscan.

- 284 -

Rooke, D. and W. R. Torbert. 1999. "The CEO's role in organisational transformation." The Systems Thinker

10 (7) Sept:

Roszak, T. 1993. The Voice of the Earth - An Exploration of EcoPsychology: Bantam Press.

—. 1999. The Gendered Atom - Reflections on the Sexual Psychology of Science: Conari Press.

Rowland, E. and C. Sheldon. 1999. "The Natural Step and ISO 14001: guidance on the integration of a

framework for sustainable development into environmental management systems." The Natural Step

& BSI.

Russell, D. 1986. "How we see the world determines what we do in the world: preparing the ground for

action research." University of Western Sydney Hawkesbury.

Russell, D. and R. L. Ison. 2000a. "Designing R&D systems for mutual benefit." in Agricultural Extension

and Rural Development - Breaking out of Traditions: A second-order systems perspective, edited by

Ison, R. and D. Russell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

—. 2000b. "The research-development relationship in rural communities: an opportunity for contextual

science." Pp. 10-31 in Agricultural Extension and Rural Development - Breaking out of Traditions: A

second-order systems perspective, edited by Ison, R. and D. Russell. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Sabapathy, J., T. Swift, J. Weiser, and M. Polycarpe. 2002. "Innovation through Partnership." Institute of

Social and Ethical Accountability. London.

Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd. 2001. "Raising the standard - supplier's guide to reducing environmental

impacts." Environmental Management Department. London.

Schön, D. A. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner - How Professionals Think in Action: Basic Books.

Scoones, I. 1999. "New Ecology and the Social Sciences - What Prospects for a Fruitful Engagement?"

Annual Review of Anthropology 28 479-507.

Scott, S. 2002. Fierce Conversations - Achieving Success in Work and in Life, One Conversation at a Time:

Piatkus.

Senge, P. 1990. The Fifth Discipline: Century Business.

Shaw, I. F. 1999. Qualitative Evaluation. London: Sage.

Shaw, P. 2002. Changing Conversations in Organizations - A Complexity Approach to Change, Edited by

Stacey, R. D., D. Griffin, and P. Shaw. London: Routledge.

Shiva, V. 2000. "The World on the Edge." Pp. 112-129 in On the Edge - Living with Global Capitalism,

edited by Hutton, W. and A. Giddens. London: Jonathon Cape.

Shotter, J. 1993. Cultural Politics of Everyday Life: Open University.

—. 1998. "Social Construction as Social Poetics: Oliver Sacks and the Case of Dr P."

Silverman, D. 1985. Qualitative Methodology and Sociology. Aldershot: Gower Publishing Company

Limited.

- 285 -

Soper, K. 1995. What is Nature? Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Stacey, R. 1996. Complexity and Creativity in Organizations: Berrett-Koehler.

Starkey, R. and R. Welford. 2001. The Earthscan Reader in Business and Sustainable Development. London:

Earthscan.

Strauss, A. and J. Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research - Techniques and Procedures for Developing

Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

The Johnson Foundation Inc. 1997. "U.S. Scientists Sign On to Principles." Wingspread Journal Spring

Theroux, P. 2002. Dark star safari - overland from Cairo to Cape Town. London: Penguin.

Tickell, S. 2000. "Business, Poverty and Human Development - What's Really Possible?" Triodos Bank UK

Annual Meeting. The National Exhibition Centre, 8 April.

TNS International. 2000. "License Agreement for becoming a Member of The Natural Step International."

Stockholm, Sweden: The Natural Step International.

TNS UK. 1997. "The Natural Step UK publicity leaflet." Cheltenham, UK: TNS UK.

—. 1998. Facilitator's Manual: TNS UK.

—. 1999a. "Pathfinder Project Report." TNS UK. Cheltenham.

—. 1999b. Presentation handbook: background information.

—. 2000. "Training Manual." TNS UK. Cheltenham.

TNS US. 2003a. "Methodology". Accessed: 09.07 2003. http://www.naturalstep.org/learn/methodology.php.

—. 2003b. "Principles". Accessed: 09.07 2003. http://www.naturalstep.org/learn/principles.php.

—. 2003c. "Science". Accessed: 09.07 2003. http://www.naturalstep.org/learn/science.php.

—. 2003d. "Understanding Sustainability". Accessed: 09.07 2003.

http://www.naturalstep.org/learn/understand_sust.php.

Upham, P. 1999a. "An Assessment of The Natural Step as a Framework for Technology Choice." PhD

Thesis, Faculty of Economic and Social Studies, Manchester.

—. 1999b. "LCA & post-hoc application of sustainability criteria: the case of The Natural Step."

International Journal of Life Cycle Analysis 5 (2) 68-72.

Vetter, A. A. J., R. Weston, and P. S. Martin. 2000. "On Being a Good Neighbour - Moving Towards

Sustainable Construction." Caleb Management Services Ltd, The Natural Step & Carillion Building

Special Projects.

Vickers, G. 1983. Human Systems Are Different: Harper Row.

—. 1987. Policymaking, Communication and Social Learning. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.

von Rosenstiel, L. and S. Koch. 2001. "Change in Socioeconomic Values as a Trigger of Organizational

Learning." Pp. 198-220 in Handbook of Organizational Learning, edited by Dierkes, M., A.

Berthoin, J. Child, and I. Nonaka. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

- 286 -

Wadsworth, Y. 1997. Do It Yourself Social Research. St Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

—. 2000. "The mirror, the magnifying glass, the compass and the map - facilitating participatory action

research." Pp. Chapter 43 in Handbook of Action Research - Participatory Inquiry and Practice,

edited by Reason, P. and H. Bradbury. London: Sage.

Webber, L. 2000. "Co-researching: braiding theory and practice for research with people." in Agricultural

Extension and Rural Development - Breaking out of Traditions: A second-order systems perspective,

edited by Ison, R. and D. Russell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Weick, K. E. 1995. Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

—. 1999. "Sensemaking as an organizational dimension of global change." Pp. 39-56 in Organizational

Dimensions of Global Change, edited by Cooperrider, D. L. and J. E. Dutton. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice - Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

—. 2000. "Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems." Organization 7 (2) 225-246.

Westley, F. 1995. "Governing Design: The Management of Social Systems and Ecosystem Management." Pp.

391-427 in Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions, edited by Gunderson,

L. H., C. S. Holling, and S. S. Light. Chichester: Colombia University Press.

—. 2002. "The Devil in the Dynamics: Adaptive Management on the Front Lines." Pp. 333-60 in Panarchy -

Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems, edited by Gunderson, L. H. and C.

S. Holling. Washington: Island Press.

Winter, M. and U. Steger. 1997. "Environmentally Motivated Organisational Learning". Accessed: Sept 18

2002. http://www.instoec.de/envmotol.doc.

Zadek, S. 2001. The Civil Corporation - the new economy of corporate citizenship. London: Earthscan

Publications Ltd.

Zimmer, B. and J. Chapman. 2000. "Block 3 - Respecting Autonomy to Managing Complexity." in T306 -

Managing Complexity: A systems approach, Managing Complexity: a systems approach. Milton

Keynes: The Open University.

awakening giants

Documents